COMMERCIAL SHELLFISH AQUACULTURE LEASES JERVIS BAY NSW
VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Prepared for FISHERIES NSW
10TH April 2014 REF: 923-Z-02
O’Hanlon Design Pty Ltd ABN 44 003 755 986 296 Burns Bay Road Lane Cove NSW 2066
Phone: (02) 9420 3633 Fax: (02) 9420 3655
Section 1 Report Overview Page 1.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 1.2 Project Context………………………………………………………………………………………… 1 1.3 Objectives..…………………………………………………………...... 1 1.4 Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………………… 1 1.5 Terms and Abbreviations……………………………………...... 4
Section 2 Landscape Assessment 2.1 Project Location………………………………..……………………………………………………... 5 2.2 The Existing Environment…………………………………...... 5 2.3 The Study Area…………………………………………………………………………...... 8 2.4 The Landscape Description and Visual Character of the Study Area………………...... 9 2.5 Existing Nightscape………………………………………………………………………………….. 11
Section 3 Scenic Quality Assessment 3.1 Assessment Criteria…………………………………………………………………………………. 13 3.2 Scenic Quality Assessment……………………...... 13 3.3 Viewer Characteristics…………………………………………...... 14 3.4 Viewpoints………………………………………………………...... 14 3.5 Sensitivity Levels…………………………………………………...………………………………... 17 3.6 Landscape Management Zones……………………………………...…………………………….. 18
Section 4 Relevant Aspects of the Proposed Development 4.1 General………………………………………………………………………………………………… 19 4.2 Aquaculture Operations………………………………………………………………………………. 19 4.3 Infrastructure Elements…………………………………………...... 19
Section 5 Visual Impact Assessment 5.0 General…………………………………………………..…...... 21 5.1 Aquaculture Lease Area 1…………………………………………………………………………. 21 5.2 Aquaculture Lease Areas 2 and 3 …………………...... 23 5.3 Visual Representation of Impacts…………...... …………………………….. 25 5.4 Residential Areas ………………………………………………..…………………………………. 25 5.5 Night Lighting………………………………………………………………………………………… 25 5.6 Cumulative Visual Impacts...... …………………………………………………………………… 26 5.7 Mitigation Measures………………………………………………………………………………… 26 5.8 Visual Impacts on water users……………………………………………………………………… 26 5.9 Summary...... ………………………………………………………………………………………… 27
Table of Contents i Tables: 1.1 Terms and Abbreviations …………………………………………………………………………… 4 2.1 Visual Impact of Lighting in the Existing Nightscape…………………………...... …… 11 3.1 Scenic Quality Assessment…………………………………………………………………………. 13 3.2 Distance Definitions for Landscape Assessment…………………………………………………. 14 3.3 Landscape Management Zones……………………………………………………….……….. 17
Figures: 1.1 Visual Impact Assessment Methodology…………………………………………………….……. 2
Appendix A: The following drawings prepared by O’Hanlon Design Pty. Ltd. are appended as referenced in the body of the report. Drawing 923-01 Study Area Drawing 923-02 Landscape Units Drawing 923-03 Viewpoints
Appendix B: The Twofold Bay Study A Photo-representation of Effects
List of Tables, Figures, Photographs, Drawings & Appendices ii Section 1 Report Overview 1.1 Introduction The NSW Department of Primary Industries on behalf of Fisheries NSW has commissioned O’Hanlon Design Pty Ltd – Landscape Architects to prepare a Visual Impact Assessment for the establishment of Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases (the Project) located in the open marine embayment of Jervis Bay NSW, adjacent to the Shoalhaven Local Government Area. The study forms an appendix to the main Environmental Impact Assessment Report prepared by the NSW Department of Primary Industries.
1.2 Project Context The Project consists of three new leases in Jervis Bay, including: two 20 hectare areas 1.5 and 1.9 kilometres off Callala Beach; and a 10 hectare site 0.7 kilometres off Vincentia over an area previously leased for mussel aquaculture. This Project picks up on a request from the NSW Marine Parks Authority to draft a strategy for the development of aquaculture in Jervis Bay to support the Jervis Bay Marine Park zoning review. Fisheries NSW has developed an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and draft Environmental Management Plan to accompany an application for the three Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases that if approved, would be tendered to shellfish growers. The exhibition of the EIS resulted in a series of submissions and a request from the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure to consider issues raised in submissions. One of the issues raised by a number of respondents was the potential visual impact of the proposed leases on the waters of Jervis Bay. 1.3 Objectives The objectives of this Visual Impact Assessment report are to: analyse the visual character of the regional and local landscape with reference to a selected Study Area; and assess the scenic quality of the study area; and assess the visual impacts of the proposed Project; and consider any proposed ameliorative measures for the Project to eliminate or reduce visual impacts. 1.4 Methodology This visual impact assessment report has been divided into five sections: 1. Report Overview; 2. Landscape Assessment; 3. Scenic Quality Assessment; 4. Relevant Aspects of the Proposed Development; 5. Visual Impact Assessment and Summary. The methodology outlined in Figure 1.1 is based on the model developed by the Forest Commission of Victoria and the landscape assessment techniques of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and has been adapted for the purpose of this Project to suit the specific requirements of the Project.
Section 1 – Introduction 1 Figure 1.1 Visual Impact Assessment Methodology
LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION VIEWER IMPACTING AND ASSESSMENT CHARACTERISTICS ACTIVITIES
Slopes Vegetation Landcover Viewpoint Distance Description of Analysis Zones impacting activities
LANDSCAPE CHARACTER SENSITIVITY UNITS ZONES
SCENIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT
LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT ZONES SYNTHESIS
VISUAL QUALITY OBJECTIVES
SYNTHESIS
VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
VISUAL MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
The methodology of assessment of visual impact has been the subject of professional discussion and analysis since the early 1970’s. A significant body of work on visual impact has been carried out by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. The USDA Forest Service has issued the following documents amongst others to describe an appropriate method of impact assessment: “Forest Landscape Description and Inventories. A basis for Land Planning and Design” USDA Forest Service Research Paper PSW-49 R. Burton Litton Jr; National Forest Landscape Management Handbook No. 432 Vol 1 February 1973; USDA Forest Service, Agricultural Handbook No. 462, “National Forest Landscape Management” Volume 2 Chapter 1 The Visual Management system - April 1974; “National Forest Landscape Management” Volume 2 Chapter 2 Utilities, USDA Forest Service - July 1975; and
Section 1 – Introduction 2 USDA Forest Service “National Forest Landscape Management” Recreation Volume 2 Chapter 8, Forest Service Agricultural Handbook No. 666 - December, 1987. The scenic assessment method used by the USDA Forest Service is a systematic approach to visual assessment using quantitative measures. It assesses the influence of landform, vegetation, water and other landscape factors on scenic quality with refinement applied for the sensitivity levels and number of viewers from various viewpoints. Early attempts to assess visual impact contained a very high level of subjectivity. The search for a qualitative assessment of visual impact seeks a higher level of objectivity in determining visual impact of any particular project or development. The USDA Forest Service system has become a benchmark for the qualitative measurement and assessment of the visual impact. Adaptations and derivations of this method have been in use in Australia by a variety of consultants for over two decades. The Forest Commission of Victoria (The Commission) has developed a programme of scenic management policies and guidelines. As an initial basis for assessment The Commission adopted descriptive criteria used by the USDA Forest Service. This approach is described in the article entitled “Scenic Perceptions of Australian Landscapes” by Dennis Williamson in Landscape Australia published April, 1979 (Williamson 1979). Williamson’s findings are based on assessment of a number of earlier research studies. Our assessment of the scenic quality criteria is based on the findings of Williamson which identifies criteria for “landscape features - scenic quality relationships”. A more recent paper “Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts” by James F Palmer and published in Landscape and Urban Planning No.69 (2004) provides additional support to the contribution of natural appearing landscapes with a complex pattern of edges, to a communities’ perception of the landscape, increased sensitivity and resultant ratings of scenic quality. Recent cases heard in the NSW Land and Environment Court have addressed the issues of visual impacts on both public and private locations. The planning principles outlined in both Tenacity v Warringah Council 2010 and Rose Bay Marinas v Woollahra Council 2012 set a matching methodology to the USDA Forest Service system. For the purpose of this study O’Hanlon Design Pty Ltd has adapted the USDA study technique to suit the characteristics of the study, likely viewer characteristics and suitable viewing distance zones. The assessment of scenic quality incorporates the evaluation of landscape, waterway and foreshore character, viewer characteristics and aesthetic value of the visual catchment. This assessment was carried out by Edward and Jane O’Hanlon on Monday 26th January 2014. The conditions of the day of the inspection varied but the general conditions were: • clear long distance visibility, • varying, bright to moderate sunlight, • heavy to moderate, varying height cloud cover creating nil to moderate levels of strong shadow, with long sunny intervals, • constant steady breezes up to approx. 5m/sec with wind generated waves breaking occasionally on long fetch exposure shorelines. The 26th January was a public holiday and was selected as likely to be one of the busier days of the year on the Jervis Bay waterfront providing an indication of the higher levels of public usage patterns.
Section 1 – Introduction 3 1.5 Terms and Abbreviations Terms and abbreviations used throughout the text of the report are shown in Table 1.1 below Table 1.1 Terms and Abbreviations
Term / Abbreviation Meaning
AHD Australian Height Datum
EP&A Act 1979 NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
DP&I NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure
JBMP Jervis Bay Marine Park
Km Kilometre
LGA Local Government Area
m Metre
OEH NSW Office of Environment and Heritage
RL Relative level
SLEP 1985 Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan
USDA United States Dept. of Agriculture
Section 1 – Introduction 4
Section 2 Landscape Assessment 2.1 Project Location The proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases are located within Jervis Bay on the South Coast of New South Wales, approx 210 km south of Sydney. The waters of Jervis Bay form part of the Jervis Bay Marine Park (JBMP). The JBMP has three main elements: • sanctuary zones (20%) • habitat protection zones (72%) • general use zones (8%). Three leases are proposed, all three leases fall inside the JBMP area, outside sanctuary zones and within the habitat protection zones. Lease 1 is a 10 hectare site 700m north-east of Vincentia and in waters adjacent to Collingwood, Orion and Barfleur beaches. Lease 1 is located over an area previously leased for mussel aquaculture. Lease 2 and Lease 3 are two 20 hectare sites approximately 1500m and 1900m respectively south-east of Callala Beach. 2.1.1 Statutory Controls In addition to the controls of the JBMP, parts of the Study Area from which the Project can be viewed are subject to the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 1985. (SLEP 1985) Within Huskisson the mapping associated with the SLEP identifies Shark Net Beach, Tapalla Point and the parks located adjacent to each as local heritage items. Similarly around Vincentia the mapping identifies the southern corner of Collingwood Beach, Orion Beach, Barfleur Beach and the foreshore around Plantation Point as local heritage items. It is notable that the mapping and Schedule 7 of the SLEP vary when describing the Heritage Items. Schedule 7 only notes the rock platforms at Tapalla Point Huskisson and the Plantation Point Rock platform (3 hectares) at Plantation Point Vincentia. The hatched mapping area appears more extensive than the written description. In addition the SLEP mapping associated with SEPP 71 identifies the whole of the Study Area as within the “Coastal Zone” and all the Foreshore Areas as “Sensitive Coastal Lands.” 2.2 The Existing Environment 2.2.1 Regional Landscape Character The visual character of the St Georges Basin and Jervis Bay Area of the South Coast of NSW is created by the underlying geology, the climate and the vegetation. The Great Dividing Range runs along the east coast of Australia from Queensland into Victoria and throughout New South Wales the Range runs close and parallel with the coast. On the south coast of New South Wales the distance between the coast and the main range varies being less than 4km around Wollongong and extending up to 15km in the area around Jervis Bay. The St Georges Basin – Jervis Bay strip of the coast has a wide area of undulating low foothills, fringing on the Pacific Ocean side with a variety of sandhills, swamps and extensive wetland areas. The Princes Highway divides the area into two zones as it runs north to south parallel to the coast and ranges following a low ridge system from Nowra down to Wondandian and beyond. To the west of the Highway the visual character is defined by a series of low hills between RL50 and RL120, and small streams flowing north to meet the Shoalhaven River at Nowra. To the east of the Highway are lower undulating ridges generally between RL10 and RL70 and a series of smaller streams draining into Tomerong Creek, Moona Moona Creek, Currambene Creek and Callala Creek. The streams break the landscape into small visual parcels with relatively enclosed vistas of indigenous vegetation with relatively modest relief around and throughout the swamps, sandhills and wetlands.
Section 2 – Visual Quality Assessment 5 West of the highway development is limited. The topography is densely covered with vegetation. Views are limited due to the density of remnant forest and the relatively gentle changes in elevation. Views and visual character are provided primarily by views from the Highway which runs through Jerrawangala National park, the Yerrigong State Forest and the Parma Creek Nature Reserve. East of the Highway the foothills have less elevation and the relative levels reduce closer to the coast. The topography around St Georges Basin is in fact a series of low curved undulations running from South-east to north-west, all reducing in height and culminating in a level at Vincentia where the maximum height is approx. RL80. North of Vincentia over a distance exceeding 15km up to the flood plain of the Shoalhaven River are a series of low hills, swamps and intermittently flooded areas behind the foredunes of Jervis Bay. These low lying areas are well vegetated, reducing views and creating an enclosed and relatively flat landscape character with moderate variation in natural vegetation or visual quality. Cultural modifications are generally low. These areas include the Tomerong State Forest, parts of Jervis Bay National Park and the Woolamia Nature Reserve. Between these heavily vegetated areas and Jervis Bay is a relatively narrow coastal fringe of sand dunes with significantly greater cultural modification including small pockets of suburban styled residential subdivision fringing the shoreline of the Bay.
2.2.2 Local Landscape Character The boundaries of the study area are defined by the foreshores of Jervis Bay, the Knoll of Vincentia to the south-east, the cliffs of Jervis Bay to the north-east and to the west, north and south, south east by the low hills and swamp areas noted above. Away from the narrow foreshore band of Jervis Bay, views are restricted by the moderate changes in elevation and the relatively dense vegetation. The character of these areas is that of dense coastal forests and swamps with limited cultural modification. On the more elevated points such as Callala Bay Headland, Huskisson Point, the eastern elevated areas of Vincentia and Plantation Point open views to the east and north-east over Jervis Bay provide varying vistas of the shoreline and emphasise the narrow band of residential development along the fringe of the Bay. Originally most of Jervis Bay with the exception of the points at each end, was fringed in low sand dunes with elevations between the mean high water level and RL15. Today a significant extent of the sand dunes has been covered with a slender band of residential development and revegetation. The higher points of Callala Bay in the north, Tapalla Point at Huskisson, Plantation Point in the south and the high cliffs to the east combine to create a visually enclosed water vista. At each end the greater elevation and set back to development at Callala Bay and Plantation Point creates a vegetated bookend to the beach. The changes between sand and rock shelves around Vincentia and the natural rock at Huskisson create variety and increase the scenic quality of the vistas. The most popular public viewing areas are the beaches and adjacent foreshore areas. Views from the beaches to the waterway are extensive long distance views whereas views from the beach to the shore are predominantly close foreground views. Viewed from the beaches in some locations, the intensity of development is exaggerated by the proximity of residential development to the inter-tidal zone. With the exception of an out of character three/four storey commercial development at Callala Beach the fringe suburban development is generally limited to two storeys and low density suburban forms. The density of vegetation and dominance of the houses along the beachfronts varies; residences along Plantation Point Parade, south of Barfluer and Orion beaches are almost completely screened, some houses behind Collingwood Beach are more visible and dominant with minimal or moderate screening and most houses have a vegetated background. Along Callala Beach the residences are generally elevated on the dunes as part of the skyline with minimal or moderate screening. The eastern end of Vincentia features houses terracing up amongst the bushland when viewed from the middle distance. Views from the residences vary with the individual elevation and levels of screening. Due to the nature of the ribbon development relatively high numbers of residences have partial or significant views of the waterway and some of those with a second floor may have extensive views from higher elevations.
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 6
Photograph 1 and 2: residential development viewed from Callala and Collingwood beaches
The remnant dunes and revegetation provide differing levels of screening however the foreshore character is of that of an extensive beach backed by low density landscape residential development. The overall character is of a wide enclosed bay, fringed by a narrow beach with a ribbon development following the shoreline. Jervis Bay itself has few cultural modifications. Moorings in the Bay are limited to a small number located off both Huskisson and Vincentia. From time to time Jervis Bay is visited by large cruise vessels and navy craft which have a very high but short term visual impact. Some lesser impacts are created by permanent moorings such as the Oceantrek dive vessel generally moored off Vincentia. Most of the waterside interface maritime elements are recessed in Currambene Creek at Huskisson. A limited number of navigation markers identify hazards and the boundaries of the JBMP sanctuary zones. Overall the visual character of Jervis Bay is based around the dominance of the waterway, the lineal quality of the beach and low background vegetation, the enclosed form of the Bay and the differentiation of shoreline materials to create the highly natural quality of the Bay as distinct from the low density character of the developed areas.
Photograph 3: Typical local landscape character Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 7
2.3 The Study Area The Study Area is identified on Drawing 923-01 in Appendix A and can be primarily defined as the surrounding visual catchment. As noted previously the catchment is confined due to the surrounding topography.
Photograph 4: Collingwood and Orion Beaches
Photographs 5a and b: Callala Beach
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 8 2.4 Landscape Description and Visual Character of the Study Area The landscape character of the Study Area is determined by the extent of the visual catchment and the visual components within the catchment. The visual catchments for the Lease Areas, is shown on Figure 923-01. The visual catchment is defined as the land and water surface visible from a group of representative potential viewing points, relative to the proposed developments. Due to the surrounding low lying topography the visual catchment of Jervis Bay is essentially viewed from the water or close to the water edge. This creates an enclosed vista where water is the prominent feature visually backed by a relatively narrow strip of coastal vegetation. The visibility is dependent on several factors including weather, elevation of the viewer and time of day. The character analysis is divided into a series of landscape units. These are discrete elements that share common landscape characteristics: e.g.: a water unity, land unit, vegetation, etc. Landscape units are characterised by a consistency of visual features or appearance and some are heavily influenced by topography. Landscape units for this project have been chosen to suit the needs of the specific study. The selected units are: 2.4.1 Coastal Slopes Refer to Drawing 923-02 in Appendix A for a character analysis of the Study Area. The bulk of this landscape unit forms a background in most directions along the edge of the Study Area. Within the Study Area some steep slopes occur along the eastern edge of the visual catchment as part of the Beecroft Peninsula. These ridges and slopes create sharp contrasts to sky and are significant in the overall character of the Study Area. Form: Some visual differentiation in form is created by the changes in slope. Line: Line is a dominant visual element for this unit, when viewed from within the Study Area as within the extensive views the vegetated horizon creates a strong horizontal line. Colour & The dense coastal vegetation results in a dark undulating edge silhouette and Texture: provides a contrast in colour and texture to the foreground water areas. There is a strong colour and textural contrast at the horizon line. Cultural: The natural character is dominant. The existing cultural changes and elements are generally insignificant in this unit. 2.4.2 Foreshore Areas The shoreline is small in the overall vista but very significant element in the landscape. The edge creates textural change and interest. It is the area of greatest activity and development. Form: Shoreline form varies from beach sand dune interfaces to rocky low escarpments, creating a high degree of visual interest. The form changes at different viewing locations. Line: Line is a very significant element on the shore. Horizontal elements are strongly emphasised and breaks or changes in line create interest and highlight changes, particularly in foreground and close middle ground views Colour & Texture is another strong element along the foreshore. Textural changes Texture: between water, sand and vegetation are visible at distances up to around 1000m. Beyond that distance colour becomes dominant. The colours run in bands and strongly emphasis the changes in material. The colours delineate material, form and usage. In Jervis Bay the sand colour is close to white and is a highly valued natural visual asset. Cultural Most cultural modifications occur within the foreshore zone. Due to the nature Changes: of potential viewing distances the cultural modifications such as buildings, walls and non-native vegetation generally form a ragged lineal strip within the foreshore vista.
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 9 2.4.3 Water Bodies and Maritime Elements Water is the dominant element within the visual catchment. Light, tide, wind and weather conditions can significantly affect the appearance. Form: The water body can vary from a flat glistening surface to a wild variety of dark foaming waves. The greatest visual value of the water body is the range of response in form, colour, and texture due to varying weather conditions. Line: Line also varies with the weather. The sharp shoreline can be broken by changes in tide or wind. The surface varies regularly with a series of waves and intersection planes. Line in the water body also can have different emphasis depending on the elevation of the viewer. Colour & Texture: Colour varies completely with light and weather. Water can appear azure blue and change to dark grey, waves can be translucent or foam topped green. In Jervis Bay the water colour is the primary visual element. The high scenic value is enhanced by the variety of colours that the water body can create. Cultural Changes: Cultural modifications on the water are limited. Significant static elements are a small number of navigational aids, generally yellow or black and a very limited number of mooring buoys and static vessels. Most cultural changes on the waters of Jervis Bay are dynamic. A variety of vessels use the bay, primarily for recreational purposes in warmer months. Most are in transit, some occasionally are static for a day or two. These vessels contribute to the maritime vista. The natural appearance is constantly altered by such cultural changes and the impacts vary. Growth in maritime usage is likely to continue as development pressures and leisure time increases.
2.5 Ambience The assessment of ambience of the visual catchment can be broken into three distinct elements: • wildness • tranquillity • harmony. 2.5.1 Wildness Areas that lack cultural modifications and obvious human activity often possess qualities of remoteness and/or wildness, which may be reinforced by the lack of accessibility. These qualities are increasingly rare and contribute significantly to both the scenic quality and the landscape character of a place. Studies such as Williamson 1979 indicate that these qualities are valued by the majority of both residents and visitors alike. The perception of wildness within the JBMP varies with the dynamic nature of the potential views into the Bay. At times the Bay appears relatively pristine, particularly when viewed from the west along Collingwood Beach toward the Beecroft Peninsula or from the east end of Callala Beach out the mouth of the Bay however at times significant boat traffic reduces the appearance of wildness. From locations along Barfleur Beach and Callala Beach the background includes a high proportion of developed foreshore reducing the perception of wildness. The difference in the background of various views is particularly relevant at night where lighting reduces the perception of wildness. 2.5.2 Tranquillity Tranquillity is often but not always related to wildness and remote areas. On the day of the inspection the tranquillity was moderate and varied due to the number of both beach and water users on a Public Holiday. On a weekday or during winter the perception of tranquillity would be higher.
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 10 2.5.3 Harmony Harmony is an assessment of whether the whole “picture” fits together into a pleasant pattern, in other words, whether each landscape element relates to the total landscape or setting in a functional and visually harmonious manner. The level of harmony of the vista will be dependent on the spatial prominence of discordant elements. Dynamic changes will also affect the perceptions of harmony over reduced periods of time. The existing character of Jervis Bay is relatively harmonious with the natural character. The most significant discordant element is the dominance of residences at some beachside locations.
Photograph 6 Dynamic changes in harmony and tranquillity 2.6 Existing Nightscape The assessment of the existing nightscape is an assessment of the spatial prominence and harmony of the lighting in the landscape at night. The assessment was made from a number of foreshore viewing locations in Callala Beach, Huskisson and Vincentia looking along the beaches or across the Bay. Background light levels, brightness and glare were considered and compared to the background lighting environment, with the source viewed from varying distances. The assessment of the existing nightscape and night lighting impact is broken into several assessment units to reflect the potentially different levels of impacts due to the distance of the viewer, the intensity of the lighting impacts. The assessment is shown in Table 2.1. At present the only fixed lights visible on the surface of Jervis Bay at night are a limited number of navigational lights. The most obvious are the four existing cardinal marks surrounding the Sanctuary Zone east of Huskisson. At irregular intervals small boat or navy vessels mooring overnight would create night lighting impacts. Visits from cruise ships and larger well lit navy vessels would be relatively high lighting impacts. Table 2.1 Visual Impact of Lighting in the Existing Nightscape
The table shows the assessment of impact of lighting of the element when viewed from varying distances.
ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING STUDY AREA
Nightscape Foreground Close Middle ground Distant Middle Background 5 to 8km Element <400 to 800m 400m/800m – 2 to 3km ground 2 to 3km - infinity out to 5 to 8km
Vincentia Moderate Low/moderate Very low Very low impact band
Huskisson Moderate Low/Moderate Very low Very low impact band
Callala Beach Low/moderate Low Very low Very low impact band
Jervis Bay Very low Very low Nil Nil
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 11
It is important to note that at night lighting has a more significant impact on the perception of wildness than the cultural changes visible during the day. This is due to the strong visual contrasts and definable edges of lighting against a dark background. At night the perception of wildness is significantly diminished for viewers many kilometres from the light source even though the proportion of the lighting in the vista may be very small with a low overall impact that can appear harmonious with the surrounding developed landscape.
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 12
Section 3 Scenic Quality Assessment 3.1 Assessment Criteria The basic premise of visual quality assessment is that all landscapes have some value, but those with the highest diversity have the greatest potential for high scenic quality. Scenic quality is the combination of elements used to identify the importance of the proposed development to potential viewers. The assessment of scenic quality is performed by assessing the landscape character units into scenic quality classes e.g. high, moderate, low or if necessary, on a scale between these ratings. These classes are based on the diversity of form, line, colour and texture, prominence of landform, prominence of vegetation and geology, and water forms. The impact of cultural elements and modifications to the landscape can detract from the scenic quality if the modifications are discordant with the surroundings. 3.2 Scenic Quality Assessment Based on the description of the landscape units in Section 2 and assessing proportional prominence of each element of the scenic quality criteria, the assessment of Scenic Quality into various classes within the Study Area is summarised in Table 3.1 As noted in the Williamson 1979 summary of previous studies “some landscape dimension - scenic quality relationships”, scenic quality increases as:
topographic ruggedness and relative relief increase;
presence of water forms, water edge, and water areas increase;
patterns of grasslands and forest become more diverse;
natural and agricultural landscapes increase and man-made landscapes decrease; and
land use compatibility increases and land use edge diversity decreases.
Table 3.1 Scenic Quality Assessment:
Landscape Unit SCENIC QUALITY CRITERIA Scenic Quality Class Proportional Prominence and contribution to scenic quality of
Diversity of Landform (and Vegetation Water Landscape edge patterns) (extent and Elements variety)
Coastal slopes Moderate Moderate High - MODERATE/HIGH
Foreshores Areas Very High Very High High Very High HIGH-VERY HIGH
Water Bodies High Very High - Very High VERY HIGH
Cultural elements Low Low - - LOW
It is clear that the relative value of each landscape unit within Jervis Bay places it in the highest scenic quality class. This conclusion of this rating in this assessment is supported by its iconic status. It is notable that without the narrow coastal strip and the water body the scenic quality would be rated significantly lower. This highlights the value of the foreshore and water body as scenic elements.
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 13 3.3 Viewer Characteristics Viewer characteristics that affect the value of the scenic quality assessment are: • number of viewers • types of viewers and extent over which they will be active • the sensitivity of views from selected viewpoints. This is determined by accessibility and number of viewers. • the relative eye level of the viewer • the distance of the viewer to the subject. To assist with an understanding of the visual elements and detail visible at various distances from the viewer we have compiled Table 3.2 below. It is important to note that using these standard guidelines viewing capacity for detailed elements reduces in the 2-3 km range and fine detail will not be visible around that distance. Table 3.2 Distance Definitions for Landscape Assessment
Foreground Close Middle ground Distant Middle Background (Bg) (FGr) (CMg) ground (DMg)
Distance 0-400 to 800m 400 to 800m-2 to 3km 2 to 3km – 5 to 8km 5 to 8km- infinity
Viewing capacity detailed detail and general general general - no detail
Object viewed rock outcrop Hill, headland or rock Foreshore areas Major topographical platform elements
Visual species of textures (palms and Colours and course patterns (colours, characteristics individual plants hardwoods) textures (sand to light and dark) vegetation cover)
Source: Forest Commission, Victoria, 1981 - Visual Absorption Capability in the Blue Range Study Area. Definitions have been adapted by O’Hanlon Design Pty. Ltd. (1997) to suit subsequent visual studies.
3.4 Viewpoints A “viewpoint” is a specific vantage point from which a number of landscape units, or parts of units, are visible. Viewpoints are important when determining the relative importance of landscape units within the overall landscape and therefore are a determining factor in the assessment of scenic quality. Units that are visible from several viewpoints play a prominent role in determining landscape character. Visibility of individual landscape elements and visual prominence of items in the landscape is determined by the individual viewing points selected within the Study Area. Note that the impact can change with only slight modification to the viewing points. A range of publicly accessible locations have been selected from which the views of the proposed lease areas are possible. The selected locations are considered representative of a general location or group of locations. Individual houses and upper floor locations may vary considerably from the public area assessment and are not individually assessed. The distance definitions are identified in Table 3.2 above. The selected static viewpoints for the Project are identified below. For locations of the selected viewpoints refer Drawing 923-03 ‘Viewpoints” in Appendix A. The viewpoints and the approximate Australian height datum for each location selected for this project area are:
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 14
VP 1 Plantation Point AHD 1-3
Photograph 7 View North-west from VP 1
VP 2 Barfleur and Orion Beaches AHD 1-3. (Note views will vary considerably along the beach length)
Photograph 8: View North-West from Barfleur Beach VP 2
Photograph 9: View North from Orion Beach at VP 2
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 15 VP 3 Collingwood Beach: AHD 3. (Note views can vary considerably along the beach length)
Photograph 10: View East from Collingwood Beach VP 3
VP 4 Adjacent to Ilfracombe Avenue. AHD 5
Photograph 11: View South-East at VP 4
VP 5 Huskisson : AHD 10
Photograph 12: View East at VP 3
VP 6 Callala Beach : AHD 1-3 (Note views will vary considerably along the beach length)
Photogaph 13: Views South-East in the areas around VP6 along Callala Beach
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 16
VP 7 Callala Point AHD 12: at the south end of Lakersteen St.
Photograph 14: View South at VP7.
3.5 Sensitivity Levels Sensitivity levels are a measure of people’s concern for the scenic quality of an existing environment. They are based upon the scenic quality of the landscape unit, distance zone and type of travel routes or location of viewpoints, and the number and type of potential viewers. Generally, tourists and residents have a higher concern for visual quality than commuters. Residents usually have a high concern for the scenic quality of their visual catchment if it is threatened by perceived detrimental changes. Residents are generally more concerned with foreground and middle ground impacts. Sensitivity levels can be affected by the duration of the exposure to a view. Static viewers are often most sensitive to foreground and close middle ground elements. Very little valid research has been carried out in Australia to determine the public sensitivity to visual impacts generally. We are not aware of any significant individual sensitivity or attitudinal surveys carried out within the study areas of coastal NSW. In order to create meaningful evaluations we have considered the aesthetic elements and sensitivities likely to be valued by potential viewers. From anecdotal evidence we conclude that: • people prefer natural to modified landscapes. • naturally vegetated areas are regarded as the most attractive and industrial areas, the least attractive. • people prefer landscapes that have appreciable variation in slope. • trees and dense vegetation are highly valued in the landscape. • people highly value water in the landscape. Moving water or surf has more interest than still water, and clear water is more attractive than muddy or turbid water. • large bodies of water create more visual interest than narrow streams. • natural foreshores and riverbanks are preferred to those, which are artificially made or modified, such as sea walls or sheet piling. • contrast amongst the elements in a landscape, whether natural or artificial, creates visual interest. • movement and activity, both natural and artificial, add to a view. Natural movement and activity created by wildlife is high valued in coastal areas.
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 17 • places with a view are more highly regarded than those without a view. The most favoured views are those over a long distance, which include extensive water bodies, with elements of colour contrast, and extensive adjacent vegetation contributing to high levels of wildness. However it should be noted that: • responses to artificial activities depend both on the visual characteristics of the movement or activity and the person’s assessment of the value of the activity. For example, some people enjoy the movement and shape of shipping within the coastal landscape, while others are more concerned with the potentially loss of apparent wildness or serious ecological damage that can result from an oil spill. • views of activities associated with enjoyment, such as recreational boating, have added visual value but are also dependant on the person’s assessment of the value of the activity. Having regard to the iconic nature of the landscape, the types of viewers observed ranging from tourists to residents with very few short term commuter or work related viewers, the SLEP 1985 identification of several viewpoints as heritage items and the SEPP 71 considerations of the sensitivity of coastal lands in which all viewpoints are located, we consider the sensitivity level of all selected viewpoints with High/Very High Scenic Quality to be – Level 1- High sensitivity.
3.5 Landscape Management The assessment of the Level 1-High sensitivity against the High/Very High Scenic Quality of the landscape units identified in Table 3.1, lead us to conclude that both the foreshore areas and the Water Body of Jervis Bay fall within Landscape Management Zone A. Zone A – Low ability to absorb change. In this zone the ability to absorb change is low. Where possible mitigation measures should be used to significantly reduce the impact of any change in this zone.
Table 3.3 Landscape Management Zones
LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT ZONES Sensitivity Level/Distance Zones (combining tables 3.2 and 3.3) 1/Fg 1/CMg 1/DMg 1/Bg Scenic Very High A A A A Quality High A A A A Classes Moderate A B B B (See Table 3.1)
Table 3.3 adapted from the USDA methodology for this project by O’Hanlon Design Pty Ltd – 2014 The results of the table indicate that due to the high sensitivity of viewers and the very high Scenic Quality of the landscape the landscape falls into Zone A where the ability of the landscape to absorb change is low and mitigation measures should be activated where possible. This rating indicates that the Scenic Quality of Jervis Bay will be affected unless the activity can be significantly screened or the activity ceases to be identifiable due to the scale, bulk, or nature of the development and weather effects.
Section 3 – Visual Quality Assessment 18
SECTION 4 Relevant Aspects of the Proposed Development
4.1 General This section describes the various elements and operations of the MPCP that will affect visibility and visual quality. It is important to note that the proposed method and sequence of aquaculture operations may affect the duration and severity of the impacts.
4.2 Aquaculture Operations The Callala Leases 2 and 3 (north and south) are located approximately 1.5 km and 1.9 km southeast of Callala Beach, respectively. Lease Area 1, the Vincentia Lease is approximately 660m north of Orion Beach in Vincentia (refer drawing 923-02). The proposed dimensions of the leases are 600m x 340m for the Callala Leases and 300m x 340m for the Vincentia Lease. However, the exact dimensions and layout of the sites in the proposed locations will be finalised once a formal survey is undertaken by a registered surveyor during placement of the lease corner navigation buoys. The Project does not include the development of new land based sites. It is proposed that existing boating facilities at Woollamia, Huskisson or Callala Bay and existing industrial zoned lands will be utilised for operational activities and these fall outside this assessment. During the construction stage the movement of vessels between the proposed Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases and shore facilities may range from 0-6 return trips per day per lease to install the proposed infrastructure. Once the infrastructure is established the movement of vessels would be in the range of 0-3 return trips per day per lease to undertake activities such as inspections, repairs, maintenance, cleaning and harvesting. The vessels will be working vessels with buoys and line visible. They will provide a ‘working harbour’ appearance as distinct from the predominantly recreational based vessels currently visible. It is notable that Lease 1 is located in a similar location to a previous aquaculture lease operational until approx. 8 years ago. The previous lease was a similar size but visually more obtrusive that the proposed lease as it relied on more visible raft infrastructure. 4.3 Infrastructure Elements The proposed commercial shellfish aquaculture lease infrastructure will consist of longline culture systems which will include an anchoring and mooring system that is connected to backbone ropes from which culturing apparatus would be suspended. The number of longlines within each lease may vary depending on the wave climate, depth and currents at each site. The use of rafts is not proposed as part of the Project. The infrastructure hidden below the waterline will vary depending on the species to be cultivated; however use of end and support buoys is common to all systems. Black buoys will be attached to the longlines to assist with supporting the system. The number of buoys used along each longline will vary depending on the growth stage of the stock and the need to secure cultured stock at an appropriate depth. Buoys are usually position 20-30 m apart when stocked with juveniles and as the crop increases in biomass additional buoys may be placed along the longlines. The standard support buoys generally have a volume of 150-200 litres and are black. Buoy shapes vary from round to conical and lozenge shapes. The max height and width is in the order of 1500mm with approx. half the height below the water line. The length of the longlines on the commercial shellfish aquaculture leases may range from 100m to 250m depending on the species cultured and site characteristics. Longlines are typically positioned 15 to 50m apart depending on the depth and prevailing sea conditions at the lease site. Section 4 – Relevant Aspects of the Proposed Development 19
Longlines are often aligned parallel to the predominant direction of waves to minimise mechanical stress on the infrastructure and obstructions to coastal processes. Longline systems typically appear as an orderly line of buoys when viewed at right angles to or at the ends of the lines but can appear disorderly when viewed from other angles. The degree of flotation of the buoys is dependent on the weight of stock on the line. Unweighted buoys will float high and are more visible. If unweighted buoys are left on longlines there is also potential for discolouration due to bird dropings, increasing visual impact by height, volume and change of colour. This was evidenced on some of the unweighted buoys in Twofold bay where following an extended period of calm weather that prevented the buoys from being washed clean (refer photo ID 001 in Appendix B) At least four navigation buoys will be located around each lease, one on each corner of each proposed lease. These are similar to the existing navigational buoys at the corners of the JBMP sanctuary zones. The requirements for each navigational buoy may vary slightly but it is likely the markers will have a day mark and a flashing light and the focal point of the light will be at least 600mm above the water level. The light will be visible at least 1850m distant in clear conditions with a minimum vertical divergence of 9 degrees. For Lease Area 1 off Vincentia the closest buoys and navigational marker will be approx. 660m from the closest point of the beach and the most distant approx 950m from the closest viewing location. For Lease areas 2 and 3 there are proposed at least 8 navigational markers and the size and shape of the proposed leases will result in markers at up to 600m apart. The closer markers to the beach will be approx 1500m from the nearest viewing locations and the most distant approx. 2400m. The additional navigational lights (minimum 12) off of Vincentia and Callala Beach will significantly increase the number of flashing lights in the Bay visible at night from both residences and public areas.
Section 4 – Relevant Aspects of the Proposed Development 20
Section 5 Visual Impact Assessment 5.0 General The assessment of the degree of visual impact of the proposed shellfish aquaculture leases is based on the visibility and perceived severity of the aquaculture infrastructure within the landscape from selected viewpoints and the number of viewers expected to experience the visual changes. Factors included in the assessment are as follows: (a) Selection of viewpoints, which offer prominent views from around the Study Area or are relevant to the general public. These viewpoints do not represent all possible views attainable from each direction; and the visual impact could naturally vary according to relative elevation and view direction. (b) Consideration of the various landscape components in relation to the visual impact. For this assessment visual impact ratings are ranked as follows: Severe, High, Moderate, Low, Very Low, Minimal and Nil. 5.1 Aquaculture Lease No.1 Views of Lease No.1 will be possible from all viewpoints except VP5 and adjacent areas that are screened by Tapalla Point and the vegetation adjacent to the Entrance of Moona Moona Creek. VP1, VP2, VP3 and VP4 are representative of the potential views around the Vincentia Foreshore. The distance of the lease to the range of viewers varies but is generally around 700-800m from the beach or viewing locations. VP6 and VP7 are representative of views along Callala Beach. 5.1.1 VP1 Plantation Point The rock platform at VP1 is noted in the SLEP as a heritage item and from the location Lease Area 1 is visible approx. 800m distant against the backdrop of the entry to Moona Moona Creek, approx 1500m northwest and undeveloped sections of beach approx 2000m further to the north. From VP1 it is anticipated the buoys will be in roughly parallel rows to the viewers. For viewers close to water level and on the rock platform the buoys will tend to appear as long strings of black circles contrasting to the water with the white ribbon of beach beyond. From elevated but possibly more heavily screened locations on Plantation Point, the individual buoys will be more obvious. Visual impact: Rock platform - Low-Moderate Park Areas – Low-Moderate (if visible where not screened)
Section 5– Visual Impact Assessment 21
5.1.2 VP2 Barfleur Beach and along Orion Beach VP2 covers an extended area of foreshore north and east of Vincentia mapped as a heritage area with the closest viewers approx. 660m from Lease No.1. Views are available from three distinct levels, the beach areas, the elevated foreshore walkway and the residences south of the walkway. The foreshore walkway and the residences are generally well screened but views do exist toward Lease No.1 in selected areas particularly adjacent to the Holden St boat ramp. Views from the beaches of Lease No.1 are uninterrupted. Along the foreshore area views of the buoys will vary from straight lines to a less orderly layout as the viewer moves east to west. Visual impact: Beach (heritage mapped) - Low-Moderate Walkway – Low Residences – Low 5.1.3 VP3 Collingwood Beach Along Collingwood Beach views of Lease No.1 are uninterrupted from the beach at a distance of between 900m and 1100m. The visual backdrop is the Beecroft Peninsula at a distance of 8km which has no visible beach element and provides a dark horizontal background element. The consistency of the water depth and colour across the Bay with the very dark green background has little relief on calm days the buoys will be visible. On days when the north east winds blow the wave effects will provide significant mitigation. High floating and buoys stained with white guano will be more visible due to limited textural and colour changes. The walkway behind the Collingwood Beach is hidden behind the dense vegetation and closely flanked by residential development to the west. It provides only occasional glimpses of the Bay to the east generally at right angles to the direction of travel.
The residences along the foreshore west of the walkway have elevated views over the dunes to the Bay. Some will still be screened from view of Lease No.1 by vegetation on the dunes even if they have longer views to Beecroft Peninsula. As the residences are move elevated than the beach level, for those with views, buoys and markers will appear more individual. Visual impact: Beach - Moderate Walkway – Minimal Residences – Low-Moderate 5.1.4 VP4 Ilfracombe Street, Vincentia From Ilfracombe Street and sections of Collingwood Beach adjacent Lease No.1 is approx. 1000m distant to the south east. The background is the view of Plantation Point, Barfleur Beach and Orion Beach. The view is a tapered vegetated and developed peninsula with a thin ribbon of non continuous beach at the shoreline. The beach adjacent to the Moona Moona Creek rock platform is one of the most popular locations with high user numbers.
Section 5– Visual Impact Assessment 22
About 75% of the residences along Ilfracombe Street have a second storey providing views over the dune vegetation. At a distance of around 1100m the buoys will combine into a number of irregular black strips possibly running at right angles to the viewer depending on the wave climate and layout. The rock platform at Tapalla Point, also heritage noted in the SLEP falls at the northern end of this extended viewing area at a distance of approx. 2000m from Lease No.1 but is almost entirely screened at the rock platform level from views of Lease No.1 by the intervening rock platform at Moona Moona Creek. Visual impact: Beaches – Low-Moderate Tapalla Point rock platform – Minimal Public spaces behind the beach – Low Residences – Low-Moderate 5.1.5 VP5 Huskisson Lease Area No.1 not visible from this location in the park adjacent to central Huskisson. 5.1.6 VP6 Callala Beach and VP7 Callala Point Along the entire length of Callala Beach and up to Callala Point Lease Area No.1 will be located at a distance of between 4km and 6 km from the viewer. At this distance Orion Beach is not visible and a row of 1.5m high buoys would therefore not be visible. Visual impact: Public and private spaces – Nil 5.2 Aquaculture Leases No.2 and No.3 5.2.1 VP1 Plantation Point, VP2 Orion Beach, VP3 south end Collingwood Beach Lease No.2 is located a minimum of 5km from VP1, VP2 and VP3. Lease No.3 is located a minimum of 4km from viewers at VP1, VP2 and VP3. At those distances the buoys will not be visible in any conditions, particularly during the middle of the day when viewers at VP1 to VP3 face north, north east into the sun reflecting off the Bay. Visual impact: Nil 5.2.2 VP4 Ilfracombe Street Vincentia The beach adjacent to Ilfracombe Street is a minimum of 3.5 km from Lease No.3 and 4.5 km from Lease No.2. At those distances the buoys of Lease No.3 will not be visible. Lease No.2 bouys may be visible in very calm conditions in the late afternoon when the sun is illuminating the face toward
Section 5– Visual Impact Assessment 23 the viewer. Such conditions are extremely rare due to the nature of sea breezes across the South Coast particularly in summer. Visual impact: Nil - Minimal 5.2.3 VP5 Huskisson The distance of Lease No.3 from Huskisson and Tapalla Point is just under 3 km, Lease No.2 exceeds 3km. Due to the elevated viewing locations in Huskisson and on Tapalla Point the longline buoys may be visible only in very calm clear and cloudless conditions, particularly in the afternoon. Assuming the wave action is predominantly parallel to Callala Beach, the buoys in the middle distance could appear as a series of thin black lines with Callala Point and the white sands of Hare Bay in the background. Any wave action or cloud cover is likely to create colour variety on the water and camouflage the lines completely amongst the moving patterns created. Visual impact: Minimal - Very Low 5.2.4 VP6 Callala Beach Callala Beach exceeds 5 km in length and provides a myriad of static and dynamic viewing opportunities of Lease No. 2 and Lease No. 3. The north eastern end of the beach is developed with low rise residential development with the exception of one three/four storey commercial building on Quay Road. The closest buoys of Leases No.2 and No. 3 vary between 1.5 km and 1.9 km from the viewers. At that distance in most weather conditions, the buoys will be visible not as lines but as an irregular mass of buoys without a perceivable form against a background of the mouth of Jervis Bay and Bowen Island in excess of 12km in the distance.
Houses along the beachfront will have similar views to those from the beach and public areas modified by any intervening planting but with slightly higher viewer elevation. From two storey residences or more elevated unscreened locations behind the beach the longline rows will separate slightly increasing the visibility and slightly emphasising the discordant nature of the element in the landscape. Visual impact: Beach – Very Low-Low Residences – Very Low-Low 5.2.5 VP7 Callala Point Views from Callala Point are generally restricted to views from the reserve at the end of Lakersteen Street. Longline buoys in the leases will be at varying distances between 1.7 and 3.2 km from viewers. The reserve and the adjacent residences are elevated allowing limited views to the south west of the closest buoys in most weather conditions. Most views are however fully screened by vegetation. Depending on the final layout, the buoys may be running parallel to the viewer in chains which will slightly highlight the discordant nature of the aquaculture lease where they are visible. Visual impact: Very Low
Section 5– Visual Impact Assessment 24
5.3 Visual Representation of impacts In order to provide a visual representation and better understanding of the impacts of a development it is common for a visual assessment to include photomontages of the development. In this case due to the changing nature of the environment in which the development is located and the effect of the environment on visibility of the subject we consider that photographs of similar installations at equivalent distances will provide a more realistic representation of the lease infrastructure than a photomontage. Fisheries NSW has commissioned a series of photographs in Twofold Bay of similar lease infrastructure. The photographs have been taken with focal lengths in the order of 55mm to provide properties consistent with a view with the naked eye. A selection of photographs taken from varying distances in differing conditions are attached as Appendix B. The photographs have been selected to most closely approximate the key viewing distances of 800- 1300m and 1900 to 2500m. 5.4 Residential areas The number of residences with potential visual impacts precludes individual assessment of every residence and individual viewing locations. It is reasonable to assume that most residences with views will focus the design of the residence and associated outdoor spaces on the water views available. As noted in the impact assessments above most affected residential areas are generally located close to the public areas and beaches. As a result views of the leases will be similar to the public views with some variations due to potential elevations of some viewers in second storey viewing locations and additional screening provided in some cases by dune revegetation. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that the likely impacts on those residences will closely match the impacts identified in the public spaces adjacent. Sensitivity levels of individual owners to those impacts are often heightened due to the nature of the impacts on private spaces. Residents on the elevated hillside facing north in Vincentia with underlying levels around RL50 are slightly different from those closer to the water level. Potential views from these residences are more elevated although many are partially or wholly screened by intervening development and vegetation. A number of views from these residences could therefore be tightly focused through small viewing corridors with an elevated viewer location. In a select number of cases the focus of the view could be located on Lease No1 at distances around 750m to 800m. This would result in buoys and markers being individually more prominent than buoys viewed at the same distances from close to water level. The resultant impact would be Low to Moderate. The relative number of responses to public exhibition and public meetings indicate a higher level of concern for potential visual impact for residents along Callala Beach than those along Collingwood Beach and around Vincentia. This is in contrast to our visual impact assessment that Vincentia residents are likely to be more affected than those along Callala Beach due to the proximity of Lease No.1 to the beach. The reasons for this higher sensitivity are not clear, however possible explanations could be: • less permanent residents in Vincentia, or • a more active environmental protection group in Callala Beach, or • familiarity with the potential impacts in Vincentia due to previous lease activities. In any case our assessment indicates relatively low levels of visual impact for the Callala Beach foreshore and adjacent residences that do not appear to match the level of resident sensitivity. 5.5 Night Lighting As lighting is restricted to cardinal markers at the corners of each lease the visual impacts are limited in number. However as noted in Section 3.4 the effect of lighting is a significant impact on the perception of the wildness of Jervis Bay. The visual impact is usually heightened at night by the lack of fine detail and visible cultural modification. For viewers at levels close to the high water mark with a background of foreshore lights behind the leases, such as the middle and eastern end of Callala Beach the cardinal marker lights are likely to blend into the background lighting environment. For more elevated viewers and those with dark undeveloped backgrounds such as Collingwood Beach the cardinal lights will be more discordant with the darker backgrounds. Section 5– Visual Impact Assessment 25
5.6 Cumulative Visual Impacts Previous aquaculture leases in Jervis Bay, now not operational, were located in a similar location to Lease no.1. As there are no current operational leases in Jervis Bay there are no direct cumulative impacts from the original leases. It is however relevant that the proposed lease replicates the original operational lease and I cannot identify any indication that the previous lease diminished the high scenic quality or iconic status of Jervis Bay held while the previous lease was operational. Some minor cumulative night lighting impacts occur due to the additional lighting of associated navigational markers adding to the number of existing markers. These are particularly relevant for viewers with views of a dark background as noted above. It is important to note the dynamic nature of the proposed visual impacts of the leases. The impacts will vary over time and are most pronounced when the lines have no culture material attached. Also significant is the ephemeral nature of the impact. If the lease expires and the lines are removed as was the case with the previous lease, no residual visual impact remains. This is unusual as most cultural modifications are more permanent in nature. The removal of most modifications will normally leave at least short term visible scars on the original landscape and often permanent visual impacts remain in perpetuity. In this case as the cultural modifications are located on water removal allows a full and immediate rehabilitation.
5.7 Mitigation Measures Due to the nature of the aquaculture infrastructure and the proposed location in open water on Jervis Bay very few opportunities exist for mitigation of the impacts. Overall volumes and numbers of buoys are unlikely to potentially be reduced as the volume is tied to the performance capacity of the buoys and the total system. Buoys could be slightly camouflaged by use of a mid-grey or dark grey-green colour rather than black however due to the changing colour of the water in differing climatic conditions, the potentially different backgrounds visible to viewers at differing relative levels and the potential to view from many different locations camouflage using colour would be of only limited success. Black is generally considered a non obtrusive colour due to its lack of reflectivity. Other mitigation measures could include • removal of buoys when lines are not in use, • cleaning of guano from high floating buoys, and • minimising buoy numbers where possible.
5.8 Impacts on water users There are an almost infinite number of potential viewing locations on the waters of Jervis Bay, some of which would place the lease areas in the close foreground of the view of water users. The potential uses of the bay are tourism, recreational boating, recreational fishing or combinations of those uses. Recreational users of the waterway generally have the capacity to adjust their location on the waterway and proximity to the lease areas if they find the visual impacts of concern. Several eco-tourism boat charters and general boat charter operations are based around Huskisson. The straightest course from Huskisson to the mouth of Jervis Bay almost bisects the distance between Lease No.1 and Lease no.3. Viewers on tourist boats travelling toward the open sections of the bay to the south-east are likely to have a very short duration view of the leases in transit at distances around 800-1000m. The degree of sensitivity of those viewers is likely to be heightened in proportion to the value the individual tourist places on wildness and natural landscapes. Given that those viewers are likely to be on a high powered recreational boat it is reasonable to assume their sensitivity to change in the visual environment will not result in concern over the short duration exposure to the lease areas.
Section 5– Visual Impact Assessment 26
5.9 Summary
In light of the iconic nature of the scenic quality of Jervis Bay and its surrounds most forms of cultural modification will potentially create visual impacts that affect the scenic quality. In this case the sensitivity of the viewers and the perception of the harmony of the activity in the landscape will be very significant factors in the assessment of the change in scenic quality. For some the maritime nature of the impact will reduce sensitivity for others the regularity and line of the infrastructure will be out of character and intrusive.
I consider that from Callala Beach and its surrounds the impacts will be sufficiently low to satisfy the majority of viewers that scenic quality is not significantly diminished. Impacts could be further reduced as noted in 5.7 Mitigation Measures if desired.
Viewers around the Vincentia beaches and Plantation Point rock platform will have views that are moderately impacted in almost all conditions. More elevated public places and residences will vary significantly between minimal impacts and moderate impacts depending on any intervening screening. Moderate impacts are significant in these locations of high scenic quality where some foreshore elements have been identified to be of heritage value. In order to minimise those impacts I suggest careful management and monitoring of Lease No.1 by the Lessee and Fisheries to ensure
• buoy numbers are kept to a minimum
• floatation levels are balanced to minimise visibility whenever possible
• buoys are immediately removed from the lease when lines are not in use.
Consideration should be given to a review of the visual impacts to monitor performance. Lease performance and tracking of sensitivity for viewers should be carried out at approx 5 yearly intervals similar to the review of impacts at Twofold Bay carried out in 2005. If Lessee performance or visual sensitivity gives rise to significant concerns a review of the availability of the lease should be considered. An additional benefit of this monitoring would be that data collected from such reviews would form a significant resource for assessment of future leases in other bays in NSW where aquaculture is proposed in the future.
Section 5– Visual Impact Assessment 27
References
“Forest Landscape Description and Inventories A basis for Land Planning and Design” USDA Forest Service Research Paper PSW-49 R. Burton Litton Jr;
National Forest Landscape Management Handbook No. 434 February 1973;
Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Handbook No. 462, “National Forest Landscape Management” Volume 2 Chapter1 The Visual Management system - April 1974;
“National Forest Landscape Management” Volume 2 Chapter 2 Utilities, Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture - July 1975; and
U.S. Department of Agriculture “National Forest Landscape Management” Recreation Volume 2 Chapter 8, Forest Service Agricultural Handbook No. 666 - December, 1987;
Williamson, Dennis. “Scenic perceptions of Australian Landscapes” Landscape Australia, vol. 2 1979
Palmer, James F. “Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts” Landscape and Urban Planning No.69 (2004)
Forest Commission, Victoria, 1981 - Visual Absorption Capability in the Blue Range Study Area.
1:25000 topographical map “Huskisson” 9027-4N 2007.
Google Earth 2011 Cnes/spot image: Mapdata Sciences Pty Ltd, PSMA
Assessment Documents
The attached assessment is based on the following documents provided by Fisheries NSW.
• Commercial Shellfish Aquaculture Leases, Jervis Bay - Environment Impact Statement 2103.
• Aquaculture in Twofold Bay- Minister for Primary Industries , 22 Feb 2005
References & Assessment Documents 28
COMMERCIAL SHELLFISH AQUACULTURE LEASES JERVIS BAY NSW
APPENDIX A
MAPPING
CALLALA BAY WOWLY CREEK HARE BAY
CARARMA WOLLUMBOOLA CREEK
CALLALA POINT HARE BAY
GREEN LEASE 2 POINT/ISLAND CALLALA CABBAGE TREE BEACH CABBAGE TREE BEACH POINT
MONTAGU POINT LONG BEACH CARRAMBENE RESERVE CREEK LEASE 3 HUSKISSON TAPELLA POINT
HUSKISSON BEACH
BINDIJINE BEACH COLLINGWOOD BEACH JERVIS BAY HONEYMOON BINDIJINE LEASE 1 MARINE PARK BAY
ORION BEACH PLANTATION POINT
VINCENTIA NELSONS BEECROFT BEACH PENINSULA BHERWERRE DART POINT BLENHEIM BEACH LONGNOSE POINT
HYAMS BEACH
CAPTAINS BOWEN POINT ISLAND MURRAYS BEACH
BRISTOL POINT
O'HANLON DESIGN Pty Limited LEGEND: NOTE: DRAWING NOT TO SCALE L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T S JERVIS BAY 04.04.14 ISSUE FOR REPORT A VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT DATE REVISION ISSUE DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING TITLE STUDY AREA NORTH JOB NUMBER ISSUE Tel: (02) 9420 3633 REFER REPORT Fax: (02) 9420 3655 Email: [email protected] STUDY AREA 296 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove, NSW 2066 01 923 A VP7
1 , 370 m VP6 m ,750 1
1 ,920
m
LEASE 2
m ,960 2 LEASE 3 VP5
VP8 ON WATER JERVIS BAY MARINE PARK (WATER BODY)
VP4
LEASE 1
750m VP3
m VP2 660 VP1
O'HANLON DESIGN Pty Limited LEGEND: NOTE: DRAWING NOT TO SCALE L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T S JERVIS BAY 04.04.14 ISSUE FOR REPORT A VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT VP# DATE REVISION ISSUE DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING TITLE VIEWPOINT LOCATION NORTH JOB NUMBER ISSUE Tel: (02) 9420 3633 REFER REPORT Fax: (02) 9420 3655 VIEWPOINTS VIEWPOINT LOCATION - EXTENDED VIEWING Email: [email protected] LOCATION WITH BASE REFERENCE LOCATION 296 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove, NSW 2066 02 REFER REPORT 923 A FORESHORE AREAS LEASE 2
LEASE 3
FORESHORE AREAS
JERVIS BAY MARINE PARK (WATER BODY)
LEASE 1
O'HANLON DESIGN Pty Limited LEGEND: NOTE: DRAWING NOT TO SCALE L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T S JERVIS BAY 04.04.14 ISSUE FOR REPORT A VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORESHORE AREAS OTHER AREAS - WATER BODY DATE REVISION ISSUE DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING TITLE NORTH JOB NUMBER ISSUE Tel: (02) 9420 3633 REFER REPORT REFER REPORT Fax: (02) 9420 3655 COASTAL SLOPES Email: [email protected] LANDSCAPE UNITS REFER REPORT 296 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove, NSW 2066 03 923 A
COMMERCIAL SHELLFISH AQUACULTURE LEASES JERVIS BAY NSW
APPENDIX B
TWOFOLD BAY STUDY PHOTO-REPRESENTATION OF EFFECTS
Location:- Breakwall Wharf, Eden
Distance to closest buoy:- approx 800m
Distance to furthest buoy:- approx 1300m
Focal length:- approx 55m
Photo ID:- 001
Date:- 11 / 03 /2014 Time taken:- 12.34 (mid day set)
Elevation of location:- Elevated Approx height :- 3 metres
Weather conditions (eg. Cloudy, sunny, clear, overcast, etc) :- Sunny clear day.
Wind speed:- Max of 15 knots.
Sea state:- Sea 1.5m, Swell S/E below 1m.
Photo-representation of Effects 1 Location:- Brandy Creek Headland
Distance to closest buoy:- approx 1900m
Distance to furthest buoy:- approx 2500m
Focal length:- approx 55m
Photo ID:- 005
Date:- 11 / 03 /2014 Time taken:- 1.51pm (mid day set)
Elevation of location:- Elevated Approx height :- 3 metres
Weather conditions (eg. Cloudy, sunny, clear, overcast, etc) :- Sunny clear day.
Wind speed:- Max of 15 knots.
Sea state:- Sea 1.5m, Swell S/E below 1m.
Photo-representation of Effects 2 Location:- Breakwall Wharf Eden
Distance to closest buoy:- approx 800m
Distance to furthest buoy:- approx 1300m
Focal length:- approx 55m
Photo ID:- 006
Date:- 13 / 03 /2014 Time taken:- 8.16am (morning set)
Elevation of location:- Elevated Approx height :- 3 metres
Weather conditions (eg. Cloudy, sunny, clear, overcast, etc) :-Overcast Cloudy Day
Wind speed:- Under 5 knots.
Sea state:- Calm seas below 1m.
Photo-representation of Effects 3 Location:- Brandy Creek Headland
Distance to closest buoy:- approx 1900m
Distance to furthest buoy:- approx 2500m
Focal length:- approx 55m
Photo ID:- 010
Date:- 13 / 03 /2014 Time taken:- 9.19am (morning set)
Elevation of location:- Elevated Approx height :- 3 metres
Weather conditions (eg. Cloudy, sunny, clear, overcast, etc) :- Overcast Cloudy Day
Wind speed:- Under 5 knots
Sea state:- Calm seas below 1m.
Photo-representation of Effects 4 Location:- Breakwall Wharf Eden
Distance to closest buoy:- approx 800m
Distance to furthest buoy:- approx 1300m
Focal length:- approx 55m
Photo ID:- 011
Date:- 18 / 03 / 2014 Time taken:- 4.32pm (afternoon set)
Elevation of location:- Elevated Approx height :- 3 metres
Weather conditions (eg. Cloudy, sunny, clear, overcast, etc) :- Cloudy overcast day
Wind speed:- 10 knots
Sea state:- Easterly below 1m.
Photo-representation of Effects 5 Location:- Brandy Creek Headland
Distance to closest buoy:- approx 1900m
Distance to furthest buoy:- approx 2500m
Focal length:- approx 55m
Photo ID:- 015
Date:- 18 / 03 /2014 Time taken:- 5.27pm (afternoon set)
Elevation of location:- Elevated Approx height :- 3 metres
Weather conditions (eg. Cloudy, sunny, clear, overcast, etc) :- Overcast Cloudy Day
Wind speed:- 10 knots
Sea state:- Easterly below 1m.
Photo-representation of Effects 6
Location:- Breakwall Wharf Eden
Distance to closest buoy:- approx 800m
Distance to furthest buoy:- approx 1300m
Focal length:- approx 55m
Photo ID:- 016
Date:- 19 / 03 / 2014 Time taken:- 11.48am (mid day set)
Elevation of location:- Elevated Approx height :- 3 metres
Weather conditions (eg. Cloudy, sunny, clear, overcast, etc) :-Sunny clear day.
Wind speed:- 12 knots
Sea state:- Easterly below 1m.
Photo-representation of Effects 7
Location:- Brandy Creek Headland
Distance to closest buoy:- approx 1900m
Distance to furthest buoy:- approx 2500m
Focal length:- approx 55m
Photo ID:- 020
Date:- 19 / 03 /2014 Time taken:- 1.02pm (mid day set)
Elevation of location:- Elevated Approx height :- 3 metres
Weather conditions (eg. Cloudy, sunny, clear, overcast, etc) :- Sunny clear day.
Wind speed:- 12 knots
Sea state:- Easterly below 1m.
Photo-representation of Effects 8 Location:- Breakwall Wharf Eden
Distance to closest buoy:- approx 800m
Distance to furthest buoy:- approx 1300m
Focal length:- approx 55m
Photo ID:- 021
Date:- 19 / 03 / 2014 Time taken:- 4.15pm (afternoon set)
Elevation of location:- Elevated Approx height :- 3 metres
Weather conditions (eg. Cloudy, sunny, clear, overcast, etc) :- Sunny with patchy cloud.
Wind speed:- 20 knots
Sea state:- East to South Easterly below 1m.
Photo-representation of Effects 9 Location:- Brandy Creek Headland
Distance to closest buoy:- approx 1900m
Distance to furthest buoy:- approx 2500m
Focal length:- approx 55m
Photo ID:- 025
Date:- 19 / 03 /2014 Time taken:- 5.01pm (afternoon set)
Elevation of location:- Elevated Approx height :- 3 metres
Weather conditions (eg. Cloudy, sunny, clear, overcast, etc) :- Sunny with patchy cloud.
Wind speed:- 20 knots
Sea state:- East to South Easterly below 1m.
Photo-representation of Effects 10