Upload
others
View
6
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
FINGERBOARDS MINERAL SANDS PROJECT LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
DETAILED PRESENTATION
JUNE 2019
URBIS.COM.AU
PRESENTATION CONTENT▪ EES Scoping Requirements
▪ Purpose of the Study
▪ Methodology Proposal
▪ Impact Assessment Methodology
▪ Findings and Recommendations so Far
URBIS.COM.AU
The EES evaluation objective is:
▪ To avoid adverse effects on the landscape and recreational values of the Mitchell River National Park and minimise visual effects on the open space areas.
EES SCOPING REQUIREMENTS
URBIS.COM.AU
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
▪ Define the criteria relevant to the study includinglegislation, standards and guidelines.
▪ Characterise the existing landscape features andlandscape character and scenic quality within theregional setting.
▪ Prepare visual simulations of the mine duringdevelopment and at end of life from indicative,visually sensitive locations.
▪ Assess the potential visual impacts on identifiedsensitive receptors, including potential night lightingimpacts.
▪ Identify and propose measures for the reduction,mitigation and management of potential visualimpacts.
URBIS.COM.AU
The methodology is comprised of:
Quantitative Assessment
▪ How much of the proposal is visible from particularviewpoints?
Qualitative Assessment
▪ Visual Modification – How does the proposalcontrast with the landscape character – how wellcan the setting absorb change?
▪ Scenic Quality - What are the qualities / values ofthe landscape setting?
▪ Viewer Sensitivity – How sensitive will viewers be?
METHODOLOGY
URBIS.COM.AU
METHODOLOGY: VISUAL SETTINGS
The assessment has been undertaken for settings based on distance from the proposal:
▪ Regional – more than 5 km.
▪ Sub–regional - between 1 km and 5 km:
- Distant Sub–regional – between 2.5 km and 5 km.
- Near Sub–regional – between 1 km and 2.5 km.
▪ Local – within 1 km.
URBIS.COM.AU
METHODOLOGY: QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT -VISUAL PROMINENCE – HORIZONTAL & VERTICAL
Horizontal
Vertical
URBIS.COM.AU
PROJECT PROPOSAL:KEY VISUAL CONSIDERATIONS
▪ Mine Life – approx. 20 years
▪ Footprint – 1,675ha
▪ Disturbed area at any one time – approx. 360ha
▪ Most visible components:
➢Tailings storage
➢Mining unit plants
➢Wet concentrator plant
➢Mine void
➢Topsoil stockpiles
➢General infrastructure
➢Services corridor
➢Rail siding
URBIS.COM.AU
▪ Rural residences and settlements.
▪ Recreation and tourist attractions, e.g., Mitchell River National Park, tourism accommodation.
▪ Tourist Routes, e.g., Bairnsdale – Dargo Rd, Fernbank – Glenaladale Rd.
FINDINGS: SENSITIVE VIEWPOINTS
URBIS.COM.AU
FINDINGS –SCREENING EFFECTS OF VEGETATION AT RESIDENCES
Note: VP21 is now uninhabited
URBIS.COM.AU
FINDINGS: VISUAL CATCHMENT ANALYSIS▪ Based on
heights of main elements (entire extent of project)
▪ Worst case –assumes no screening vegetation
URBIS.COM.AU
VIEWPOINT 15 - RECEPTOR 6
730 metres from closest element
Existing
During mining ~1 < 5 years
Post mining > 5 years
URBIS.COM.AU
VIEWPOINT 18 - RECEPTOR 15(BAIRNSDALE – DARGO RD)510 metres from closest element
During mining ~5 < 8 years
Post mining > 8 years
Existing
URBIS.COM.AU
VIEWPOINT 21 - RECEPTOR 2 (KALBAR OWNED)
During mining ~ 1 < 15 years
Post mining > 15 years
Existing
170 metres from closest element
URBIS.COM.AU
VIEWPOINT 22 - RECEPTOR 5(FERNBANK-GLENALADALE RD)140 metres from closest element
During mining ~1 < 5 years
Existing
Post mining > 5 years
URBIS.COM.AU
VIEWPOINT RD1 – NEW ROAD(RELOCATED BAIRNSDALE-DARGO ROAD)20 metres from closest element
During mining ~5 years
Post mining > 12 years
Existing
URBIS.COM.AU
VIEWPOINT RD2A- BAIRNSDALE-DARGO ROAD30 metres from closest element
During mining ~1 < ~8 years
Post mining > 15 years
Existing
URBIS.COM.AU
VIEWPOINT RD3 - NEW ROAD(RELOCATED FERNBANK-GLENALADALE RD)
During mining ~ 12 years
Post mining > 15 years
Existing
280 metres from closest element
URBIS.COM.AU
VIEWPOINT RD4 - NEW ROAD(RELOCATED FERNBANK-GLENALADALE RD)
During mining ~ 1 < 5 years
Post mining > 15 years
Existing
30 metres from closest element
URBIS.COM.AU
MITIGATION MEASURES
▪ Building material colour selection - processing plant and other buildings.
▪ Progressive restoration.
▪ Foreground visual screening – at perimeter of fixed plant and along road sides.
▪ Off site mitigation – consultation with landowners regarding amelioration on their land.
▪ Shielding of fixed lighting and management of vehicle mounted lights.
URBIS.COM.AU
▪ Existing vegetation assists in screening views, particularly from residences
▪ Overlooking is not possible (except for distant and remote areas of the National Park).
▪ Highest impacts located within the local setting reducing with distance.
▪ Impact highest for 30 months as mining advances at about 1 km per year.
▪ Backfilling of pits and flattening of stockpiles -impact will fall to low to moderate, reducing further with revegetation.
▪ Minimal impact on surrounding areas once completed.
▪ Overall, the impacts of lighting are expected to be low.
SUMMARY
URBIS.COM.AU
SUMMARY (CONT’) ▪ Service Corridor Impacts:
➢Most visible components - 66kV and 22kV powerlines and the 2m high acoustic mound.
➢Moderate to High impacts to VP17 (receptor 1), reducing to low as amelioration establishes.
▪ Rail Siding Impacts:
➢Fernbank - generally low profile elements, screened from receptor 23 by existing vegetation.
➢Bairnsdale – elements consistent with existing rail and industrial / commercial development.
URBIS.COM.AU
SUMMARY: MOST HIGHLY IMPACTED VIEWPOINTS
VIEWPOINT SENSITIVITY MODIFICATION
LEVEL
INITIAL IMPACT RESIDUAL IMPACT
Viewpoint 15 – Receptor 6 H M-H H L-M
Viewpoint 19 – Receptor 30 H L-M M-H L
Viewpoint 22 – Receptor 5 H L L-M VL
Diverted Tourist Roads H H H L
Note: Residual impact is the final impact after the
implementation and maturation of mitigation measures