Magnitude, Significance and Sensitivity and relevance of Topic Paper 6 issues:

Magnitude: I see this as the scale or magnitude of effect (or change) to the landscape elements, the character, and/or designated landscape, andwill vary depending on the stage of project construction It’s normallydefined in one of four stages: high, medium, low or no change. Scale or magnitude of effect or change have been described to date by the scale of effect or change in the view with respect to the addition or loss of features in that view, the degree of contrast or integration of new features in the view, the degree of contrast or new features in the view, the duration and nature of the effect, and the angle of view, the distance of the viewpoint from the proposed development, and the extent of the area over which the changes would be visible. It’s reasonably well understood but there can be some misinterpretation between the stages.

Significance: Objectivity versus Subjectivity? Objectivity in assessment is a constant issue for Environmental Assessments. IEMA see that this could perhaps be linked into how the views of non-experts such as local communities could be brought in to the assessment of significance. LVIA needs to be a structured, consistent, impartial process designed to minimise personal subjectivity.

The significance of the identified effects would become the residual effects once avoidance or mitigation are applied and included in the design development.

Sensitivity: It would appear that there are some fairly widespread difficulties in the understanding of the terminology of intrinsic sensitivity, whether it is “overall sensitivity” or” inherent sensitivity”. Thisis not aided by the fact that the final LCA Guidance (2002) did not define sensitivity, but switched to the term capacity, defining this as, “the degree to which a particular landscape character type or area is able to accommodate change without significant effects on its character, or overall change of landscape character type”.

The environmental sensitivity of the location or receptor is important.

Landscapes may be potentially sensitive depending on the type of change. There are some landscapes which are sensitive for no implied change but solely through natural processes e.g. SSSI degradation and riverine environments.

Different types of development would give rise to different types of impacts. This would give rise to different forms and levels of impact in the same landscape.Therefore the effect, made up of a combination of sensitivity and impact, may differ dependent on the development proposed, but is driven by differences in the impact as a result of the changes to the development being proposed, rather than the sensitivity of the landscape or human perception of a view altering. For example, it might be possible to add many low impact developments into a highly sensitive landscape and not significantly affect it. Conversely, a single high impact development could have a significant effect on the same landscape. Common to this is that it’s not the landscape or visual sensitivity that’s being altered, but the appropriateness of the proposed development and its design to the elements that contribute to the sensitivity.

There is a related miscomprehension of the value of a landscape. It is relatively common for landscape value to be linked and represented by the presence of certain designated landscapes. I often come across decisions being made on the basis that a landscape with no designation means a landscape with little or no intrinsic value, which of course is clearly wrong.

Topic Paper 6 (2003):

This does not give firm, well-defined definitions of sensitivity; instead it outlines specific terms:-

  • Overall landscape sensitivity, which is the inherent sensitivity of the landscape itself, and which is irrelevant of the type of change that’s proposed. Overall landscape sensitivity is derived from:
  • the sensitivity of the landscape resource (character and individual landscape elements contributing to its character
  • the visual sensitivity of the landscape.
  • Landscape sensitivity to a specific type of change, to assess sensitivity of the landscape to a particular type of change or development. It’s defined as the interaction between the landscape, the way it’s perceived and the specific type of change or development planned.

Jeff and Carys will be aware of the discussions and debate relating to this paper and subject area around sensitivity and capacity as part of the ongoing LCA Guidance Review.

Julian Francis

March 2011