MINERAL SANDS PROJECT LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

mineral sands
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

MINERAL SANDS PROJECT LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

FINGERBOARDS MINERAL SANDS PROJECT LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT DETAILED PRESENTATION JUNE 2019 PRESENTATION CONTENT EES Scoping Requirements Purpose of the Study Methodology Proposal Impact Assessment Methodology


slide-1
SLIDE 1

FINGERBOARDS MINERAL SANDS PROJECT

LANDSCAPE & VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

DETAILED PRESENTATION JUNE 2019

slide-2
SLIDE 2

URBIS.COM.AU

PRESENTATION CONTENT

▪ EES Scoping Requirements ▪ Purpose of the Study ▪ Methodology Proposal ▪ Impact Assessment Methodology ▪ Findings and Recommendations so Far

slide-3
SLIDE 3

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

slide-4
SLIDE 4

URBIS.COM.AU

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

▪ Define the criteria relevant to the study including legislation, standards and guidelines. ▪ Characterise the existing landscape features and landscape character and scenic quality within the regional setting. ▪ Prepare visual simulations of the mine during development and at end of life from indicative, visually sensitive locations. ▪ Assess the potential visual impacts on identified sensitive receptors, including potential night lighting impacts. ▪ Identify and propose measures for the reduction, mitigation and management of potential visual impacts.

slide-5
SLIDE 5

URBIS.COM.AU

The methodology is comprised of: Quantitative Assessment ▪ How much of the proposal is visible from particular viewpoints? Qualitative Assessment ▪ Visual Modification – How does the proposal contrast with the landscape character – how well can the setting absorb change? ▪ Scenic Quality - What are the qualities / values of the landscape setting? ▪ Viewer Sensitivity – How sensitive will viewers be?

METHODOLOGY

slide-6
SLIDE 6

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.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

URBIS.COM.AU

METHODOLOGY:

QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT - VISUAL PROMINENCE –HORIZONTAL & VERTICAL

Horizontal Vertical

slide-8
SLIDE 8

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

slide-9
SLIDE 9

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

slide-10
SLIDE 10

URBIS.COM.AU

FINDINGS –

SCREENING EFFECTS OF VEGETATION AT RESIDENCES

Note: VP21 is now uninhabited

slide-11
SLIDE 11

URBIS.COM.AU

FINDINGS:

VISUAL CATCHMENT ANALYSIS

▪ Based on heights of main elements (entire extent of project) ▪ Worst case – assumes no screening vegetation

slide-12
SLIDE 12

URBIS.COM.AU

VIEWPOINT 15 -RECEPTOR 6

730 metres from closest element

Existing During mining ~1 < 5 years Post mining > 5 years

slide-13
SLIDE 13

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

slide-14
SLIDE 14

URBIS.COM.AU

VIEWPOINT 21 -RECEPTOR 2

(KALBAR OWNED)

During mining ~ 1 < 15 years Post mining > 15 years Existing

170 metres from closest element

slide-15
SLIDE 15

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

slide-16
SLIDE 16

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

slide-17
SLIDE 17

URBIS.COM.AU

VIEWPOINT RD2A

  • BAIRNSDALE-DARGO ROAD

30 metres from closest element

During mining ~1 < ~8 years Post mining > 15 years Existing

slide-18
SLIDE 18

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

slide-19
SLIDE 19

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

slide-20
SLIDE 20

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.

slide-21
SLIDE 21

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

slide-22
SLIDE 22

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.

slide-23
SLIDE 23

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