Visual amenity baseline

  1. Visual receptors within the SLVIA study area, that is, within the offshore environment, are limited to those passing through the area on vessels, most of whom will be working in the fishing, transport and oil and gas industries.
  2. AIS Ship Traffic data has been used to identify potential receptors crossing the SLVIA study area (Marine Scotland, 2022a). Shipping activity includes cargo vessels, which generally travel out from Aberdeen and Peterhead, heading north-east, east, or south across the SLVIA study area. Fishing vessels tend to be more concentrated in the western part of the area, within 50 km of the coast. Movements of passenger vessels and recreational craft are more limited within the SLVIA study area though occasional use is shown by the data.
  3. AIS Ship Traffic data shows that more vessels of all types are more likely to be found in inshore locations between the north-west edge of the SLVIA study area and the Aberdeenshire coast. This includes frequent recreational marine users travelling along the east coast of Scotland.
  4. Visual receptors also include people on land where they have views of the sea. As noted above, this is a scenic coast with numerous coastal walks, beaches and viewpoints offering views out to sea. Sea views are also available to residents in their homes and within their communities, and people travelling along the coast on roads and railways. Although not within the SLVIA study area, selected onshore receptors are considered within this Scoping Report as they may be of greater sensitivity than those passing through the offshore environment. The most sensitive receptors to offshore development would be those along the coastal edge. Therefore, onshore receptors are only considered at coastal locations such as beaches, cliff-tops walks and coastal settlements.
  5. The visibility of the Array will determine the potential for effects on views. A zone of theoretical visibility (ZTV) has not been produced, as theoretical visibility can be assumed across the open seascape, and across all locations where sea views are available. Actual visibility will vary greatly. Clear views can be assumed for closer marine views within the SLVIA study area. For onshore receptors, a number of factors affect the visibility of distant features in views. These are: the acuity of the human eye; atmospheric visibility; meteorological conditions; and the curvature of the Earth. These are considered in the following section, in order to determine whether significant effects on sensitive onshore receptors would be likely.
  6. The Review and Update of Seascape and Visual Buffer study for Offshore Wind Farms (White Consultants, 2020) states that “The largest currently consented turbine towers have a diameter of up to 5m and so, theoretically, can be seen from 50km. Larger turbines 350-400m high are likely to have larger diameter towers and so may be able to be seen from longer distances. Therefore visual acuity is unlikely to be a limiting factor in terms of visual buffers.”
  7. White Consultants (2020) presents a formula “for calculating the maximum distance at which an observer can discern the outline of an object”. This formula includes a locally determined ‘extinction coefficient’, which is a measure of how much haze is in the air. Table 9.1 in White Consultants (2020) gives a ‘maximum likely viewable distance' for northern Scotland, where the extinction coefficient is lowest, of 39 km.
  8. The Met Office records data on atmospheric visibility and classifies atmospheric visibility of over 40 km as ‘excellent’. An analysis carried out for the Seagreen 1 Offshore Wind Farm (Seagreen, 2012), using Met Office data from Leuchars, Fife, indicates that visibility of greater than 40 km only occurs 8% of the time, the equivalent of 29 days per year. Visibility is also affected by meteorological conditions, such as rain. Assessments should nevertheless consider the worst case (White Consultants, 2020).
  9. The curvature of the Earth means that distant structures may appear beyond the horizon. Tall structures such as wind turbines are likely to be visible at long distances, as their blades may be visible even when the tower base or hub is out of sight. Diagram 5.1 in White Consultants (2020) shows the effect of curvature of the Earth on wind turbine visibility. This indicates that a wind turbine of 350 m height would need to be 82 km offshore to be out of the view of an observer located 6 m above sea level. An observer on higher ground would theoretically see part of the same turbine at even greater distances.
  10. Therefore, it is possible that receptors on the elevated coast closest to the Array would be able to gain partial views of the offshore wind turbines. Wireline views from four representative viewpoints have been generated to illustrate this potential visibility. The viewpoint locations are shown in Figure 7.10   Open ▸ , and the wirelines are shown in Figure 7.11   Open ▸ to Figure 7.14   Open ▸ .
  11. The viewpoint locations are all within the closest section of coast, between Aberdeen and Portlethen, and represent locations that would potentially be chosen as representative viewpoints for inclusion in an SLVIA. They have been selected to represent potentially sensitive receptors located along the coastal edge. The viewpoints were chosen as they are the closest locations where sensitive receptors (people) on land could have views of the offshore wind farm. This means that they can be used to illustrate ‘worst case’ views of the Array. All are at similar distances from the Array: between 80 km and 81 km. This is beyond the study area, but as noted above these are the closest sensitive receptors on land. The wirelines ( Figure 7.11   Open ▸ to Figure 7.14   Open ▸ ) are discussed below.
  12. Viewpoint 1 Girdle Ness (grid reference 397197, 805345): from the coast near the lighthouse at the north of Aberdeen Harbour, the Array will be barely visible. The viewpoint is around 20 m above Ordnance Datum (AOD) and so the wind turbines are hidden by the curvature of the Earth. This also indicates that there would be no visibility of the Array for people at sea level, including visitors to beaches and people using boats in the inshore area.
  13. Viewpoint 2 Tullos Hill (396375, 803786): from the high point south of Aberdeen Harbour, at 86 m AOD, the upper blades of the wind turbines will be theoretically visible. The wireline indicates that no wind turbine hubs (nacelles) will be visible.
  14. Viewpoint 3 Coast Road near Souter Head (395908, 802037): on the cycle route above Souter Head, the closest point to the Array. At around 47 m AOD, the view is similar to Tullos Hill, with no wind turbine hubs theoretically visible.
  15. Viewpoint 4 Portlethen (392644, 796241): on a high point at 93 m AOD to the south of the other viewpoints, within the SLA. The software indicates that a small number of wind turbine hubs would be theoretically visible, although these would be just at the horizon. The Array would be behind the Kincardine Offshore Wind Farm wind turbines, which appear much larger in the view.
  16. These wirelines illustrate a dummy layout of the wind turbines with the highest upper blade tip height above LAT (see section 2.3.4), located in the north-west part of the site boundary, closest to land. The wind turbines are modelled at 399 m to blade tip height (above LAT)[13] and are spaced at the minimum separation distance (1,000 m). This dummy layout is entirely indicative and is purely to show potential visibility of wind turbines from land-based receptors. Offshore substation platforms are not shown as these would be of lower height than the wind turbines. The wirelines show a 53.5° angle of view in each case. The wirelines include, for context, the operational Kincardine Offshore Wind Farm, which comprises turbines up to 186 m to blade tip height and is approximately 15 km from the viewpoint locations.
  17. This analysis shows that there will be limited actual visibility of the Array from these closest viewpoints. Due to distance and elevation, there are no onshore locations where more extensive views of the Array would be possible. Combined with the limited atmospheric visibility across a distance of approximately 80 km, the actual visibility of the Array is likely to be minimal.
  18. Aviation lighting would be mounted on wind turbine hubs. As noted above, the wind turbine hubs would generally be below the horizon line so no lighting would be visible. Wind turbine hubs, and lighting, would only be theoretically visible from more limited elevated locations. There is no requirement for aviation lighting to be visible at distances of 80 km. Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) guidance states that, in conditions of good visibility, the intensity of aviation lighting can be reduced to 10% of the maximum value (CAA, 2016). Good visibility would be required to gain views of the Array, but at these times the intensity of lighting would be substantively reduced. It is therefore unlikely that aviation lighting would be visible to sensitive visual receptors.


7.5.4. Potential Array ImpactsPotential Array Impacts

  1. A list of all potential impacts on the seascape, landscape and visual environment which may arise during the construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning phases of the Array in the absence of designed in measures is included in Table 7.15   Open ▸ .

 

Table 7.15:
Potential Impacts Identified for Seascape, Landscape and Visual Environment in the Absence of Designed in Measures

Table 7.15: Potential Impacts Identified for Seascape, Landscape and Visual Environment in the Absence of Designed in Measures

Figure 7.10:
Viewpoint Locations

Figure 7.10: Viewpoint Locations

 

7.5.5. Designed in MeasuresDesigned in Measures

  1. The main designed in measure of SLVIA effects is the distance of the Array from the locations of sensitive receptors. The most sensitive seascape, landscape and visual receptors are found along coastlines, including, for example, scenic coasts, and people visiting beaches and clifftop viewpoints. The Array is unlikely to be clearly visible from these receptors.

7.5.6. Potential Impacts After the Implementation of Designed in MeasuresPotential Impacts After the Implementation of Designed in Measures

  1. According to good practice guidance (Landscape Institute, 2013), impacts on seascape, landscape and visual receptors are judged with reference to the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of the predicted impact. Sensitivity is judged with reference to the susceptibility of the receptor to the type of change proposed, and the value placed on the landscape or visual resource. Magnitude is judged with reference to the scale, extent, duration and reversibility of the impact.
  2. The offshore seascape is unlikely to be sensitive to changes arising from the Array. For the offshore seascape, there are no key characteristics that are considered highly susceptible to changes of the type that would arise from introduction of the Array. There are no designations or other indications that the Array is a valued seascape. Both susceptibility and value, and therefore sensitivity, are likely to be low. While the scale of change in seascape character may be high in the vicinity of the Array, due to the low sensitivity, significant effects are unlikely to arise.
  3. Some of the key characteristics of the coastal character areas are susceptible to changes arising from the introduction of offshore structures. The coast is also locally designated for its scenic value. Susceptibility and value, and therefore sensitivity, are likely to be higher. The analysis presented in this Scoping Report indicates that visibility of the Array from the coast will be minimal, by day and by night, largely due to the distance offshore. The magnitude of change in coastal character is not considered likely to be great enough to give rise to significant effects.
  4. Considering visual receptors, those people within the SLVIA study area will be either passing through or working within the seascape and are unlikely to be susceptible to changes in their outlook as they move around the sea. There is no indication that any particular value is placed on views within the marine environment. Both susceptibility and value, and therefore sensitivity, are likely to be low. While the scale of change in views may be high for receptors close to the Array, due to their low sensitivity significant effects are unlikely to arise.
  5. Visual receptors closer to the coast include residents, visitors to coastal locations and beaches, and recreational users of inshore waters. The marine view forms part of their enjoyment of the area, and they are likely to be of higher sensitivity to changes in seaward views. The value of coastal views is recognised in local landscape designations, and in the many viewpoints provided along the coast. Susceptibility and value, and therefore sensitivity, of these receptors is likely to be higher. The analysis presented in this Scoping Report indicates that visibility of the Array from locations of these sensitive receptors will be minimal, largely due to the distance offshore. This includes visibility of lighting at night time. Even when excellent visibility and weather conditions enable views to the Array, the magnitude of change in view, by day and by night, is likely to be very small. It is not considered that there would be any likely significant effects on views experienced by receptors on land and in inshore waters.
  6. The above analysis focuses on operational effects. Construction and decommissioning works would take place largely within the site boundary. The only activity taking place outside the site boundary would be vessel movements, which are a feature of the seascape and views in this area. As such, the effects of construction and decommissioning works are not likely to be significant.
  7. On the basis of the evidence and analysis presented in this Scoping Report, it is proposed that all potential impacts to the seascape, landscape and visual environment will be scoped out of the assessment. Further detail is presented in Table 7.16   Open ▸ .
  8. An analysis of onshore cultural heritage setting has not been carried out because, given the minimal visibility from onshore locations, it is considered highly unlikely that the setting of any onshore cultural heritage receptors would be affected to a significant degree. With reference to the guidance set out in Historic Environment Scotland (2016), it is therefore further proposed that effects on setting of onshore cultural heritage receptors will be scoped out of the assessment.

Figure 7.11:
Viewpoint 1 Girdle Ness

Figure 7.11: Viewpoint 1 Girdle Ness

Figure 7.12:
Viewpoint 2 Tullos Hill

Figure 7.12: Viewpoint 2 Tullos Hill

Figure 7.13:
Viewpoint 3 Coast Road Near Souter Head

Figure 7.13: Viewpoint 3 Coast Road Near Souter Head

Figure 7.14:
Viewpoint 4 Portlethen

Figure 7.14: Viewpoint 4 Portlethen

Table 7.16:
Impacts Proposed to be Scoped Out of the Array Assessment for Seascape, Landscape and Visual Environment and Cultural Heritage Setting

Table 7.16: Impacts Proposed to be Scoped Out of the Array Assessment for Seascape, Landscape and Visual Environment and Cultural Heritage Setting

 

7.5.7. Proposed Approach to the Environmental Impact AssessmentProposed Approach to the Environmental Impact Assessment

  1. Since there are no likely significant effects on seascape, landscape or visual receptors, it is proposed that this topic will be scoped out entirely from the Array EIA Report.

7.5.8. Potential Cumulative EffectsPotential Cumulative Effects

  1. Cumulative seascape, landscape and visual effects arise from the presence of multiple developments, usually other wind farms, affecting the same receptors. As shown in Figure 7.9   Open ▸ , a number of operational and planned offshore wind farms are located within the SLVIA study area. Most of these are closer to shore than the Array, and so would likely be more visible from sensitive coasts and visual receptors. It is possible that the Array would be seen in combination with the operational schemes, and with proposed wind farms should they be constructed.
  2. The low sensitivity of the offshore seascape and offshore visual receptors means that any cumulative effects are unlikely to be judged significant. The minimal visibility of the Array from more sensitive receptors onshore and inshore, suggests that any cumulative effects would be limited, and significant effects are considered unlikely. No assessment of cumulative effects on the seascape, landscape or visual environment is therefore proposed to be included in the assessment.

7.5.9. Potential Transboundary ImpactsPotential Transboundary Impacts

  1. A screening of transboundary impacts has been carried out and is presented in Appendix 3. There is no potential for transboundary impacts upon the seascape, landscape and visual environment or cultural heritage setting due to construction, operational and maintenance, and decommissioning impacts of the Array.

7.5.10. Scoping Questions to ConsulteesScoping Questions to Consultees

  • Do you agree that the evidence suggests that visibility of the Array will be minimal, and that receptors beyond 70 km from the site boundary do not need to be considered?
  • Do you agree that offshore receptors, within the 70 km SLVIA study area, including offshore seascape character and people working in the marine environment, are of low sensitivity to the type of change proposed?
  • Do you agree that the assessment of seascape, landscape and visual environment and cultural heritage setting receptors should be scoped out of the Array EIA Report?

7.5.11. Next StepsNext Steps

  1. At this stage, there is no post-scoping stakeholder consultation for SLVIA expected to be required to support the Array EIA Report. The over-arching next steps are outlined in section 4.3.4.

 

7.6. Infrastructure and Other UsersInfrastructure and Other Users

7.6.1. IntroductionIntroduction

  1. This section of this Scoping Report presents the relevant infrastructure and other users present in the vicinity of the Array and considers the scope of assessment on infrastructure and other users receptors from the construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning of the Array.

7.6.2. Study AreaStudy Area

  1. Figure 7.15   Open ▸ shows the infrastructure and other users study area which includes the Array.
  2. As the infrastructure and other users study area varies in scale depending on the receptor, this has been divided into different areas according to each receptor, as follows:
  • infrastructure and other users study area - inner (purple) area (within 1 km of the site boundary): this area includes the extent of potential direct physical overlap between the Array activities and the following receptors:

–           recreational receptors (including receptors carrying out fishing, sailing and motor cruising, kite surfing, surfing, windsurfing, sea/surf kayaking and canoeing and beach users);

–           offshore energy projects (e.g. offshore wind farms, tide and wave projects);

–           cables and pipelines;

–           carbon capture and storage, natural gas storage and underground coal gasification;

–           oil and gas operations; and

–           coal deposits.

–           aggregate extraction and disposal sites; and

–           recreational receptors (diving sites).

  • broad infrastructure and other users study area (green hatched area; within 10 km of the site boundary): this area will consider all other projects/plans in the vicinity of the Array to take forward into the Cumulative Effect Assessment (CEA).

7.6.3. Site-Specific Survey DataSite-Specific Survey Data

  1. There have not been any site-specific surveys undertaken to inform this Scoping Report for infrastructure and other users. As suitable data is available throughout the east Scotland region, new data or modelling studies will not be required to characterise the infrastructure and other users baseline for the Array Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report. It should be noted, however, that a winter vessel traffic survey was completed in December 2022 and a second vessel traffic survey is planned for summer 2023. Results from these surveys will feed into the Infrastructure and Other Users Technical Report and EIA chapter, as appropriate.

Figure 7.15:
Infrastructure and Other Users Study Area

Figure 7.15: Infrastructure and Other Users Study Area

 

7.6.4. Baseline EnvironmentBaseline Environment

  1. This section provides an overview of the baseline environment with regard to infrastructure and other users. To support this Scoping Report, a number of baseline datasets were identified, as summarised in Table 7.17   Open ▸ .

 

Table 7.17:
Summary of Key Desktop Reports

Table 7.17: Summary of Key Desktop Reports

 

  1. The following receptors have been considered as part of the baseline environment for infrastructure and other users.

                        Recreational activity

  1. Figure 7.16   Open ▸ shows a heat map of 23 different recreation and tourism activities undertaken at sea or around the coastline (Marine Scotland, 2015). In addition, the NMPi presents several data layers for recreational activities, providing an overview of recreational activities around the Scottish coast.
  2. There is high recreational activity in the coastal region and area of sea between North Berwick and Elie and Earlsferry, including recreational boating, SCUBA diving, surfing, surf kayaking and paddleboarding ( Figure 7.16   Open ▸ , Figure 7.17   Open ▸ and Figure 7.18   Open ▸ ). Recreational sea angling activity is also high in the area of sea around Arbroath and Dunbar, with extensive shore angling all along the east Scottish coast (NMPi, 2022). All recreational activities listed above are highly seasonal and dependant on certain weather conditions.
  3. As the Array is approximately 80 km from the nearest point on the Scottish coast, recreational activity occurring within the infrastructure and other users study area – inner area is considered minimal or unlikely. Furthermore, coastal recreational activities (SCUBA diving, surfing, surf kayaking and paddleboarding) will not occur within the infrastructure and other users study area – inner area, therefore, these activities have not been considered further within this Scoping Report.
  4. Figure 7.17   Open ▸ shows AIS tracks for recreational vessels which are located within 3 nm of the infrastructure and other users study area – inner area, therefore, there is a possibility that recreational vessels may come into close proximity with the Array and may be impacted by its infrastructure.
  5. As there are no offshore wind, wave and tidal projects located within the infrastructure and other users study area – inner area, these have not been considered further within this Scoping Report.

Figure 7.16:
All Recreational Activities in the Vicinity of the Site Boundary

Figure 7.16: All Recreational Activities in the Vicinity of the Site Boundary

Figure 7.17:
RYA Recreational AIS Intensity in the Vicinity of the Site Boundary

Figure 7.17: RYA Recreational AIS Intensity in the Vicinity of the Site Boundary

Figure 7.18:
Recreational Activities (Windsurfing, Surfing and SCUBA) in the Vicinity of the Site Boundary

Figure 7.18: Recreational Activities (Windsurfing, Surfing and SCUBA) in the Vicinity of the Site Boundary

                        Offshore wind, wave and tidal projects

  1. There are no offshore wind, wave or tidal projects within the infrastructure and other users study area – inner area ( Figure 7.19   Open ▸ ). However, there are a number of awarded ScotWind sites in the vicinity, including the Morven Offshore Wind Farm project (EnBW and bp) and the Bellrock Offshore Wind Farm project (BlueFloat Energy and Falck Renewables). These are currently at the pre-application phase, and the Applicant has undertaken early engagement with other ScotWind developers, particularly in the east region, to collaborate on activities at a regional scale.

                        Oil and gas operations

  1. The site boundary overlaps a number of non-active hydrocarbon licence blocks, including: 27/1, 27/2, 27/7, 27/8, 27/13, 27/14, 27/15, 27/19 and 28/11.
  2. The site boundary overlaps active hydrocarbon licence blocks 27/3, 27/9 and 27/10, which are operated by North Sea Natural Resources Ltd (Licence number: P2321) ( Figure 7.19   Open ▸ ).
  3. In October 2022, the NSTA (formerly the Oil and Gas Authority (OGA)) launched the 33rd Offshore Licensing Round with 898 blocks or part-blocks on offer across the main producing areas of the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS). It should be noted that the site boundary only overlaps one block on offer in the 33rd Offshore Licencing Round – Block 27/8 (NSTA, 2023) ( Figure 7.19   Open ▸ ). It is anticipated that the first awards from this Offshore Licencing Round will be announced in Quarter 2 2023 (NSTA, 2022).
  4. There is potential for further exploration or development in this area of the North Sea due to the North Sea Natural Resources Ltd existing licence overlapping the site boundary, and the launch of the 33rd Licensing Round. The Applicant has been engaging with North Sea Natural Resources Ltd since the ScotWind pre-application stage and following award. Engagement has been positive and will continue to ensure activities are managed in a manner that facilitates coexistence.  
  5. At present no recent exploration, appraisal or production wells have been drilled within the site boundary.
  6. The closest well to the site boundary is approximately 4 km to the north-east of the site boundary and located within P2321, however, this was drilled, plugged and abandoned in 1970 by Amoco UK Petroleum Limited, and did not encounter any hydrocarbons.
  7. There are no oil and gas pipelines located within the site boundary. The closest pipeline (Catcher Gas Export Pipeline) is located approximately 48 km from the site boundary.
  8. The following services are associated with the oil and gas industry:
  • helicopters: the oil and gas industry relies on helicopters for personnel transfer and emergency evacuation. Helicopter travel and associated aviation considerations are addressed separately in section 7.3; and
  • vessels: the oil and gas industry requires supply or support vessels for its operations. Vessels and associated navigational considerations are addressed separately in section 7.2.

                        Carbon capture, natural gas storage, underground gasification and coal deposits

  1. There are currently no carbon capture, natural gas storage, underground gasification or coal deposits located within the infrastructure and other users study area – inner area.
  2. Therefore, these have not been considered further within this Scoping Report as they are not present within the infrastructure and other users study area ( Figure 7.19   Open ▸ ) and, therefore, the Array activities and infrastructure are unlikely to cause significant effects with respect to these receptors.

                        Subsea telecommunication cables

  1. There are no active or disused subsea telecommunication cables located within the infrastructure and other users study area – inner area (EMODnet, 2022b). Therefore, subsea telecommunication cables have not been considered further within this Scoping Report.

                        Marine disposal sites

  1. No active or closed disposal sites have been identified within the infrastructure and other users study area – inner ( Figure 7.19   Open ▸ ). Therefore, marine disposal sites have not been considered further within this Scoping Report.

                        Marine aggregate extraction sites

  1. Although Scotland has a considerable marine sand and gravel resource, the marine aggregate industry has historically been very small due to more readily accessible land supplies. Marine aggregate licences have historically been issued to two sites in Scotland, one site in the Firth of Forth and the second site in the Firth of Tay (Scottish Government, 2015) which do not overlap the infrastructure and other users study area - potential increased turbidity area. There are no active licences for marine aggregate extraction within the east Scotland region.
  2. Therefore, marine aggregate extraction sites have not been considered further within this Scoping Report.

Figure 7.19:
Key Infrastructure and Other Users in the Vicinity of the Site Boundary, Including Marine Disposal Sites

Figure 7.19: Key Infrastructure and Other Users in the Vicinity of the Site Boundary, Including Marine Disposal Sites

 

7.6.5. Potential Array ImpactsPotential Array Impacts

  1. Potential impacts on infrastructure and other users receptors which may occur during the construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning phases of the Array in the absence of designed in measures have been identified in Table 7.18   Open ▸ .

 

Table 7.18:
Potential Impacts Identified for infrastructure and Other Users in the Absence of Designed In Measures

Table 7.18: Potential Impacts Identified for infrastructure and Other Users in the Absence of Designed In Measures