Ashton WMF WP

Transcription

1 09/26/ Allen Drive Loevenstein Cape Town 7530 South Africa C00720-AWMF-VIA-001

2 Disclaimer This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Legacy Environmental Management, and is subject to and issued in accordance with the agreement between Legacy Environmental Management and Advisian. Advisian accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for it in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any third party. Copying this report without the permission of Legacy Environmental Management and Advisian is not permitted. Project No: C00720-AWMF-VIA-001 : Visual Impact Assessment Rev Description Author Review Advisian Approval Date 00 For internal review 11/10/2017 F Bester R Kuffner M Herbert Advisian ii

3 Table of Contents 1 Introduction Policy and legislative context Affected Environment Development Components Alternatives Surroundings Environment Character Landscape Character Geology & Topography Vegetation Land use Visual Character Visual quality Sense of Place Visibility Visual exposure Viewsheds Impact statement Site Investigation Visual Assessment Conclusions and recommendations References Advisian iii

4 List of Figures Figure 1 Aerial Layout showing location of the existing WMF and surrounding environment... 2 Figure 2 Aerial layout of the existing WMF... 3 Figure 3 Potential receptors... 4 Figure 4 Visual Exposure vs Distance (Source: Adapted from Hull and Bishop, 1988)... 8 Figure 5 Distance categories defined for exposure... 9 Figure 6 Digital elevation model of the terrain Figure 7 Compiled viewshed illustrating the increased visibility upon planned vertical extension.. 12 Figure 8 Key photos location relative to the WMF List of Tables Table 1 Potential receptors... 5 Table 2 Receptor exposure Table 3 Visibility at each receptor Table 4 Summarised expected visual impacts as per evaluation criteria Table 5 Overall Assessment Advisian iv

5 1 Introduction The Ashton Waste Management Facility s (WMF) permit has expired. As the planned regional landfill near Worcester is not yet operational a new application for operation of the Ashton WMF must be submitted. However, as, the landfill at Ashton WMF is close to capacity it will require additional disposal airspace. In addition to the application for operation while awaiting the establishment of the regional landfill at Worcester, the municipality will also be applying for closure. Legacy Environmental Management was appointed to facilitate the application process. With the WMF located near Ashton in close proximity to a residential area a Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) will be required as part of the application submitted to the department. A visual assessment offers recommendations on the weighted disturbance of new developments to the sense of place versus the ability of the environment to hide components. 2 Policy and legislative context The proposed project is a listed activity requiring a scoping study and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as published in the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) and the regulations in terms of Chapter 5 of NEMA (Act No 107 of 1998) and NEMA EIA Regulations (2014). The National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA) (Act No.25 of 1999) and associated provincial regulations provide legislative protection for natural, cultural and scenic resources, as well as for archaeological and paleontological sites within the study area. This report deals with visual considerations including natural and scenic resources. The Western Cape DEA&DP Visual and Aesthetic Guideline s criteria (Oberholzer, B., 2005) were used as guide for the methodology of this baseline study. 3 Affected Environment Ashton is a small village situated near the town of Robertson in the Breede Valley Wine Region in the Western Cape, South Africa. The town is mainly known for its wine and fruit estates and is part of Route 62, the scenic alternative to the N2 highway on the way to the Garden Route. It lies between the foothills of the Langeberg Mountains and the Breede River Valley and forms part of the Robertson Wine Route. The WMF is located outside the main town of Ashton to the North of the residential area of Zolani. Figure 1 and Figure 2 below shows the location and layout of the existing landfill located at the WMF.

6 Figure 1 Aerial Layout showing location of the existing WMF and surrounding environment

7 Figure 2 Aerial layout of the existing WMF 3.1 Development Components At present the landfill has already exceeded capacity and with submission of continued temporary operation while awaiting the opening of the regional landfill near Worcester, the Aston WMF will require a permit for a vertical extension of the current landfill. For its current operation the WMF was licenced to use airspace of up to 6m above ground level. For the intended new permit they wish to increase that to 12m above natural ground level. There are no further plans for changes to the existing layout and operation of the WMF and therefore the planned increased use of airspace is the only parameter that will be investigated for impact to the visual aesthetics of the environment. 3.2 Alternatives As an obvious alternative to the vertical extension, the potential to establish additional cells to the west of the current landfill footprint can be considered. The area from where cover material is obtained appears to be a good site for establishing additional cells. A horizontal expansion will however be in violation of the current permitted minimum buffer distance of 500m to the nearest residential or light industrial land use. With the area s natural topography inhibiting horizontal expansion away from the existing residential areas this alternative will not be a viable option.

8 Another alternative would be opening of a new landfill at an alternate location. Since the current application is only for temporary operation while awaiting the opening of the regional landfill at Worcester, this is also deemed not to be a viable option. 3.3 Surroundings The Aston WMF is located off the R60 approximately 500m North of Zolani s formal residential dwellings. The landfill site is located approximately 3 km s from Ashton and within 5 km s of the residential areas in Montagu. The immediate surroundings to the north are predominantly natural environments with indigenous vegetation associated with the mountain ranges of the region. The surrounding environment to the south is dominated by cultivated land. Figure 3 Potential receptors Figure 3 indicates the receptors identified where potential visual impact can be experienced. Table 1 describes the identified receptors as shown as well as an indication of its sensitivity based on its

9 current land use. With the lack of access to the mountain region falling under protected status, observations from this zone was considered as highly unlikely and therefore not included as a potential receptor. Table 1 Potential receptors Code Receptor Sensitivity R1 Residential area in Ashton High R2 Residential area in Ashton in elevated area with direct views across affected environment High R3 Residential area of Zolani in close proximity to affected environment High R4 Residential area at Montagu High C/I Main commercial and industrial areas of Ashton Low F Sparsely distributed farm houses in the region Low T1 Main route R60 traveling from Robertson into and through Ashton Low T2 Main Route R62 conncenting Ashton to Montagu via the Cogmanskloof Pass Low T3 Main route R60 traveling past Zolani from Ashton to Swellendam Low 4 Environment Character Many temporal factors such as climate, season, atmospheric conditions, region and sub-region affect the attributes that comprise the landscape. Based on different experiences, social level and cultural backgrounds individuals perception of what is scenic will vary (i.e. in some parts of the world, economic progress might be seen as far more important than landscape and views by stakeholders, while in other countries, stakeholders may feel strongly that landscape and views should be protected). Since visual aesthetics cannot be measured, determining a visual resource in absolute terms is not achievable. Instead, following a process of quantifying the natural characteristics of the study area and its immediate surroundings allows us to offer insight into the significance of the expected visual impact and enables us to investigate mitigation strategies.

10 4.1 Landscape Character Defining the landscape character can offer insight into Visual absorption capacity of the affected area. The landscape character is generally based on geology, landforms, vegetation cover and land use patterns Geology & Topography The WMF is located at the foot of the Langeberg mountain range close to the Cogmanskloof pass. The surrounding area is characterized by lower mountain slopes grading to slightly undulating plains. High to medium flat topped hills are abundant in the region and steep upper slopes with sharp cliff faces are dominant in the area to the north of the facility. The underlying geology of the region consists mainly of greywacke, shale and schist with sandstone, conglomerate, grit and limestone of the Malmesbury Group as well as siltstone, shale and sandstone of the Wagendrift Formation, Witteberg Group. The mountainous region to the North of the facility consists mainly of Quartzitic sandstone, siltstone, shale and conglomerate of the Table Mountain Group Vegetation The region is known for amazing floral diversity of the Cape fynbos. The vegetation types found in the vicinity of the facility includes Breede Shale Fynbos, Breede Shale Renosterveld, Breede Alluvium Renosterveld with the northern mountain ranges dominated by South Langeberg Sandstone Fynbos. The Fynbos biome is vulnerable to fire and as a result the appearance of the natural landscape may change rapidly from dense cover to bare ground. Generally the vegetation consists of moderately tall and dense shrubland with short and grassy cuppresoid-leaved shrubland dominated by renosterbos experienced at alluvium sands and valley bottoms. Scattered medium to small sized trees are also present along rivers and streams in the area Land use The affected environment consists of a range of mixed land use and cover predominantly consisting of natural vegetation and cultivated lands, mainly vineyards and orchards. The land cover for the immediate surroundings are endemic natural vegetation of the fynbos biome with a protected Mountain reserve to North of the facility. The formal residential area of Zolani is situated approximately 500m south of the landfill, but there has been informal shacks and residential dwellings erected in very close proximity to the site. Other urban areas in the vicinity include the towns of Ashton and Montagu. Two main arterial routes, the R60 & R62, are also present in the region.

11 4.2 Visual Character The low to medium natural vegetation with scattered trees provides the area with wide panoramic views across the valley floor and pristine mountainous landscapes. In general, western views look out over orchards and vineyards while other directions are dominated by the high mountain peaks and hills protruding the sky line. While little screening is offered by the area s natural vegetation, the protruding hills and mountain range surrounding the WMF obscures a direct view of the landfill from most directions. Buildings and other infrastructure in developed towns fractures the view of the natural environment. There is however multiple residential zones established at higher elevations which enjoy unobscured views of the natural landscape. Views of the existing landfill are mostly obscured by the natural topography of the area and the change to natural slope of the area is not clearly noticeable from distant vantage points. 4.3 Visual quality The visual quality of the region is dominated by open views across the valley and mountain range. The nearby protected areas offer views of pristine mountain environments with an abundance of endemic plant and animal species. Much of the natural environment has been transformed for cultivation purpose, but due to the relatively low number of permanent population in the area, the remaining natural environment has suffered little to no degradation. The visual quality in the direct vicinity of the WMF is adversely affected by the presence of informal shacks. The area surrounding the existing landfill, outside the fence line, is scattered with paper & plastics which greatly deteriorates the visual quality. From further views the break in natural vegetation in the clearing from where cover material is obtained as well as the landfill itself is clearly visible. While distinguishable, the use of cover material endemic to the area makes the landfill blend into the background with little effect on the visual quality. 4.4 Sense of Place The upgrading of roads in and around Ashton during the time of site inspections was disruptive to the normal sense of place. From past experiences in the region, this area offers a calm and quiet environment, the perfect setting to sample some of the great wines that the region is famous for.

12 5 Visibility 5.1 Visual exposure The inverse relationship of distance and visual impact is well recognised in visual analysis research (i.e. Allen, 1970; Van der Ham & Iding, 1971; Hull & Bishop, 1988; Oberholzer, B. 2005). The literature indicates that the visual impact of an object diminishes at an exponential rate as the distance between the observer and the object increases. The visual impact at 1,000 m can be considered to be 25% of the impact as viewed from 500 m. At 2,000 m it would be 10% of the impact at 500 m (Hull and Bishop, 1988). Figure 4 Visual Exposure vs Distance (Source: Adapted from Hull and Bishop, 1988) The Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DEA&DP) Visual and Aesthetic Guideline s criteria (Oberholzer, B., 2005) define three categories of visual exposure: High exposure dominant or clearly noticeable; Moderate exposure recognisable to the viewer; Low exposure not particularly noticeable to the viewer With the scale of the proposed vertical extension of the Waste management facility it is estimated that the high exposure areas will be in the range of 1 km and moderate exposure will be experienced up to a distance of approximately 3 km s. Observations ranging in distances from 3 to 5 km s are deemed to have a low exposure and from distances exceeding 5km s the visual impact are considered to be negligible.

13 Figure 5 and table 2 below shows the relevant position of the identified receptors in terms of the defined categories of exposure. Figure 5 Distance categories defined for exposure

14 Table 2 Receptor exposure Code Receptor Exposure R1 Residential area in Ashton Low to None R2 Residential area in Ashton in elevated area with direct views across affected environment Low R3 Residential area of Zolani in close proximity to affected environment High R4 Residential area at Montagu Low C/I Main commercial and industrial areas of Ashton Low to medium F Sparsely distributed farm houses in the region Low to medium T1 Main route R60 traveling from Robertson into and through Ashton Low to medium T2 Main Route R62 conncenting Ashton to Montagu via the Cogmanskloof Pass Low to medium T3 Main route R60 traveling past Zolani from Ashton to Swellendam Medium 5.2 Viewsheds Information obtained from the Chief Directorate National Geo-Geospatial Information (CD: NGI, was utilized to produce a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the affected environment. Figure 6 depicts the resulting DEM with a hillshade effect applied.

15 Figure 6 Digital elevation model of the terrain An assumed average observer elevation of 1.8 m and a maximum height of 6m above ground level was applied perform a Viewshed analysis to determine the current extent of visibility. This process was repeated with an offset of 12m above ground level to determine the potential visibility for the proposed vertical expansion of the landfill. A compilation of the resulting viewsheds indicating the increased visibility as per planned use of additional airspace is illustrated in Figure 7. From the figure it can be seen that the planned increased airspace will have minimal effect on the current visibility of the landfill. With the screening characteristic of the natural topography, the modelled increase of elevation will not account for extreme increases in the current visibility of the landfill.

16 Figure 7 Compiled viewshed illustrating the increased visibility upon planned vertical extension Viewshed analysis introduces an inherent degree of error. Without highly accurate information such as LIDAR or accurate 3D models of the entire study it is not possible to simulate the effect natural vegetation and structures will have on the visibility. The resulting Viewshed will therefore include areas that will not necessarily have a direct line of sight to the evaluated object. The Viewshed also does not take into account raised platform or built structures that raise the observer elevation in which case the Viewshed could incorrectly rule out potential observer points. Use of this technique is not intended to offer a 100% accurate indication of the affected area, but rather offer an approach to identify likely observation points for further site investigation. From the resulting analysis the visibility at each receptor was derived as summarised in table 3.

17 Table 3 Visibility at each receptor Code Receptor Visibility Screening R1 Residential area in Ashton None Screening by existing buildings R2 Residential area in Ashton in elevated area with direct views across affected environment Partial Partial screening by natural topography and vegetation R3 Residential area of Zolani in close proximity to affected environment Partial Partial screening by natural topography and vegetation R4 Residential area at Montagu None High mountain range completely screens C/I Main commercial and industrial areas of Ashton Partial Partial screening by natural topography and vegetation F Sparsely distributed farm houses in the region Partial Partial screening by natural topography and vegetation T1 Main route R60 traveling from Robertson into and through Ashton Partial Screening by existing buildings T2 Main Route R62conncenting Ashton to Montagu via the Cogmanskloof Pass None High peaks completely screens T3 Main route R60 traveling past Zolani from Ashton to Swellendam Partial Partial screening by natural topography and vegetation 6 Impact statement The visual impact is a function of many factors or criteria. The impact ratings are assessed in terms of visual attributes. Some of the factors are measurable such as viewing distance, the visual absorption capacity of the surrounding landscape, and the scale of the surrounding environment and landform. Other factors are subjective viewpoints, which are extremely difficult to consistently categorise. The critical appraisal of the visual impact of the project and associated works on the landscape is presented from the viewpoint of the author. 6.1 Site Investigation From the desktop review, the initially identified receptors were refined to observation points from where site evidence was obtained. The priority receptors were identified as R2, R3, T3 and F as indicated in Figure 3. Due to screening by natural topography and existing buildings the remainder of the receptors was disregarded from further site investigation. The site investigation was conducted on 12/09/2017. All photos were captured between 9AM and 12PM (daylight). It was a warm clear day with minimum cloud cover and conditions was interpreted to offer maximum viewing distance. During the period of the site investigation upgrades to roads and bridge in and around the area was observed. While disruptive to the normal sense of place

18 and some limitations on freely traversing the environment as under normal circumstances, the construction activity was determined to not be disruptive to the normal views directed at the existing landfill site and therefore insignificant to results of this report. As determined from the desktop assessment and identified receptors a number of observation points were investigated. Figure 8 illustrates the location for the key visuals obtained during the site investigation. Photos obtained from these locations are included as plates 1 through 6 below. Figure 8 Key photos location relative to the WMF Observation points from location 1 represents views in the elevated residential zone marked as R2. Typical dwellings in this area includes large single story and double story alone standing houses with views directly facing the landfill. Even though the break in natural vegetation is clearly noticeable, the presence of the landfill in the distance does not greatly detract from the vidual quality of the view.

19 Plate 1-1: View with clearly noticeable clearing in natural vegetation from elevated residential area with views directly facing the WMF facility. Plate 2-2: Typical residence found in the area Observations from location 2 represents views from the northern boundary of zolani marked as R3. While this area is much closer to the land fill site, it is still not extremely noticeble from here. Due to the upward anlge of views from this location the landfill blends into the background. Simalarly to that experienced at location 1, the most noticble visaul aspect of the break in natural vegetation. Typical structures found in this area are smal single story dwellings.

20 Plate 2-1: Direct view of the landfill from residential dwelling in western boundary of Zolani Plate2-2: Direct view of landfill area

21 Plate2-3: Typical dwellings found at Zolani Location 3 offers further observations representative for receptor marked as R3. Images obtained here represent views from the Eastern boundary of Zolani. The natural topography completely obstructs views of the landfill from this area with dust clouds due to activity at the landfill as the only indication of its presence. Plate 3-1: Natural topography screening landfill from visibility on eastern boundary of Zolani

22 Plate 3-2: Noticeable dust protruding from behind hill as result of activity at the landfill site Location 4 and 5 offers views of the landfill from direct surroundings of the WMF. These observations are positions in natural areas with little to no observers. It is not considered as evidence for visual impact from receptors, but rather as a representation of the current landfill from close range views. Plate4-1: View of the clearing from where cover material is obtained with visible change in natural slope where landfill protrudes from the right.

23 Plate4-2: Partial screening by natural topography even from elevated position on top of reservoir. Plate4-3: View across the residential area of Zolani with Ashton in the background from high point in the area

24 Plate5-1: View of the landfill from nearby hill Plate5-2: View of the landfill from next to WMF entrance

25 Plate5-3: Entrance gate, weighbridge and buildings at the WMF site Plate5-4: View of the Landfill from low terrain next to the site.

26 Plate5-5: View of landfill from close to perimeter fence (outside) Location 6 shows observations from within the landfill site. These images are included as representation of visuals within the landfill site as well as representation of potential visibility for receptors. If structures visible from visuals taken from inside the WMF site, it is logical to assume that the WMF site will be visible from those locations. Based on this assumption visibility will be assessed from these images. In plate 6-1 a section of the R60 traveling to Swellendam can be distinguished (marked as receptor T3). With the high travel speed in that section of the route as well as the site located perpendicular to the roadway it is expected that little to no visual impact will be experienced from this location. Plate 6-2 offers an observation from the top of the landfill looking out over Zolani with Ashton and cultivated land in the background. The most prominent structures from the image are dwellings from Zolani with the shacks in informal areas dominating most of the view. It is expected that these locations will experience a similar view of the landfill as described for location 2 and that the residential areas of Ashton visible in the background will experience a similar effect as described for location 1. No clear distinguishable scattered farm buildings (marked as receptor F) can be identified from the image. If any of this type of structures fall within the visual range of the landfill it is expected that the presence of the landfill will have little effect on the visual aesthetics from those locations. With the high distance and low elevation of these locations it is assumed that the visual impact will be to a lesser degree than experienced at either location 1 or 2.

27 Plate 6-1: View from the WMF site in area where glass material is stored with R60 to Swellendam in the distant background Plate 6-2: View from the top of the landfill

28 Plate 6-3: View of the clearing from where cover material is obtained from the top of the landfill Plate 6-4: Close up view of the landfill after cover material has been applied

29 Plate 6-5: View of the landfill before cover material has been applied 6.2 Visual Assessment The relatively small scale of the proposed vertical extension is not expected to have much effect on the change of the existing environment. Plates 1-1, 2-1 & 2-2 as included above shows views of the landfill from the residential areas marked as R2 and R3 in figure 3. With the angle of views and distance from the site, the use of additional air space will not be extremely noticeable. Plates 5-1, 5-4 & 5-5 show observation from around the site, from these positons a change in elevation is will be obvious. The affected extent is therefore considered to be on a local scale and it is expected that the only noticeable changes will be from areas directly surrounding the Landfill. The vertical extension of the landfill is the only feasible option to maintain the current management of waste material while awaiting the opening of the regional landfill site near Worcester. With no real viable alternatives to this extension, the probability of the project to proceed as planned are considered to be highly likely. Once operational, the regional landfill at Worcester will replace the Ashton WMF facility. Any effects associated with this project are therefore considered as short term. After closure remediation of the site, to return it to a natural state, will be implemented to ensure that there is no long term or permanent effects. The activity at the WMF will stay the same as is currently in practice and there is no planning for any additional expansion at the site. Plates 5-3, 5-4 & 6-1 show the current landfill site waste material and plate 6-3 shows the clearing from where cover material is being obtained. With no change in activity there will be no effect on the current environment. The intrusion is therefore considered to be low. With the current practise of cover material from neighbouring land parcels the existing intrusion is also softened to a degree where it is difficulty distinguished from the natural background. Plates 6-4 & 6-5 show the difference in experienced observation before and

30 after cover material has been applied. This effect is evident form further views, e.g. plate 2-1 where the landfill is hardly distinguishable from the natural environment. While not expected, should any visual impact occur, because of the close proximity to the pristine mountain areas the intensity of any impact would be considered to be high. While the dominant vegetation in the region is low growing without much screening from the effected region, the placement of the landfill site between multiple high hills results in good screening by the natural topography with most observation points only offering partial views of the existing landfill. Plates 1-1, 2-1 & 2-2 illustrates views where the landfill is partially screened and plates 3-1 & 3-2 shows observation where the natural topography completely screens the landfill from the viewer. From observations in built-up areas, existing buildings and infrastructure completely obstructs views of the affected site. The visual absorption capacity of the environment is therefore considered as high. Table 4 Summarised expected visual impacts as per evaluation criteria Criteria Expected impact Extent Probability Duration Intrusion Intensity VAC Local scale Highly likely Temporary Low High High The overall visual impact for the proposed vertical extension is expected to be low to none. There are no planned changes to the current practise or footprint to the exiting landfill. It can therefore be assumed that any changes to the current visual environment and effect on current visual quality will be low and that there are no risks of changes to the sense of place or loss of irreplaceable resources associated with the planned extension. Table 5 Overall Assessment Criteria Changes to the Visual Character Effect on Visual Quality Change to Sense of Place Irreplaceable loss of resources Impact Low Low None None The confidence is considered to be medium as the level of judgement is based generally on common sense, general knowledge, the author s field experience and the inherently subjective nature of this type of assessment.

31 7 Conclusions and recommendations As determined from the viewshed analysis the increased visibility due to the proposed additional use of airspace does not greatly change the visibility from what is currently experienced for the existing landfill. The natural topography offers good screening and the use of cover material softens the effect of intrusion drastically. From the site investigation and observations while traversing the region, it was determined that only a low (if any) visual impact is experienced from any of the identified receptors, the most noticeable effect being the break in natural vegetation. While not notably disruptive to the visual character of the landscape from distant views, close up observations clearly shows the change in natural slope of the region. During operation, high growing trees can be utilised to screen the landfill from receptors. With the general low to medium shrubs in occurring naturally in the area, a dense tree line could potentially be seen as more intrusive to the natural environment. Since the cover material already mitigates most of the adverse visual effects and the site closure of the landfill is planned when the regional landfill near Worcester becomes operational, it is not recommended to implement the use of vegetation to attempt screening. After closure the landfill should be re-contoured and re-vegetated using graded slopes and indigenous species of grass or other vegetation to return the area to its natural state (or as close as possible). During investigation of the area around the landfill site, a large quantity of waste material was found scattered in the natural areas surrounding the WMF. While this was less evident in the residential area close to the vicinity, it holds a potential threat to greatly deteriorate the visual quality of the area. As mitigation to this becoming a serious issue we offer the following strategy. To control litter, all incoming vehicles should be covered (e.g., with netting or tarp), and site staff should be assigned as necessary to regularly retrieve litter which happens to escape from the landfill site or collect at its periphery. This crew should also clean the access road ditches adjacent to the site on a regular basis. It is recommended that all of the above problems be monitored by visual or other inspection by landfill staff on a regular basis, and that good communications be maintained with the surrounding neighbours. In this way, emerging problems can be addressed to avoid any serious disturbances.

32 8 References Allen, M. (1970). Vision and highway safety. Philadelphia: Chilton Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of Interior Visual Resource Management Manual 8400 Chief Directorate : National Geo-spatial Information, Department of Rural Development & Land Reform RSA, Digital Elevation Model Dataset 25m res, Ladislav Mucina and Michael C. Rutherford, 2006, the vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland Natalie Wolchover (2012), How Far Can the Human Eye See?, human-eye.html Oberholzer, B Guideline for involving visual & aesthetic specialists in EIA processes: Edition 1. CSIR Report No ENV-S-C F. Republic of South Africa, Provincial Government of the Western Cape, Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning, Cape Town. Van der Ham, R. J. I. M., & Iding, J. A. M. E. (1971). Landscape typology system based on visual elements. Wageningen: Methodology and Application