The two principal criteria used to determine the landscape or visual effect, are:

Transcription

1 Landscape and Visual Appraisal Methodology 1. Introduction The methodology adopted for the Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) has been informed by current thinking and industry best-practice guidance, in particular: Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd Edition (GLVIA3); Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland; and Advice Note 01/11 Photography and Photomontages in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. GLVIA3 states that the principles and processes of landscape and visual impact assessment can also be used to assist in the appraisal of forms of land use change or development that fall outside the requirements of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive and Regulations. Applying such an approach in these circumstances can be useful where development proposals raise concerns about effects on the landscape and/or visual amenity. For this project a study area for the LVA extending to a 2km radius from the development is considered appropriate for the scale and nature of the proposed development. 2. Baseline methodology The existing landscape and visual baseline has been informed by an initial desktop study, including a review of relevant publications, Ordnance Survey (OS) data and aerial mapping. The findings of the preliminary desktop study have been verified in the field during September Assessing effects methodology The assessment of landscape and visual effects are separate, although linked procedures. Landscape effects derive from alterations to the physical landscape as a resource, which may give rise to changes in the landscape character, while visual effects relate to the changes that arise in the composition of available views and visual amenity, as experienced by people, as a result of changes to the landscape. The landscape baseline, its analysis and the assessment of landscape effects all contribute to the assessment of visual effects. The two principal criteria used to determine the landscape or visual effect, are: The sensitivity of the receptor; and The magnitude of change (impact). The determination of the anticipated effect is a qualitative assessment and requires the application of professional judgement to weigh the findings of the sensitivity of receptor and the magnitude of the impact experienced by the receptor. Effects are described according to their nature, which may be beneficial or adverse. In this case the effects of introducing residential development to the site are all considered to be permanent, as agreed with the Appellants.

2 The effects of the development are considered at two different timescales. Firstly the baseline conditions are compared to the conditions immediately that the construction work is complete and the site becomes operational in its new residential use. The second scenario is an assessment for the design year, considered to be 15 years after opening. This is the predicted time that the landscape scheme will have achieved a significant effect (for example establishment of planting). This appraisal does not consider the likely effects of the development during the construction phase. This is on the basis of the application being in outline only, with limited construction, phasing or engineering details, together with the fact that given the scale of the development, the construction phase will only comprise a temporary change over a relatively short timescale that is unlikely to have a major impact. In this case the landscape or visual effect of the development on heritage features is not considered. It is agreed with the Appellants that there is no effect on any heritage designations or features and this aspect is not in dispute as part of the appeal. 4. Landscape character 4.1 Landscape baseline The assessment of the landscape baseline within the study area considers the following: The existing situation including a factual description of the existing landscape and its condition; The existing landscape character through desk study informed by existing published landscape character assessments followed by verification in the field; Identification of specific landscape receptors; and The value of the existing landscape including reference to relevant statutory and non-statutory designations. The receptor is assessed as being of value at either a national, regional or local level. 4.2 Nature of landscape effect The assessment of landscape effects considers the potential effect of the development proposals on the landscape character within the study area, with reference to effects on the identified landscape receptors. An assessment has been made of the sensitivity of the landscape resource by combining judgements about the value attached to the landscape and the susceptibility of the landscape to the nature of change arising from the type of development proposed. The criteria which have been used to guide the assessment of landscape sensitivity are summarised in the table below. Sensitivity High Typical descriptors A landscape valued at the international, national, regional or borough/district level; A vulnerable landscape likely to be fragile and susceptible to change; A landscape which is well maintained and in a good condition and contains rare and distinctive elements; A landscape with a limited tolerance of change;

3 No, or limited, scope for substitution or positive enhancement. Low A landscape that is valued at the local level; A landscape that is of a fair condition with some degraded elements; A landscape which is fairly tolerant of change; Some scope for substitution or positive enhancement. A landscape of limited value; A landscape which is in a poor condition with few or no distinctive components; A landscape which is tolerant of change; Scope for substitution or positive enhancement. The likely nature of effect (magnitude of change) that would be experienced by landscape receptors has been described. The factors that are considered in assessing the nature of effect include the: Extent to which the removal or addition of landscape features alters the existing landscape character; Geographical extent of the area over which the effect is evident; Duration of the effect (short/medium/long term, permanent/temporary); and Effectiveness of any mitigation proposed. The criteria which have been used to guide the assessment of the magnitude of change that would be experienced by landscape receptors as a result of the development are set out in the table below. Magnitude of change Large Small No Change Typical Descriptors Major alteration to resource, key characteristics, features or elements, and/or quality and integrity of resource. Moderate benefit to/loss of resource, key characteristics, features or elements; improvement/degradation of attributes quality. Some measurable change in attributes, quality or vulnerability; minor benefit/loss of, or positive/detrimental alteration to, one (maybe more) key characteristics, features or elements. Very minor benefit/loss of or positive/detrimental alteration to one or more characteristics, features or elements. The Project would result in no alteration of characteristics, features or elements. 4.3 Resultant landscape effect The summary is not presented as a level of significance as this development does not fall within the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and there are no significant levels to judge the effects against. The resultant effect, however, is provided to give an overall decision as to the effect of the development on each individual receptor. This combines the findings of the sensitivity and the magnitude of change. The criteria which have been used to quantify the resultant effect are set out in the table below:

4 Resultant landscape effect Major Adverse Moderate Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Beneficial Moderate Beneficial Major Beneficial The Project would result in effects that potentially would : be at considerable variance with the existing landscape character, degrading its integrity; and/or completely degrade, diminish or destroy the integrity of valued characteristic features, elements and / or their setting. be at variance with the existing landscape character; and/or substantially degrade or diminish the integrity of valued characteristic features, elements and / or their setting. be slightly at variance with the existing landscape character; and/or slightly degrade or diminish the integrity of valued characteristic features, elements and / or their setting. be compatible with the existing landscape character; and/or be compatible with the integrity of valued characteristic features, elements and / or their setting. improve and enhance the existing landscape character; and/or restore valued characteristic features partially lost through other land uses. markedly improve and enhance the existing landscape character; and/or restore valued characteristic features largely lost through other land uses. substantially improve and enhance the existing landscape character; and/or restore or reinstate valued characteristic features of the area lost through other land uses In addition, a category of No change is added specifically for this case with respect to the National Character Area (NCA). This is due to the size, scale and diversity of the NCA it is not possible to determine that a single site specific development could meaningfully modify the characteristics of such an extensive area. This is contrary to the Appellants assertion that their scheme will offer a slight benefit to the NCA. 5. Visual amenity 5.1 Visual baseline The assessment of the visual baseline within the study area considers the following: The area within which the development proposals may be visible; The different groups of people within the study area who may experience views of the development proposal; The identification of specific viewpoints; and The nature of the views at the viewpoints. All viewpoints used for the assessment of visual effects are in publicly accessible locations and have been chosen to reflect a representative range of the visual receptors within the surrounding area. The area around each broad viewpoint location was explored to find the most suitable (i.e. unscreened and representative) and safely accessible location for the view to be recorded. Baseline photographs have been taken for each of the viewpoints in accordance with best practice guidance. A description of the visual composition of the existing view from each

5 viewpoint has been provided. Baseline photographs have been taken for each of the principal viewpoints July 2014 using a Canon EOS 20D Digital SLR using a 50mm equivalent fixed focal length lens. The photographs were taken in accordance with best practice guidance and were cylindrically stitched together using Adobe Photoshop to form panoramic views. The location and time for each of the viewpoints was recorded. 5.2 Nature of visual effects The assessment of visual effects considers the potential effect of the Project on the visual amenity as experienced by people within the study area. The effects on visual amenity have been assessed through the consideration of potential effects on the identified viewpoints. The sensitivity of the visual amenity is considered by combining judgements about the value attached to a particular view and the susceptibility of the visual receptor to changes in the view. As identified within GLVIA3, susceptibility is mainly a function of: The occupation or activity of people experiencing the view at particular locations; and The extent to which their attention or interest may be focussed on views and the visual amenity they experience at particular locations. The criteria which have been used to inform the assessment of visual sensitivity are outlined in the table below: Sensitivity High Low Typical descriptors People with a key interest in the view such as residents at home, and people engaged in outdoor recreation where the view is a key reason for the activity e.g. users of PRoW and visitors to attractions where views of their surrounding area are an important contributor to the experience. People with a moderate interest in the landscape such as travellers on road, rail and other transport routes. People with little or passing interest in the landscape, for example, those in the work place and people taking part in outdoor sport or recreation activities that are not related to the view. The nature of effect (magnitude of visual change) experienced by visual receptors as a result of the development proposals has been described by reference to the: Scale of change in the view in respect of the loss or addition of features and changes in the visual composition; Degree of contrast or integration of any changes in the existing or remaining landscape components form, mass, height, colour and texture; Orientation, angle and extent of the view in relation to the main activity of the receptor; Distance from the viewpoint to the proposed development; Duration of the effect (temporary/permanent, intermittent/continuous etc.); and Effectiveness of any mitigation proposed.

6 The criteria which have been used to guide the assessment of the nature of effect that would be experienced by visual receptors as a result of the development proposals are outlined in the table below: Nature of effect Large Small No change Typical descriptors Changes to the view that would completely alter the overall perception and key characteristics of the view Changes to the view that would be readily noticeable and would alter the general perception or key characteristics of the view Some measurable, small scale visual changes to the overall perception and key characteristics of the view. Very minor changes to the overall perception and key characteristics of the view that would be barely noticeable with the naked eye No alteration to the view. 5.3 Resultant visual effect As with landscape character, the summary is not presented as a level of significance as this development does not fall within the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and there are no significant levels to judge the effects against. The resultant effect, however, is provided to give an overall decision as to the visual effect of the development on the receptor at each individual viewpoint. This combines the findings of the sensitivity and the magnitude of change. The criteria which have been used to quantify the resultant visual effect are set out in the table below: Resultant visual effect Major Adverse Moderate Adverse Minor Adverse Minor Beneficial Moderate Beneficial Major Beneficial The Project would result in: a substantial deterioration in the existing view a distinct deterioration in the existing view a discernible deterioration in the existing view A barely perceptible deterioration or improvement in the existing view a discernible improvement in the existing view a distinct improvement in the existing view a substantial improvement in the existing view