122/Doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © Studioengleback Contents

Ashford Local Development Framework Landscape Character Study for Ashford Borough Council & English Partnerships

ASSESSMENT & DATA SET : Upper Stour Valley November 2005

122/doc/021 © studioengleback Notice: This report was prepared by Studio Engleback solely for use by Ashford Borough Council. This report is not addressed to and may not be relied upon by any person or entity other than by Ashford Borough Council for any purpose without the prior written permission of Studio Engleback.

Studio Engleback accept no responsibility or liability for reliance upon or use of this report (whether or not permitted) other than by the Ashford Borough Council for the purposes for which it was originally commissioned and prepared.

In producing this report, Studio Engleback has relied upon information provided by others. The completeness or accuracy of this information is not guaranteed by Studio Engleback Ashford Local Development Framework

Landscape Character Study

for Ashford Borough Council & English Partnerships

DATA SET : Upper Stour Valley

November 2005

122/doc/020

Studio Engleback 8a London Road Tunbridge Wells Kent TN1 2EJ

Tel: 01892 538 537 Fax: 01892 538 438 email [email protected] web: www.studioengleback.com

studioengleback The survey team included:

Luke Engleback MLI Chartered Landscape Architect Louise Hooper MLI Chartered Landscape Architect Gary Grant MIEEM Ecologist Mark Goddard Ecologist Alex Morse Ecologist Andrea Kenworthy MLI Chartered Landscape Architect Hans Martin Aambo Assistant Landscape Assistant Jacinta Faithfull Assistant Landscape Assistant Katrin Pfeiffer Senior Landscape Architect Katie Davis MLI Charterd Landscape Architect

The phase 1 study period ran from late August to November 2004 the phase 2 study ran from june October 2005

The assessment team included:

Luke Engleback MLI Chartered Landscape Architect Professor Michael Ellison Past Presedent of the Landscape Institute Gary Grant MIEEM Ecologist Andrea Kenworthy MLI Chartered Landscape Architect

The reports were complied with the above plus:

Paul Mamo Roger Cooper Shinishiro Ito Lukas Boras

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 4 5 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Contents

Acknowledgement Study Team 4 Data Set Preface 6

Section 1 Introduction 9 Introduction 10 Location 11 Landscape Context 12

Section 2 Assessment 17 Assessment Summary 18 Distinctive Elements 22 Detractors 23

Section 3 Field Work & Data Sheets 25 Field Work & Data Sheets 24-119

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 4 5 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Preface

The Landscape Character Study was carried out following guidelines set out by the Countryside Agency. The landscape was divided into Landscape Description Units (LDUs), based on the Historic landscape characterisation study for Kent 2001. The Study Area was divided up into sectors from A - G the order was the priority at the time for looking at areas concerned with GADF to feed into the planing of those areas - F and G being landscapes that woudl not be considered for development.

Each LDU parcel was assessed from an average of 3 points - larger LDUs had more reference points than smaller ones - by two surveyors. Landscape Description Units were based on the Kent Historic Landscape Character Study 2002; Landscape Character Areas of Kent were taken from the Babtie/KCC report 2004.

All sites were viewed from public rights of way using a combination of transport by car and walking footpaths and bridleways. Site notes were recorded on a two-sided A4 record sheet D by hand and later transferred to the word documents contained in this data set. D Each LDU is numbered, each filed photograph carries the LDU reference and a photograph location number reference - e.g. D1.3 for LDU D1, third photograph location. The photographs have been saved as jpegs and were generally taken at 1Gb resolution. G This data set includes the location maps for the key photographs taken of each LDU. The photogrpahs plus a digital set of the data sheets are contained in a CD bound into the back cover of the data set. F Ordnance Survey maps have been used as a base for hand-drawn plans and scanned for location of photographs etc are reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO Ashford Borough Council License No LA077038 © Crown copyright. All rights reserved. E B For the assessments the LDUs were grouped by similarity into large blocks we have called District Landscape types (DLT). The 58 DLTs were assessed to fall into one of nine categories used by the County Landscape Character Study. A team of four senior landscape architects and ecologists visited each area as a travelling collegium over a period of four days making on site assessements and checking these by return to specific areas. These first thoughts were then tested by the same team in ths studio a few days later to check for consistency of appraisal. Then each area was check against the feild sheets. This work has been presented in these documents as tables. C A All photographs © studio engleback . A read only CD of the photo database and maps are located in the back of landscape character report 122/doc/014

Studio Engleback November 2005

Study Area Fieldwork Sectors

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 6 7 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback WYE STOUR VALLEY

HOLLINGBOURNE VALE

HOTHFIELD HEATHY STOUR GAP FARMLANDS

GREENSAND FRUIT BELT STOUR VALLEY

UPPER STOUR VALLEY BRAEBOURNE VALE BIDDENDEN HIGH HALDEN WOODED FARMLANDS ASHFORD BRAEBOURNE LEES MIXED FARMLANDS BEULT VALLEY

UPPER BETHERSDEN STOUR VALLEY FARMLANDS

MERSHAM FARMLANDS

UPPER STOUR VALLEY ALDINGTON RIDGE

OLD ROMNEY SHORELINE WOODED FARMLANDS Based on an OS Map Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO by permission of Ordnance Based on an OS Map Reproduced copyright. All rights reserved. License No LA077038 © Crown The Ashford Character Study Area Black line shows Kent County Landscape Character Areas Red fine lines show Historic Landscape Character Parcels used as a basis for the Landscape Description Units (LDUs) in this study White lines show District Areas as defined in the assessment

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 6 7 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 8 9 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Section 1 Introduction

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 8 9 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Introduction

The Kent Lanscape Character Study The Ashford Landscape Character Study Assessment The Upper Stour Valley (east and west) are flat, generally open • Approximately 90% of this County Landscape Character Area Many of the judgements made about landscape are subjective but landscapes formed by the Great Stour and East Stour rivers. The (CLA). This county type is split north west and south east of the process of landscape assessment provides a robust methodology land use is one of mixed farming with crest top woodlands, as at Ashford, and it is important to differentiate between the Upper based on current best practice. Godinton park, enclosing views in the middle distance. These hills Great Stour Valley to the north west of Ashford and the eastern are formed from Greensand outliers which intrude into the clay vale Upper Stour Valley containing the East Stour, Ruckinge and White The physical attributes of the landscape are considered in conjunction in this area. These low ridges also include Hothfield, the site of Water Dykes. with the historical and cultural influences, nature conservation interests Godinton House itself, and the outlier that forms Hurst Hill, Clap Hill • There are 38 Landscape Description Units (LDUs) in this CLA and landuse. These factors are analysed further in the field to determine and that at Great Chart. Occasionally, east of Ashford, there are lying within the study area the key characteristics, aesthetics, visual unity, ecological integrity, views NE over the low rise of the Greensand to the North Downs • The LDUs are based on the Historic Landscape Character map condition of heritage features and impact of built development. The beyond. for Kent, there are 3 Historic landscape character types in this condition and sensitivity of each character area is then determined. study area: Clumps of field trees and copses provide interest as does the • HLT 1 - Field Patterns Condition describes the integrity and unity of the landscape such as its irregular presence of riparian vegetation along the river. Where • HLT 7- Valley Floor and Water Management functional integrity and visual unity - for example an urban fringe with the river as lost its associated vegetation however it is often • HLT 9 - Settlements many detracting elements and loss of unifying features will be of poor inconspicuous. Hedgerows are relatively infrequent and often • We have grouped these into 6 District Landscape Types (DLTs) condition. gappy, with many of the field trees being of a similar age with no • There are 2 ‘settlements’ the Waterbrook Freight Depot that sign of renewal of the stock. The loss of hedgerows is associated projects into the floodplain, and the Forstal and Mill which are Sensitivity of the landscape refers to its overall character and quality with the conversion of unimproved pasture to vast, arable or the extension of Mersham on the southern side of the CTRL and and the extent to which these factors will be tolerant of change in improved pastureland and it is likely that the remaining pasture London to Dover Railway. general. may be vulnerable to further conversion. The advent of under field drainage and improved mechanization has allowed the blurring of In carrying out the survey and discussing the results we find that Capacity determines the ability of the landscape to accommodate the traditional land use boundaries between the river floodplain, the there are some minor adjustments that should be made to the change without causing loss of the essential character and local clay soils and the freer-draining Greensand. County Landscape Character Area Boundaries. These include: distinctiveness. Capacity will vary according to the type and nature of change being proposed. The loss of hedgerows and trees contributes to a loss of visual • Removing LDU E33 from the Upper Stour Valley and including it unity, and is eroding the traditional wildlife corridors along the river with the Bethesden Farmlands and DLT BF 5 which is of a similar The matrix combines condition and sensitivity which indicates the area’s and between the fields. character divided only by Magpie Hall Lane. ability to accommodate change and the appropriate land management • LDU A21 (South) has been added from the Old Romney Shoreline or use, and will assist in the overall policies or development that might Diversity is limited to the tree copses, hill top woodlands beyond Wooded Farmlands as it is part of the historic Landscape be appropriate to a particular area. the character area and residual riverside vegetation, but often the Character type extending north along the Ruckinge Dyke valley fragmentation of these elements contributes to a discordant sense up to the line of the Roman Road, the County Landscape Area of change, coupled with an increasingly bland picture, starved of boundary being drawn for convenience along the road crossing variety, formed by the flat arable and improved grass fields. the railway and A2070. c o n d i t good moderate poor • Due to development as a market and business park, LDU A1 is reinforce conserve conserve The landscape around the South Willesborough dykes is similarly not included except for a narrow strip of floodplain linking LDU C1 & reinforce open but has long views to the suburbs of Ashford. Fingers of with A2 (Aylesford Green) pasture and neglected farmland extend right up to the A2042 to • LDUs A4, A15(Hillcrest Farm), and A30, plus part of B12 south the town centre. The Ashford to Folkestone railway line cuts across of the CTRL have been added to the Mersham Farmlands, as create & conserve conserve to the north of the area, rarely impinging on the landscape, but they appear to us as being part of the Greensand Ridge rather reinforce & create & restore this may change significantly when the Channel Tunnel Rail Link than the Floodplain Fields. Again the line of the CTRL provides a is constructed. A major part of the remaining valley character is convenient edge at county scale, not is not always appropriate at under pressure for a mixed development at Cheeseman’s Green local level. and Conscience Farm that may be contributing to the sense of • LDUs A2, A3, A21 (Bliby Corner and Bilham Farm) and A10 are create restore & restore create neglect and degradation. within the floodplain and relate closely to adjacent LDUs within the Upper Stour Valley not the Old Romney Shoreline Wooded Farmlands. low moderate high s e n s i t i v i t y Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 10 11 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Location

Location of Upper Stour Valley District Areas

Studio Engleback Graphic based on OS Map base data Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO License No LA077038 © Crown copyright. All rights reserved. Location of Upper Stour Valley Landscape Character Area within study area

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 10 11 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Landscape context - Upper Great Stour Valley

Geology The Upper Stour Valley sits within the Wealden Clay with Greensand abutting to the north and around Worten Mill.

+ Worten Mill Flooding + Worten Mill The valley sits within the floodplain. + Worten Mill Heritage There are no listed buildings or conservation areas. Godinton Park is designated a Special Landscape Area.

Ecology Parts of the floodplain, wet grazing areas and woodlands around Godinton are designated Sites of Nature Conservation Interest.

Features lost since the 1870s The old maps suggest that there has been negligible change in Geology Flooding Heritage this area.

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 12 13 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback + Worten Mill

+ Worten Mill

Ecology Features lost since 1870’s

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 12 13 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Landscape context - Eastern Upper Stour Valley

+ Swanton Mill + Swanton Mill

Geology Flooding

Geology The Eastern Upper Stour Valley sits within the Wealden Clay with Greensand encroaching on the area around Mersham.

Flooding The valley sits within the floodplain, and is subject to flooding.

Heritage There are two Archaeological Sites, marked yellow, to the south of Park Farm and south of Stanhope.

Ecology + Swanton Mill An extensive area of the floodplain around Park Farm and Captain’s Wood are designated Sites of Nature Conservation Interest.

Features lost since the 1870s There has been some loss of hedgerows to the area south of the CTRL. The 1908 plan revealed an extensive wooded area to the east of the A2070(T) on the slightly higher ground known as Calves Wood, Buttesland Wood and Ruffets Wood which have since completely disappeared. There were noteable hedgerow trees around Swanton Mill and along the course of the East Stour River. Heritage

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 14 15 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback + Swanton Mill + Swanton Mill

Ecology Features lost since 1870’s

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 14 15 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 16 17 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Section 2 Assessment

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 16 17 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Assessment Summary

This county area is split north west and south east of Ashford – the Upper Great Stour Valley to the north west of Ashford and the eastern Upper Stour Valley containing the East Stour, Ruckinge reinforce conserve conserve and White Water Dykes to the south east. & reinforce

There are 2 ‘settlements’ the Waterbrook Freight Depot that projects into the floodplain, and the Forstal and Mill which are the extension of Mersham on the southern side of the CTRL and London to Dover Railway. create & conserve conserve reinforce & create & restore We have made adjustments to the Kent CLA boundary to exclude the area to the south east of Chilmington and to include a greater extent along the Ruckinge Dyke valley lying within the floodplain. create restore & restore create The Upper Stour Valley is an extensive open valley floor landscape of predominantly arable farming where hedgerows have been removed during the conversion to unimproved pasture and Policy recommendation riparian vegetation lost as cultivation extends close to the river banks. This intensification with loss of vegetation and wildlife corridors is particularly evident at the East Stour Valley and Ruckinge Dyke. At Waterbrook and Willesborough Dykes there is a mix of neglected farmland, wasteland Location of Upper Stour Valley and major transport corridors which give an interrupted and fragmented character and open views to the suburbs of Ashford.

Occasionally the Great Stour tributaries and wet areas are delineated by flushes of willows or wet alder woodland which is more marked to the Upper Great Stour Valley. Here the mixed farming and strong hedgelines with discrete poplar plantations give a reticulated and more distinctive landscape.

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 18 19 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 18 19 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Near Mansion Copse to north of Worten Mill to the north west of Ashford (G17.3 & G 17.4) Moat at Aylesford Green (A2.2)

Looking south along East Stour near Outlet Village (C1.1) Looking north towards Ashford from A2070(T) (C1.5)

East of Flood Street looking south (A2.1) Open fields around Swanton Mill(A2.5)

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 20 21 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback USV1 USV2 USV3 USV4 USV5 USV6 CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES

Landuse Farming Recreation Parkland Woodland Former industrial use Freight Depot

Topography Flat Gently undulating Rolling Steeply sloping Lakes/reinforce ponds Streams/ dykes

Vegetation cover Intact hedgerows Hedgerow trees Feature trees Evidence of hedgerow clearance Evidence of woodland loss

Farming type Predominantly arable Mixed farming Mainly pasture Wet meadows

Local vernacular Ragstone, pegtiles, ship lap Oast house

Visibility Open long distance Intermittent Restricted

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 20 21 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Distinctive Elements

Swanton Mill Flood Street (A32.2) Situated on the East Stour River this is a newly Flood Street is a distinctive feature within the open restored working mill, possibly dating back to the valley floor landscape. It comprises deep ditches, 16th century. Surrounded on all sides by large ancient pollarded willows, neat mown verges and a Key mostly featureless arable fields the mill and the small unique raised walkway. It provides a fine approach to area of alder/ willow carr are important heritage and the village of Mersham to the north. Church Green Lane ecological features. Historic Building Roman Road

Oast House Woods

Hilltop/ Scenic Views Parks

River Stour Flooded Gravel Pits

East River Stour (A31.7) The river and tributaries are in places channelled through a series of dykes and control weirs.

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 22 23 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Detractors

Key Freight Depot (A5.1) Secluded location at the end of spur from the A2070(T), set CTRL/ Eurostar Rail Line M20 within farmland. Public access restricted. Comprises ancillary Railway Line Detractor structures including security kiosks, lighting and native shrub planting to western edge. A2070(T)

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 22 23 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 24 25 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Section 3 Fieldwork & Data Sheets

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 24 25 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback USV 1 Court Lodge Farm District Landscape Type: USV 1 Court Lodge Farm Comprising: C4

CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES

• Area of improved grazing crossed by dykes, dry ditches and gappy hedges with Court Lodge Farm and moated farmhouse with mature trees and poplars.

• Long Length forms a thick linear woodland to the road.

• The Greensand footpath cuts through the area.

• Housing at Stanhope overlooks the area to the north and east. Location of USV 1 within Upper Stour Valley ANALYSIS

Condition

Pattern of elements: moderate Detracting features: low Distinctiveness: moderate Cultural heritage: moderate Ecology: moderate Functionality: moderate

Long Length with the deep drainage dykes and blackthorn hedges give a unified linear character to the landscape and provide a network of semi-natural habitats.

Sensitivity

Sense of place: low Landform: high Extent of tree cover: moderate Visibility: moderate

Long Length is a valuable wildlife corridor and restricts views to the west. The recent improvements to the moated farmhouse are not in keeping with the local character, and the housing at Stanhope impinges onto the area. Overall the sense of character has been eroded.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

restore & create

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 26 27 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback USV 2 Willesborough Dykes District Landscape Type: USV 2 Willesborough Dykes Comprising: C1, C2, C3, A1 (part of), A2 (Aylesford Green)

CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES

• Low lying area within the floodplain criss crossed by dykes, the East Stour and dominated by the A2042 road/ junction network and CTRL to the east.

• Mix of farmland, predominantly grazing and regenerating scrub surrounded by new housing, industry and retail development to the south of Ashford.

ANALYSIS

Condition

Pattern of elements: low Detracting features: high Distinctiveness: low Cultural heritage: low Ecology: low Functionality: moderate

An incoherent pattern of elements dominated by the road network with an interrupted character and generally degraded condition.

Sensitivity

Sense of place: low Landform: high Extent of tree cover: low Location of USV 2 within Upper Stour Valley Visibility: high

The sense of place is weak, but visibility is high due to wide open floodplain generally devoid of hedgerows and with few isolated trees.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

restore & create - restore moat by improved management - create wetlands

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 26 27 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback USV 3 Waterbrook District Landscape Type: USV 3 Waterbrook Comprising: A2 (Waterbrook), A5

CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES

• Gently undulating open valley floor with extensive tree, hedge and ditch clearance with mix of arable land, neglected grazing, gravel workings, freight depot and former railway sidings.

• Some remnant hedgerows, ditches and ponds.

ANALYSIS

Condition

Pattern of elements: low Detracting features: high Distinctiveness: low Cultural heritage: low Ecology: moderate Functionality: low

Location of USV 3 within Upper Stour Valley The area has a fragmented and degraded feel with many detracting features.

Sensitivity

Sense of place: low Landform: high Extent of tree cover: low Visibility: high

The area has undergone substantial change over recent years with the loss of landscape features, in particular field boundaries to become in effect an arable and brownfield wasteland. Theopen floodplain is highly visible.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

create - create new woodlands

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 28 29 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback USV 4 East Stour Valley District Landscape Type: USV 4 East Stour Valley Comprising: A2 (Swanton Mill), A2 (east of Flood Street), A31, A13 (Denne), A18, A19, A25 (North of Mersham Sports Ground), A32

CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES

• Intensively farmed land of predominantly large arable fields within the East Stour river valley floodplain.

• The area is bisected by tributaries, often delineated by willow pollards and carr such as around Swanton Mill, Evergate Mill and Flood Street.

• The area has undergone extensive clearance of hedges and ditches.

• Around The Forstal and Flood Street the scale is more intimate with smaller fields of improved grassland and remnant orchards. Location of USV 4 within Upper Stour Valley • The CTRL bounds the northern edge and is for the most part in cutting. note: for direct comparison map to be scaled 200% to equate with like scale on all other maps ANALYSIS

Condition

Pattern of elements: low Detracting features: moderate Distinctiveness: low Cultural heritage: low Ecology: low Functionality: high

The landscape has underdone extensive intensification with loss of hedgerows and decline in semi- natural habitats. There are discrete pockets of distinctive character such as around Flood Street where willows and associated ditches have remained intact; however overall the pattern is fragmented and interrupted in places by the CTRL.

Sensitivity

Sense of place: low Landform: high Extent of tree cover: low Visibility: high

Landscape signatures are sporadic and overall the sense of place is weak. The floodplain and general lack of vegetation allow extensive views and high visibility.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

create - critical hinterland for flood defences and green infrastructure

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 28 29 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback USV 5 Ruckinge Dyke District Landscape Type: USV 5 Ruckinge Dyke Comprising: A2 (South Willsborough), A3, A10, A21, A21 (Bilham Farm), A21 (Bliby Corner), A21 (south), A22 (Brockman’s Farm), C17, C18

CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES

• The area is predominantly arable farmland within the floodplain with some smaller paddocks and grazing with gappy relic hedges and scattered hedgerow trees.

• The land rises to a distinctive knoll to the east of Finn Farm which was extensively wooded during the late 19th century and has since completely disappeared.

• Adjacent at Steeds Lane are a series of fishing ponds.

• Around Bilham Farm the hedgerows are intact and the proximity to Captain’s Wood gives a more wooded character.

• The A2070(T) dual carriageway on wooded embankment bounds the western edge and is prominent.

ANALYSIS

Condition

Pattern of elements: low Detracting features: high Distinctiveness: low Cultural heritage: low Ecology: moderate Functionality: moderate

The conversion of unimproved pasture to arable within the floodplain has resulted in the loss of hedgerows and trees and overall fragmentation and decline in wildlife corridors. The road is highly visible and a prominent detractor.

Sensitivity

Sense of place: low Landform: high Extent of tree cover: low Visibility: high

The distinctive elements that are characteristic of a floodplain have been lost and the strength of character is weak. The area is highly visible due to the open nature of the floodplain and lack of tree Location of USV 5 within Upper Stour Valley cover.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

create - critical hinterland for flood defences and green infrastructure

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 30 31 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback USV 6 Great Stour Valley District Landscape Type: USV 6 Great Stour Valley Comprising: E1, E2, E3, E1/4, G11, G12, G13, G14, G16, G17

CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES

• Extensive valley floor farmland of arable and pasture with scattered woodlands, including numerous discrete poplar plantations.

• The Great Stour and tributaries meandering through the landscape are often delineated by flushes of willows or wet alder woodland.

• Localised floodberms and embankment at Worten Mill.

• Swinford Manor and Bucksford Manor (now school and complex of private houses) have noteable mature trees.

• The area is crossed by a number of local lanes with strong hedgelines and footpaths, including the Greensand Way and Stour Valley Walk.

ANALYSIS

Location of USV 6 within Upper Stour Valley Condition note: for direct comparison map to be scaled 200% to equate with like scale on all other maps Pattern of elements: high Detracting features: low Distinctiveness: high Cultural heritage: moderate Ecology: moderate Functionality: high

Attractive and highly distinctive with intact features, such as the wet woodlands and mature stream side trees, though there has been some loss of grazing pasture as areas have been drained. This is a working farmed landscape with intact areas of semi-natural habitat that also accommodates flooding.

Sensitivity

Sense of place: high Landform: high Extent of tree cover: moderate Visibility: moderate

A reticulated landscape of subtle landform and distinctive landscape signatures with a sense of continuity over time and strong sense of place. There are long distance intermittent views.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

conserve & restore - reinstate alder woodlands (originally used to make charcoal for gunpowder) - improve river corridor habitat and restore meanders

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 30 31 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 32 33 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Upper Stour Valley USV1: Court Lodge Farm

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 32 33 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 30/09/04 Location: C4 Court Lodge Farm Map reference: TQ994397 C4 ctd.

Context: Brief description: Medium sized parcel of improved grazing with Court Lodge Farm and moated farmhouse Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley to the south. Exceptional boundary to the west with Long Length consisting of thick linear HLT: 1.10 Medium regular with straight boundaries woodland. Traversed by dykes, dry ditches and gappy hedges. Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of detracting features TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Apparent N/NE to Pound Lane and Stanhope; S to Intact Insignificant knoll in C6; W to Long Length Detractors: Interrupted but Electronic gates to farmhouse, replica floodlit Stonehenge. Housing at localised TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Stanhope evident to north where not screened. Newly mown dyke on Fragmented Apparent Court Farm, boundary Filtered throughout one edge. Low voltage power lines. Insignificant with Long Length, hedgerow trees Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern wildlife? PATTERN Apparent Dykes, farmstead, Medium regular with straight boundaries Insignificant linear trees and tree Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High Dykes, moat, gappy Unenclosed groups, poplars behind farm hedgerows, linear Moderate SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation woodland strips LANDUSE Apparent Settlement: clustered Low farmstead and Insignificant Intensity of land use farmhouse Unsettled Moderate – noticeably improved pasture LU: improved grassland Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to change Species associations Natural features Stream and water-filled drainage dyke both Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Willow, alder sides of Pound Lane Boundary with Some new planting Variable Farm type Primary Other Long Length, around farmhouse, Poor Improved pasture hedgerows and otherwise mature Woodlands Heritage features Species hedgerow trees Field Boundaries Stock fencing, hedges, ditches Good Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Variable Remnants Ash, willow, oak Poor Other trees Heritage features Species Other features Private moat Good Linear trees around moat, new planting Alder, willow, hornbeam, oak, Variable associated with farmhouse. hawthorn, blackthorn Poor Heritage features Species Field Boundaries Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Dykes, stream, hedgerow Hawthorn, rose, blackthorn, vernacular, character and sense of place willow, alder, oak, ash Highways Verges Other features Type Siting Design Extent High Greensand Way national footpath; driveway Exceptional treed boundary Moderate to farm; footpaths; Long Length and Pound along Long Length, good Newly Historic - Some Low Lane boundaries along Pound Lane refurbished moated improvements farmhouse not in keeping Buildings Villages Farmsteads with local Court Lodge Farm – newly character refurbished farmhouse and barns, new double garage Stanhope Other features Well treed moat housing – needs screening

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 34 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback C4 Court Lodge Farm 35 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 C4.1

C4.2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 34 35 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 36 37 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Upper Stour Valley USV2: Willsborough Dykes

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 36 37 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 17.09.04 Location: A2 Aylesford Green Map reference: TR029408 A2 Aylesford Green ctd.

Context: Brief description: Variable tract of underdeveloped urban fringe bordered by new development, railway Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley and slip roads. Regenerating scrub and grassland with historical moat and new bunded HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks and pastures pond to South. Native amenity planting

Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – asses the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of detracting features Landform Views Out TOPOGRAPHY Dominant Detractors: Intact Apparent Modified moat, Over railway to business park. South to Noise and light from surrounding transport corridors and new Interrupted Insignificant pond and slip road A2070 West to Ashford Market development especially A2070 Fragmented TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views In Apparent new planting and Fairly open Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Insignificant scrub regeneration wildlife? ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern PATTERN Apparent Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High Insignificant fairly intact patch of Some ditches with Juncus Unenclosed regenerating scrub with and Typha Moderate SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation wetland habitat (Moat LANDUSE Apparent Slip road, amenity Yes trees and new pond) Low Insignificant planting, moat, new bunded pond Intensity of land use Low Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Natural features Naturalised moat, grassland with scrub Species associations to change regeneration, urban fringe set-aside Thorn, planted oak, few oak and ash standards, rose, Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good yellow flag, nettle, willow herb variable newly planted Variable Farm type Primary Other regenerating regenerating with Poor few oak and ash standards Woodlands Heritage features Species Field Boundaries Good Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Variable Poor Other trees Heritage features Species remnant mature oak, scattered thorn Other features Moat needs management regime. Good regenerating New pond - less intense mowing would Variable Field Boundaries Heritage features Species improve ecological potential Poor Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Verges Other features Highways vernacular, character and sense of place Amenity/ wildflower mix along road and footpath Type Siting Design Extent High Buildings Villages Farmsteads Road, pond Fringe appropriate Moderate Low Other features Artificial bunded pond with amenity planting, fenced

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 38 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A2 Aylesford Green 39 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A2 Aylesford Green.1

3 A2 Aylesford Green.2

1 2

A2 Aylesford Green.3

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 38 39 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 30/09/04 Location: C1 South Willesborough Map reference: TR012405 C1 ctd.

Context: Brief description: Large parcel of low-lying mixed farmland predominantly grazing, traversed by new roads Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley and surrounded by new housing and industry and retail development of south Ashford. HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks and pastures East Stour and associated dykes criss-cross the area.

Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out detracting features Apparent A2042 on Filtered only to woodland above Park Detractors: Intact Insignificant embankment Farm to south; Ashford to north Noise, lighting, visual intrusion from roads and railway Interrupted TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Fragmented Apparent New planting along Often limited Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Insignificant roads wildlife? Key visual elements Pattern ENCLOSURE Dominant Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High PATTERN Apparent Dykes, streams and Fragmented by road and railway Some set aside but not East Stour and dykes. remnant hedges, Insignificant interlinked New roadside planting. Moderate Unenclosed some stock fencing. Remnant hedges. SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Low LANDUSE Apparent Settlement Intensity of land use Variable Insignificant – intermittent Unsettled though dense at Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability boundaries. Land to change use – road corridors and mixed farming Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Roadside and Very young or over Variable Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? remnant hedges or mature Poor river trees Natural features Ditches, rivers, streams Species associations Willow Field Boundaries Remnant hedges, some new planting, Good stock fencing Variable Farm type Primary Other Poor Grazing – sheep, cattle, horses Set aside and market gardening, some arable to Other features Good east of railway Variable Poor Woodlands Heritage features Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species vernacular, character and sense of place Oak, hawthorn, ash Type Siting Design Extent High Other trees Heritage features Species Moderate Roads Road on Good new Low Field Boundaries Heritage features Species including dual embankment planting Remnant hedges – highly variable from very Hawthorn, field maple, hazel, carriageway thick to very gappy blackthorn, rose etc. and clover junction Highways Verges Other features New roads and mown verges, footpaths All housing etc. and cycle lanes, concrete kerbs, lighting, outside parcel, extensive native planting but high impact Buildings Villages Farmsteads Few scattered houses Other features Road and rail dominant

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 40 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback C1 South Willesborough 41 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 C1.1

C1.2

C1.3

C1.4 2 5

C1.5

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 40 41 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback

Photograph locations/ direction ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 30/09/04 Location: C2 south of Stanhope Map reference: TR02400 C2 ctd.

Context: Brief description: Small parcel of set aside (originally part of larger parcel, now new housing) with Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley regenerating scrub, thick overgrown hedgerow and scattered oaks. HLT: 1.9 Small regular with straight boundaries Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? detracting features

TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Intact Apparent Filtered to housing Detractors: Interrupted Insignificant New road, lighting Fragmented

TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent Remnant hedgerow Open wildlife? Insignificant and new planting Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Set aside Hedge PATTERN Apparent Over mature hedge Not clear – parcel now very small due to Moderate Insignificant new planting south of Stanhope Unenclosed Low

SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Intensity of land use LANDUSE Apparent Set aside farmland Low, high for road Insignificant Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Unsettled to change Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Natural features Species associations Roadside and Young or very Variable remnant hedgerow mature Poor Farm type Primary Other trees Set aside Field Boundaries Thick and overgrown or new planting of Good Woodlands Heritage features Species hedgerow along road Variable Poor Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Some remnants Oak Other features Good Variable Other trees Heritage features Species Poor

Field Boundaries Heritage features b Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Thick hedge Hawthorn vernacular, character and sense of place

Highways Verges Other features Type Siting Design Extent High New roads – mown, footpath and cycle Oak, ash, field maple, Moderate+ track and new planting viburnum, hazel Local road On low lighting Low embankment Buildings Villages Farmsteads 1 or 2 scattered houses

Other features Naturalising set aside and regenerating scrub

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 42 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback C2 South of Stanhope 43 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 1

C2.1

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 42 43 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 30/09/04 Location: C3 north of Pound Lane Map reference: TQ999396 C3 ctd.

Context: Brief description: Small triangular shaped parcel to north of Pound Lane, set aside and sheep grazing Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley separated by well treed stream. HLT: 1.9 Small regular with straight boundaries Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? detracting features

TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Intact Apparent Housing to north, filtered to east Detractors: Interrupted Insignificant Housing along NW boundary, no screening Fragmented

TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent Strong trees along Restricted wildlife? Insignificant stream Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High Set aside, some scrub Stream and hedges ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern PATTERN Apparent Strong hedge north Small scale, N and W boundary replaced Moderate + Insignificant of lane. Stream by fence and housing Unenclosed Low Intensity of land use SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Low LANDUSE Apparent Grazing and set Insignificant aside Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Unsettled to change

Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Along stream and mature Variable Natural features Stream and strong tree line Species associations W corner near Poor Field maple, ash, hawthorn housing Farm type Primary Other Field Boundaries Stock fencing, hedges, stream and Good Grazing and set aside housing fence Variable Woodlands Heritage features Species Poor Other features Some scrub in set aside Good Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Variable Few relics Oak, ash Poor Other trees Heritage features Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local vernacular, character and sense of place Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Stream, hedge, stock fencing Type Siting Design Extent High Moderate+ Verges Other features Highways Housing, Needs Low Very good hedge to north Hawthorn, elder, ivy, bramble, although screening ash outside parcel – very weak edge Buildings Villages Farmsteads

Other features Small brick bridge over stream

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 44 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback C3 North of Pound Lane 45 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 C3.1

C3.2

2 1 3

C3.3

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 44 45 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 46 47 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Upper Stour Valley USV3: Waterbrook

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 46 47 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 17.09.04 Location: A2 Waterbrook Map reference: TR031401 A2 Waterbrook ctd.

Context: Brief description: Gently undulating open valley floor landscape, extensive tree, hedge and ditch Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley clearance, now predominantly arable with localised new development ( business centre HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks and pastures and gravel works) and former sidings. Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of TOPOGRAPHY Dominant Landform Views Out detracting features Apparent gently undulating North across A2070 to Ashford fringe Insignificant and North Downs, east across railway to Detractors: Intact Downs. West to Park Farm. Restricted Access rd to freight depot, with associated lighting. Gravel workings. Interrupted south due to tree cover. Obvious bund to East of access road Fragmented

TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views In Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent Stream side trees Open wildlife? Insignificant Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Restricted to small Unlinked ditches, gappy PATTERN Apparent remnant hedges Changed from small scale paddocks to patches. Some ponds. hedgerows Moderate Insignificant and ditches large arable with hedge clearance Former railway sidings with buddleia, alder, bramble Low SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation LANDUSE Apparent Gravel works next Crop Intensity of land use: High - arable dominant Insignificant to disused sidings, access road to Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability freight works and to change business centre, Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good otherwise arable Limited to remnant Varied Variable Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? ditches and Poor hedgerows Natural features Species associations Streams and ditches Field Boundaries Remnants Good Typha, teasel, alder, willow Variable Primary Other Farm type Poor Arable Set-aside Woodlands Heritage features Species Other features Ponds. Regenerating scrub to South with Good willow, poplar around ponds Variable Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Poor Thorn and Oak Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Other trees Heritage features Species vernacular, character and sense of place Type Siting Design Extent High Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Industrial and Fairly well Modern steel- Localised Moderate Remnant hedges and ditches road screened, clad shed Low Highways Verges Other features gravel works New access road to freight depot street lighting more obtrusive Buildings Villages Farmsteads Two new developments, industrial unit Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 48 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A2 Waterbrook 49 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A2 Waterbrook.1

1 A2 Waterbrook.3 2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 48 49 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2 Settlement/ Edge conditions Survey Date: 16/09/05 Reference: A5 Location: Freight Depot Surveyors: LE/AK Reference: A5

Study Segment: Cheeseman’s Green (Map ref: TR035396) Brief summary description of settlement/ edge conditions and its siting within the wider landscape: County Landscape Character Upper Stour Valley Secluded location at the end of spur from the A2070(T), set within farmland. Public Area: access restricted. Historic Landscape Type: 9.6 Post 1810 settlement (general) Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity Boundaries: A2 encloses A5 to N, W & S, A15 to E of the settlement and note any detracting features and their significance - Intact SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Interrupted BUILT FEATURES freight depot ancillary structures including security kiosks and lighting Fragmented Settlement integrity/ edge condition – how well does the settlement hold together TOPOGRAPHY Insignificant Landform flat Extent of settlement High TREE COVER Insignificant Key visual elements - native shrub planting to western edge Moderate FORM & LAYOUT Linear nuclear Clustered Low Sprawling Intensity of built form and trend AGE & Pre-war recent CONDITION Post-war 1960-70’s Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability 1980-1990’s to change Recent Local vernacular Survival of features and condition Good KEY FEATURES – in what way do the following contribute to the local distinctiveness of the - Variable settlement? Poor Building style Roof & materials/ scale Tree Cover Age structure Good - - Variable Poor

Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition Good Street Scene Frontage/ verge/ boundaries/ materials Planting/ signage/ lighting - Variable Poor - Other features - Good Variable Edge condition New housing Poor - Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local vernacular, character and sense of place Other features (include detractors) Type Siting Design Extent High -

PERCEPTION of the place – is it tranquil/ safe/ pleasant/ legible/ accessible? Moderate Secluded site, busy with lorries and restricted access to public Low

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 50 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A5 Waterbrook 51 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 50 51 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 52 53 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Upper Stour Valley USV4: East Stour Valley

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 52 53 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 21.09.04 (Amended 20.07.05) Location: A2 east of Flood Street Map reference: TR054385 A2 East of Flood St. ctd.

Context: Brief description: Large parcel of open, gently undulating valley bottom landscape formed by River Stour Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley and associated drains. Comprises mainly open arable, with some pasture (smaller scale) HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks and pastures to E. The field pattern has been largely lost through h’row + clearance in W. The tree cover is mainly restricted to the rivers and ditches. A key feature of the parcel is Evergate Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Mill and an ancient dam to the E, comprising a fine house with landscaped ponds. A local lane runs N t S through the E of the parcel with a notable fine h’row. CTRL has a TOPOGRAHY Landform Views Out moderate impact to Northern boundary. Apparent Gently undulating Across valley SW towards Colliers Hill, SE to Aldington church, N to Mersham Church Visual unity – asses the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of TREE COVER Key visual elements Views within detracting features Apparent Intermittent mature Very open Detractors: trees along river. CTRL corridor to N boundary partially visible and clearly audible, Interrupted Trees at Evergate Mill hedgerow and ditch clearance very evident. to E ENCLOSURE Key visual elements Pattern Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for PATTERN Insignificant Extensive clearance of Very large scale to west, smaller scale to wildlife? hedges and ditches. east Fine h’row along lane Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors to E Some area of rough River, ditches and CTRL Low – moderate – locally SETTLEMENT & Key visual elements Seasonal variation pasture impact waterways. LANDUSE Apparent Arable, some pasture With crop Insignificant to east. Evergate Mill and Dam, heritage Intensity of land use: feature High Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to change Natural features River and knoll, land rising to CTRL Species associations Sedge, iris, , purple loosestrife, Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good meadowsweet, typha, Relics and along Mainly mature sparganium, dragonflies river Farm type Primary Other Arable Pasture Field Boundaries Loss of h’row and ditch clearance. Fine Woodlands Heritage features Species h’row along lane to E Variable Small copse to W of embankment Ash Other features Evergate Mill and Dam Good Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Very occasional h’row trees, trees around Oak and ash, white willow, alder Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Evergate Mill vernacular, character and sense of place Other trees Heritage features Species Type Siting Design Extent Riverside – not continuous but strong visually Ash and willow CTRL bridges To N boundary Functional Noise and Moderate Field Boundaries Heritage features Species some visual Ditches, gappy h’rows Fine high h’row along lane Dogwood, blackthorn, hazel, ash, impact to S of Evergate Mill f. maple, oak, rose Highways Verges Other features Local lane to E with well treed – high h’row

Buildings Villages Farmsteads CTRL to boundary Evergate Mill and ancient dam

Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 54 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A2 East of Flood Street 55 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A2 East of Flood St.1

Photograph locations/ direction

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 54 55 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 21.09.04 Location: A2 Swanton Mill Map reference: TR042392 A2 Swanton Mill ctd.

Context: Brief description: Large L-shaped parcel of drained valley floor, bisected by River Stour and tributaries, now Kent Landscape Character Area: Upper Stour Valley large arable fields, dominated by Swanton Mill to south and Swanton Court to centre, HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks and pastures pollarded willow along river Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of detracting features TOPOGRAPHY Dominant Landform Views Out Intact Apparent Mainly flat, gentle Open in all directions Detractors: Interrupted Insignificant rise to south of Power line to east of Swanton Mill, evident hedge and ditch Fragmented Conscience Farm clearance TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent Follows River Stour Open across arable wildlife? Insignificant and tributaries, Swanton Mill Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High farmstead Limited to carr north of River and tributaries, Swanton Mill ditches Moderate ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern PATTERN Apparent Hedge and ditch Very large rectilinear Low - moderate Insignificant clearance evident Unenclosed Intensity of land use: SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Mainly very high - arable LANDUSE Apparent Arable, Swanton Mill Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Insignificant farmstead Unsettled to change Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Along riverside and Mixed in carr but Variable Natural features Dry pond, River Stour and tributary Species associations Swanton Mill very mature former Poor Alder, willow pollards along river Farm type Primary Other and ditches Arable Field Boundaries River and most ditches recently dredged. Good Woodlands Heritage features Species To north of Swanton Mill Poplar, birch, ash, willow carr Few hedges gappy and trimmed. Variable Poor Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Scattered Willow Other features Swanton Mill – newly refurbished Good Other trees Heritage features Species Variable Garden trees at Swanton Mill Poor Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Ditches Blackthorn, hawthorn Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Highways Other features vernacular, character and sense of place Type Siting Design Extent High Buildings Villages Farmsteads th Swanton Mill – 16 Century? Moderate Farmhouse and newly restored former mill Low Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 56 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A2 Swanton Mill 57 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A2 Swanton.2

A2 Swanton.1 A2 Swanton.3

A2 Swanton.4 A2 Swanton.5

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 56 57 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 17.09.04 Location: A13 Denne Map reference: TR045388 A13 Denne ctd.

Context: Brief description: Small area of gently rolling improved grassland and farmstead bordering E. R.Stour, Kent Landscape Character Area: Upper Stour Valley remnant hedges and important hedgerow trees HLT: 1.15 Small rectilinear with wavy boundaries Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? detracting features

TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Detractors: Intact Apparent Gently rolling South to Colliers Hill, West to A2 Captains local power lines and distant noise from M20 Interrupted Insignificant Wood, E to Flood St, tree cover Fragmented TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent Localised along North to Stour and White Hook Farm. wildlife? Insignificant river, road dyke and Open, central knoll hedge boundaries Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High No patches River corridors remnant ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern hedges and dykes Moderate PATTERN Apparent Remnant hedge Insignificant and dyke, signs of Low hedgerow removal and drainage Intensity of land use: Moderate SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability LANDUSE Apparent Farm cluster and to change Insignificant improved grassland silage Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good localised and mature Variable Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? intermittent Poor Natural features Species associations Field Boundaries Remnants are good Good Variable Farm type Primary Other Poor Improved grassland and farm, orchard Other features Farmstead and row of cottages on Flood St Good Woodlands Heritage features Species Variable Poor Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Scattered and intermittent Ash, willow, alder, elm Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local vernacular, character and sense of place Other trees Heritage features Species Orchard and ornamentals near farm Lime, oak, ash, poplar, elm Type Siting Design Extent High Moderate Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Low Remnant hedges and dykes Thorn and Damson

Highways Verges Other features

Buildings Villages Farmsteads Wall and cottages on Flood St Recent new build, brick

Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 58 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A13 Denne 59 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A13 Denne.1

A13 Denne.2

2 1 3

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 58 59 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2 Settlement/ Edge conditions Survey Date: 16/09/05 Reference: A18 Location: The Forstal Surveyors: LE/AK Reference: A18

Study Segment: Cheeseman’s Green (Map ref: TR050392) Brief summary description of settlement/ edge conditions and its siting within the wider landscape: County Landscape Character Upper Stour Valley Southern part of Mersham village containing the Forstal, the village school (turn of th th Area: 20 century), a 17 century pub the Farriers Arms, a water mill, a post 70s barn and Historic Landscape Type: 9.7 Village/ hamlet 1810 extent outbuildings, the Mountbatten Hall, post war houses including bungalows, older cottages adjacent to, and blighted by the CTRL. The area is surrounded by 2-3m high mixed Boundaries: A17 to N, A2 to W, A32, A2 & A19 to S, B10 & B5 to N species agricultural hedges and has village scale. A tall stand of poplars is a distinctive feature on the border with parcel A17. SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements BUILT FEATURES Bungalows and older cottages, The Farriers Arms - 17th Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity century pub, farm seed depot, village school, watermill, post of the settlement and note any detracting features and their significance 1970’s Mountbatten Hall Rural village scale, with dispersed houses typical of the Weald. Intact TOPOGRAPHY Dominant Landform Interrupted Steep slope rising to northeast Fragmented

TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Settlement integrity/ edge condition – how well does the settlement hold together Mature sycamores, pine, ash with hedgerow to one side of lane Extent of settlement Facing onto the High convergence of rural FORM & LAYOUT Linear lanes from Flood Street Moderate and Jemmett’s Farm and AGE & Pre-war A mix of ages crossing over the CTRL Low CONDITION Post-war 1960-70’s Intensity of built form and trend th th 1980-1990’s Mixed ages from 16 to 20 century, closely knit village scale – i.e. medium density Recent Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability KEY FEATURES – in what way do the following contribute to the local distinctiveness of the to change settlement? Local vernacular Survival of features and condition Good Building style Roof & materials/ scale Pub and Mill are older buildings, school is Variable A mix of building styles: th turn of 20 century Poor - Victorian brick village school - Mountbatten Hall – post 1970’s brick Tree Cover Age structure Good with roof hip Mixed Variable - The Farriers Arms – white shiplap Poor

Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition Good Frontage/ verge/ boundaries/ materials Planting/ signage/ lighting Street Scene Where apparent Narrow street with footpath and hedge to Discrete 4m high lighting and Variable one side telegraph poles Poor

Edge condition New housing Other features CTRL crosses under road, high parapet Good N/A walls obscure views. Variable Poor Other features CTRL in cutting crosses northern edge of (include detractors) parcel - noise Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local vernacular, character and sense of place

PERCEPTION of the place – is it tranquil/ safe/ pleasant/ legible/ accessible? Type Siting Design Extent High Busy rural village with random architectural style and mix of residential, school, pub etc in close Bungalow onto road 60s/70s discrete proximity to the noisy CTRL School Onto road Late Victorian / Arts discrete Moderate adjacent to CTRL & Crafts Low Mountbatten hall Set back from Post 1970s? hipped on edge of parcel road barn form, brick/ looking onto pasture hung tile with slate substitute tiles.

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 60 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A18 The Forstal 61 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A18.1

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 60 61 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 21.09.04 Location: A19 east of The Forstal Map reference: TR052391 A19 ctd.

Context: Brief description: Small parcel bordering CTRL to north, Mersham School to west, Stour tributary to south, A2 Kent Landscape Character Area: Upper Stour Valley to east. Now very open arable, knoll to north, small relic copse to east, remnant ditches HLT: 1.15 Small rectilinear with wavy boundaries and hedge to south and east. Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of detracting features TOPOGRAPHY Dominant Landform Views Out Apparent Knoll to north, falling View to Mersham Church to north, across Fine views from knoll Intact Insignificant to south and east Stour Valley to SW, S and SE towards Interrupted Colliers Hill Detractors: Fragmented CTRL corridor, ditch and hedgerow clearance TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Apparent New planting along Open Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Insignificant CTRL and scattered wildlife? trees in relic copse and along R. Stour Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High tributary Relic copse CTRL corridor will improve as trees grow, ditches, river Moderate ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern PATTERN Apparent Hedgerows gone, Low- moderate Insignificant remnant ditches Unenclosed Intensity of land use: SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation High LANDUSE Apparent Arable and CTRL Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Insignificant boundary Unsettled to change Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Mixed in copse, Variable Natural features Knoll Species associations young along CTRL, Poor mature along river Farm type Primary Other Arable Field Boundaries Newly dredged ditch and river Good Variable Woodlands Heritage features Species Relic copse Hawthorn, hazel, ash, field Poor maple, oak Other features Good Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Variable very scattered poplar Poor

Other trees Heritage features Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Riverside trees willow, ash vernacular, character and sense of place

Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Type Siting Design Extent High Ditch Juncus, yellow flag, willowherb Grain silo Functional Discrete Moderate Highways Verges Other features CTRL bridges Type I CTRL access track for footpath New planting including Low hawthorn, field maple, oak

Buildings Villages Farmsteads

Other features CTRL corridor and bridges

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 62 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A19 East of The Forstal 63 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A19.1

A19.2 2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 62 63 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 23.09.04 Location: A25 North Mersham Sports Ground Map reference: TR047384 A25 Sports Ground ctd.

Context: Brief description:

Kent LCA: Upper Stour valley Small village sports ground (cricket and football) next to Flood St, South of The Forstal HLT: 1.9 Small regular with straight boundaries and strong tree lined boundary, especially to South and East Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of detracting features TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Apparent North to Mersham ridge Mersham ridge to North, Stour Valley to East, Aldington ridge to South Intact Insignificant Occasional filtered views to East West and sheep grazing and Colliers hill to West. Interrupted and South Fragmented Detractors: TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views In Powerline Apparent Along parcel Open Insignificant boundaries Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for wildlife? ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern PATTERN Apparent Ditch along Flood St, Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High Insignificant Hedge and ditch to New planting will grow into Ditch and hedgerow North & East, Fence small copses boundaries Moderate to South Low SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation LANDUSE Apparent Recreation ground Intensity of land use Insignificant and club house and High parking Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? to change

Natural features Species associations Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Along boundaries Mixed Variable Farm type Primary Other Poor Field Boundaries Gappy hedge to North Good Heritage features Species Woodlands Variable Poor Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species To North, East and South Oak, willow, ash and Other features Good sycamore Variable Poor Other trees Heritage features Species Small plantations in corner and along Pollard willows, verge and Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local western boundary ditches vernacular, character and sense of place

Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Type Siting Design Extent High Club house Moderate Highways Verges Other features and floodlights Low Flood St Buildings Villages Farmsteads Shiplap and flat roof

Other features Asphalt parking Small timber playground white post and metal rail fence

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 64 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A25 North Mersham Sports Ground 65 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A25 SportGd.1

A25 SportGd.2 2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 64 65 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 21.09.04 Location: A31 Moat and context Map reference: TR039393 A31 ctd.

Context: Brief description: Small discrete parcel comprising a single paddock and pond surrounded on three Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley sides by ditches (two are wide and holding water). Tree cover is localised to pond and HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks and pastures northern boundary. Historic link to ruin in A16? Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of TOPOGRAPHY Dominant Landform Views Out detracting features Apparent Flat Open across arable to east, west and Insignificant south, restricted due to trees to north Intact Detractors: Interrupted TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within No major detractors, likely hedge clearance along western Fragmented Apparent Clustered around Open through paddock Insignificant Swanton Court, boundary, ditch clearance along southern boundary pond, ruin and northern boundary Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for ditch wildlife? ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High PATTERN Apparent Hedge and ditches, Small scale Pond and species rich Strong boundaries Insignificant wire fence grassland Moderate Unenclosed SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements b Low LANDUSE Apparent Swanton Court, ruin, Intensity of land use: Insignificant moat and paddock Unsettled Low Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to change Species associations Natural features Pond Extent Age structure Alder, white poplar, poplar, Tree Cover Good Phragmites, horse chestnut, Around pond and Mature along Variable elder, Leylandii northern boundary northern, mixed Poor and regeneration Farm type Primary Other at pond Species rich permanent grassland Woodlands Heritage features Species Field Boundaries Hedge overgrown to south, trimmed Good to east, hedge gone to west – just Variable herbaceous over fence and bramble. Poor Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Oak, ash, elm, sycamore, Newly cleared ditch to west. hornbeam, field maple, blackthorn, damson, Other features Neglected pond – valuable ecologically Good hawthorn, hazel Variable Poor Other trees Heritage features Species Garden trees at Swanton Court White poplar, alder, apple Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Field Boundaries Heritage features Species vernacular, character and sense of place Wide ditches and hedges Hawthorn, bramble, Phragmites Type Siting Design Extent High

Highways Other features Moderate

Buildings Villages Farmsteads Low

Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 66 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A31 Moat and context 67 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A31.1

A31.2

3 1

Photograph locations/ direction

A31.7

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 66 67 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 21.09.04 Location: A32 Flood Street Map reference: TR048388 A32 ctd.

Context: Brief description: Very distinctive linear parcel south of the Forstal along Flood Street giving a fine approach Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley to Mersham village. Characterised by deep ditches, mown verges, pollarded willows HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous Valley Bottom paddocks and pastures and a raised walkway. Separates farmland of A2 to east and west. (Note: parcel is not a separate HLT) Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out detracting features Apparent Across A2 to east, through trees south of Insignificant the Denne to west Detractors: Intact Sycamore Interrupted TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Fragmented Apparent Pollarded willows Linear along Flood Street Insignificant Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for wildlife? ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern PATTERN Apparent N/a Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High Insignificant Ditches (newly dredged) Unenclosed and willows Moderate

SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Low LANDUSE Apparent Raised road and Insignificant footpath, steep Intensity of land use: Unsettled ditches High Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distictiveness? Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to change Natural features Species associations Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Farm type Primary Other Linear along road Over mature Variable Poor Woodlands Heritage features Species Field Boundaries Good Variable Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Poor

Other trees Heritage features Species Other features Ditches Good Pollarded willow Sycamore, Horse chestnut Variable Poor Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Highways Verges Other features vernacular, character and sense of place Mown, raised walkway Type Siting Design Extent High Buildings Villages Farmsteads Moderate Other features Deep ditch on both sides, bench in poor repair Low

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 68 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A32 Flood Street 69 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A32.1

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 68 69 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 70 71 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Upper Stour Valley USV5: Ruckinge Dyke

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 70 71 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 22.09.04 Location: A2 South Willesborough Map reference: TR021402 A2 South Willesborough ctd.

Context: Brief description: Small rectangular parcel bisected by A2070 dual carriageway on embankment. Kent LCA: Old Romney Shoreline Wooded Farmlands Consists of open flat arable farmland to South, and smaller paddocks with sheep to HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks and pastures North. Bordered to East by East Stour R. North by urban fringe, open farmland to West Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? and South Visual unity – asses the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of TOPOGRAPHY Dominant Landform Views Out Apparent Arable to South, To south partially restricted through tree detracting features Insignificant pasture to North belts and overgrown hedgerows Detractors: Intact TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views In North and south compartments each relatively intact but major visual Interrupted Apparent Along Rd Open and ecological barrier of road. A2070 dual carriageway, urban fringe Fragmented Insignificant embankment and to North outside parcel but impacts of lighting and noise field boundaries ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for PATTERN Apparent Ditches and hedges Large arable, rectilinear to South smaller wildlife? Insignificant to South. post and grazing paddocks to North rail to North Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High Woodland belt on River to East, hedges and SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation embankment both sides of ditches Moderate LANDUSE Apparent Road Insignificant Arable to South dual carriageway Unsettled Pasture to North Low

Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Intensity of land use: High

Natural features Species associations Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to change Farm type Primary Other Arable to South pasture to North Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Linear All around 15yrs on Variable Woodlands Heritage features Species embankment new Strip along both sides of road embankment, Oak, willow, field maple, ash, Poor linear hornbeam, birch planting in North section Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Pollarded willow to East of South section and Oak dominant to south ,willow Field Boundaries Good stock fencing to North, overgrown Good North of northern section along dyke to east hedgerows Variable - good Other trees Heritage features Species Poor Four blocks of fenced screen tree planting to Willow, poplar East of North section Other features Good Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Variable Hedge and Ditch to South. Post and wire to Hawthorn, bramble to west of Poor North (barbed wire) both sections Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Highways Verges Other features Wooded strip on embankment, paved Dual carriageway vernacular, character and sense of place verge, small mown strip Footpath running either side Type Siting Design Extent High along the toe of embankment Dual On Well planted Continuous Moderate Buildings Study Sector Farmsteads carriageway; embankment embankments east to West Low

Other features Housing to 3 storey town Changes North New urban houses character of edge parcel

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 72 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A2 South Willesborough 73 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A2 S Willesborough.1

A2 S Willesborough.2

2 3

A2 S Willesborough.3

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 72 73 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 16.09.04 Location: A3 Bilham Farm Map reference: TR022494 A3 Bilham Farm ctd.

Context: Brief description: North West tip of gently undulating Aldington Ridge, Stour valley to East and West, Kent LCA: Old Romney Shoreline Wooded Farmlands Ashford ring Rd and fringe to North. Open mixed arable farmland, scattered hedgerow HLT: 1.6 Rectilinear with wavy boundaries trees, gappy hedges, with Bilham farmstead to South of parcel Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of detracting features TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Apparent Very gently North to Ashford market and North Detractors: Intact Insignificant undulating low ridge downs, east to M20, West to park farm, Ashford fringe and ring rd clearly apparent, noise and light pollution Interrupted dividing Stour valley SW to wooded ridge as well as visual impact Fragmented TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent Clustered poplar Open wildlife? Insignificant and standard Oak near farm, scattered Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High Gappy hedges to East hedgerow trees Pond and brambles mainly continuous to west Moderate ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern around farm. Some PATTERN Apparent Gappy hedgerow Rectilinear wavy boundaries, large fields unused barns Low Insignificant stronger to West of parcel Intensity of land use: High

SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability LANDUSE Apparent Farmstead and Crop to change Insignificant mixed arable Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Scattered Mature Variable hedgerow trees Poor Natural features Pond Species associations some near farm Pollarded willow, dragonflies Field Boundaries Gappy to east, better and thicker to west Good Farm type Primary Other Variable Mixed arable Some pasture Poor Woodlands Heritage features Species Other features Farmstead. Farmhouse and cottages in Good Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species good condition. large area derelict and Variable Scattered Oak and willow unused Poor Other trees Heritage features Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Poplar, small group of willows vernacular, character and sense of place at pond Type Siting Design Extent High Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Ashford fringe Moderate hedges, ditches Blackthorn, bramble, and ring rd Outside parcel Low hawthorn, field maple, but visible sycamore

Highways Verges Other features Access track, wide verge Buildings Villages Farmsteads Brick farm house, concrete barns and Late 18th C brick farmhouse, cottages recent cottages

Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 74 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A3 Bilham Farm 75 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A3.1

A3.2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 74 75 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 23.09.04 Location: A10 Cheeseman’s Green Map reference: TR030384 A10 ctd.

Context: Brief description: Large, highly variable horseshoe shaped parcel, dominated by open arable fields with Kent LCA: Old Romney Shoreline Wooded Farmlands tall hedges and abundant standards. Two blocks of probably ancient semi-natural oak- HLT: 1.7 Irregular straight boundaries hornbeam woodland and a semi-improved grassland with rush immediately south of Captain’s Wood. Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out detracting features Apparent Gently undulating Panoramic east to Colliers Hill, N to Insignificant Captain’s Wood Detractors: Intact Road – traffic and noise, occasional power lines Interrupted TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views In Fragmented Apparent 2 blocks of oak Open, restricted in places by hedgerows Insignificant woodland. High Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for hedgerows with wildlife? mature standards. Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Set aside, pond at Gill High hedgerows PATTERN Apparent Mature trees Irregular, mainly large Farm, 2 woodland blocks, Moderate Insignificant and hedges, small semi-improved paddocks/gardens grassland Low around Gill Farm Intensity of land use SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation High - moderate LANDUSE Apparent Arable fields Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Insignificant dominant to change Extent Age structure Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Tree Cover Good 2 blocks, high mainly mature Variable hedgerows Natural features Species associations Poor Field Boundaries Hedgerows Good Farm type Primary Other Variable Arable Grazing pasture Poor Woodlands Heritage features Species 2 woodland blocks, some veteran pollards Oak, hornbeam Other features Good Variable Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Poor Some veteran oak, hornbeam Other trees Heritage features Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Veteran oak pollard on boundary with A13 vernacular, character and sense of place Field Boundaries Heritage features Species N/A High hedgerows Hawthorn, field maple, Type Siting Design Extent High blackthorn, elm Moderate Highways Verges Other features Low Narrow grass, ditch Buildings Villages Farmsteads Gill Farm, Little Gill Farm Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 76 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A10 Cheeseman’s Green 77 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A10.3

3 A10.8 4

Photograph locations/ direction

A10.9

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 76 77 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 23.09.04 Location: A21 Bliby Corner Map reference: TR025379 A21 Bliby Corner ctd.

Context: Brief description: Lowland mixed farmland, arable and cattle grazing. Relic remnant hedges, intermittent Kent LCA: Old Romney Shoreline Wooded Farmlands hedgerow trees, filtered views towards Ashford. HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks and pastures Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? detracting features

TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Detractors: Intact Apparent North to Ashford, restricted West and Hedge remnants to South Interrupted Insignificant South by trees, filtered east to Colliers Hill Fragmented TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent wildlife? Insignificant Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High Key visual elements Pattern ENCLOSURE Dominant Relic non-continuous Apparent Hedge remnants PATTERN hedges better in NE corner Insignificant and stock Moderate

SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Low LANDUSE Apparent Cattle pasture and Insignificant arable Intensity of land use: Unsettled Moderate Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to change Natural features Species associations Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Farm type Primary Other Hedgerows Mainly Mature Variable Arable and stock farming Poor Woodlands Heritage features Species Field Boundaries Barbed wire, very gappy relic hedges to Good South better to North East Variable Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Oak and thorn Poor

Other trees Heritage features Species Other features Good Variable Poor Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Real relic thorn and stock fencing Goat willow, hazel, thorn and Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local blackthorn vernacular, character and sense of place

Highways Verges Other features Type Siting Design Extent High Grass Moderate Buildings Villages Farmsteads Low

Other features Water troughs, cattle pen

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 78 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A21 Bliby Corner 79 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A21 Bliby.1

A21 Bliby.2 2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 78 79 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 16.09.04 Location: A21 East of A2070 and Finn Farm Map reference: TR020384 A21 East of Finn Farm ctd.

Context: Brief description: Gently undulating arable farm land, large fields some fragmented ditches/hedges, Kent Landscape Character Area: Upper Stour Valley some strong tree belts and distinctive low knoll in otherwise open and rather featureless HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks and pastures landscape. Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of detracting features TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Apparent Low knoll and very North to Ashford fringe and north downs. Detractors: Intact Insignificant gently undulating East to colliers Hill. South to old Romney A2070 (Noise but very well screened along boundary) Interrupted shoreline wooded farmlands Fragmented TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent Strong tree belt Otherwise open wildlife? Insignificant along lane and top of Church Hill west of Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High knoll Strong linear woodland along some roads, gappy Moderate ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern hedges and ditches, dry PATTERN Apparent Varied hedges: thin large fields pond. Low Insignificant and gappy to well wooded b High drained ditches

SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability LANDUSE Apparent Arable Yes to change Insignificant Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Localised Mixed Variable Poor Natural features Low knoll Species associations Field Boundaries Gappy Good Variable Farm type Primary Other Arable Poor Woodlands Heritage features Species Other features Good N/A Variable Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Poor occasional Poplar, oak, Thorn, Hornbeam, Cherry, Ash, Field Maple, Hazel Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local vernacular, character and sense of place Other trees Heritage features Species Type Siting Design Extent High Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Moderate Ditches and hedges Hawthorn, Blackthorn Low

Highways Verges Other features Hedges or trees no verges

Buildings Farmsteads

Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 80 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A21 East of A2070 and Finn Farm 81 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A21 Finn.1

A21 Finn.3 2

Photograph locations/ direction A21 Finn.2 A21 Finn.4

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 80 81 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 24.09.04 Location: A21 South (North of Brisley Farm) Map reference: TR017373 A21 south ctd.

Context: Brief description:

Kent LCA: Old Romney Shoreline Wooded Farmlands Small Parcel adjacent to A2070 and southern tip of larger parcel HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks & pastures. Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? detracting features

TOPOGRAHY Dominant landform Views Out Detractors: Intact Apparent Very restricted Noise from A2070, but pretty well screened visually by trees Interrupted Insignificant Fragmented

TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent Hedgerow and Open wildlife? Insignificant ditch-side trees Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Streams and hedges but PATTERN Apparent Some hedgerow Large and regular not continuous Moderate Insignificant clearance Low - moderate SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation LANDUSE Apparent Arable and sheep Intensity of land use: Insignificant High Unsettled Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to change Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Mature Variable Species associations Natural features Poor

Farm type Primary Other Field Boundaries Hedges gappy to West Good Arable and sheep Sheep to south Variable Poor Woodlands Heritage features Species Other features Good Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Variable Along stream and boundary Oak, Hornbeam Poor Other trees Heritage features Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local vernacular, character and sense of place Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Hedge stream, ditches Rose, Thorn Type Siting Design Extent High A2070 Well screened Noise Moderate Highways Verges Other features Low

Buildings Villages Farmsteads

Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 82 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A21 South (North of Brisley Farm) 83 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A21S.1

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 82 83 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 24.09.04 Location: A21 south of Bilham Farm Map reference: TR024389 A21 south of Bilham Fm ctd.

Context: Brief description: Triangular-shaped parcel S of Bilham Farm, arable, flat, mainly strong hedges and Kent LCA: Old Romney shoreline wooded farmlands hedgerow trees, open views west to Park Farm, filtered through trees to east and south, HLT: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottom paddocks and pastures Captain’s wood edge to north. Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of detracting features TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Apparent Track to Bilham Farm to north; views to Detractors: Intact Insignificant Park Farm to west; filtered views across Park Farm Interrupted farmland to south and east Farm barn Fragmented TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent Hedgerow trees and open wildlife? Insignificant woodland edge of A10 Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High Strong ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Moderate PATTERN Apparent hedges and fence medium - large Insignificant on lane Low

SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Intensity of land use: LANDUSE Apparent Insignificant single High (LU) barn on edge of Bilham Farm; Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Arable to change Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Variable Natural features Species associations Poor Field Boundaries Gappy in places Good Farm type Primary Other Arable Variable Poor Woodlands Heritage features Species Other features Good Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Variable east and south boundaries willow, oak Poor Other trees Heritage features Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Field Boundaries Heritage features b vernacular, character and sense of place hedge Thorn, Blackthorn Type Siting Design Extent High Verges Other features Moderate Highways Edge of farm Functional short section of footpath Barn Low

Buildings Villages Farmsteads 1 modern barn

Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 84 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A21 South of Bilham Farm 85 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A21 Bilham.1

2 A21 Bilham.2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 84 85 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 24.09.04 Location: A22 North - Near Brockmans Farm Map reference: TR022376 A22 north ctd.

Context: Brief description: Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley HLT: 1.9 Small regular with straight boundaries (parliamentary type enclosure) Small parcel of open arable farmland, extensive hedgerow clearing to North and West Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of detracting features TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Apparent Flat Limited Detractors: Intact Insignificant Hedgerow clearance Interrupted Fragmented TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Apparent Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Insignificant wildlife?

ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High PATTERN Apparent Strong to South, Not continuous Insignificant especially at Moderate woodland corner, hedges cleared to Low West and North Intensity of land use: SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation High LANDUSE Apparent Arable Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Insignificant to change Unsettled Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? On South Mature Variable Natural features Species associations boundary 2 mature Poor Oaks and Ash Primary Other Farm type Field Boundaries Gappy to North, reasonable to West Good Arable Variable Woodlands Heritage features Species Poor Other features Good Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Variable Intermittent oak standards Poor Other trees Heritage features Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local vernacular, character and sense of place Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Thorn and Bramble, post and wire Type Siting Design Extent High Highways Verges Other features Moderate To edge Low

Buildings Villages Farmsteads

Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 86 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A22 North-Near Brockmans Farm 87 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A22N.1

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 86 87 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 01/10/04 Location: C17 north of Steeds Lane Map reference: TR015380 C17 ctd.

Context: Brief description: Small, triangular parcel to west of A2070 consisting of a fish pond complex to the south Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley and grazing pastures to the north and west with strong boundary hedgerow with HLT: 1.9 Small regular with straight boundaries standards Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the significance of detracting features TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Apparent Restricted around fishing ponds; in Detractors: Intact Insignificant north of parcel views N, E and W across Modern development to S around fishponds; A2070 to east Interrupted farmland, A2070 also to E Fragmented Key visual elements Views within TREE COVER Dominant Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Strong hedgerows More open to north, enclosed around Apparent wildlife? Insignificant fishponds Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern High Ponds High hedgerows PATTERN Apparent Small field pattern to north, lost around Insignificant fishponds Moderate Unenclosed Low SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation LANDUSE Apparent House to south, Intensity of land use Insignificant fishponds then Low - moderate Unsettled pasture to north Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? to change Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Species associations Natural features Ponds Hedges and Some willow Willow, emergent/marginal Variable around ponds regeneration, aquatics Poor mainly mature Farm type Other elsewhere Pasture Woodlands Heritage features Species Field Boundaries Hedges Good Variable Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Poor Oak, ash Other features Good Other trees Heritage features Species Variable Leylandii, Picea Poor Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Hedge Hawthorn, field maple, elder, Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local elm vernacular, character and sense of place Highways Verges Other features Type Siting Design Extent High Moderate Residential Fairly well Buildings Villages Farmsteads Low South of fish ponds and angling screened buildings Other features Fishponds and intensively mown lawn

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 88 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback C17 North of Steeds Lane 89 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 C17.1

2 C17.5

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 88 89 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 01/10/04 Location: C18 E of Sticket Wood Map reference: TR01376 C18 ctd.

Context: Brief description: Very small parcel of very gently undulating mixed farmland consisting of sheep grazed Kent LCA: Upper Stour Valley pasture and small arable section to south. Bounded to the east by the A2070, which HLT: 1.15 Small rectilinear with wavy boundaries impacts strongly, and to south and west by Sticket Wood and its remnants. Aesthetics – what is your overall impression of this area? Visual unity – assess the overall unity of the landscape and note the signifi cance of detracting features TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views Out Apparent Very gently North and east, fi ltered through trees. Detractors: Intact Insignifi cant undulating Noise and visual impact of A2070 Interrupted Fragmented TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within Apparent Hedgerow to N, new Open Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Insignifi cant planting screening wildlife? A2070 Extent of semi-natural habit Ecological corridors High ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Shallow ditch, gappy PATTERN Apparent Hedgerow, stock Small scale, now straight boundaries hedgerow better to north Moderate Insignifi cant fence along road Unenclosed Low

SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Intensity of land use LANDUSE Apparent Sheep pasture, Moderate Insignifi cant arable to south Unsettled Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to change Key characteristics – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Tree Cover Extent Age structure Good Boundaries Mature hedges, Natural features Species associations Variable new screening Poor along part of Farm type Primary Other Pasture Arable A2070

Woodlands Heritage features Species Field Boundaries Hedgerows, stock fencing, ditch Good b Poor Hedgerow trees Heritage features Species Oak, willow, ash Other features Good Other trees Heritage features Species Variable Poor Field Boundaries Heritage features Species Hedge and ditch, Hornbeam, hawthorn, Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local blackthorn vernacular, character and sense of place

Highways Verges Other features Type Siting Design Extent High A2070 Screened to Moderate Buildings Villages Farmsteads north of parcel Low only Other features

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 90 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback C18 East of Sticket Wood 91 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 C18.1

C18.2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 90 91 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 92 93 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Upper Stour Valley USV6: Great Stour Valley

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 92 93 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2 Survey Date: 14/7/05 Reference: E1/E4 Location: Great Stour Surveyors: MG Reference: E1/E4 Development Area: Chilmington Brief summary description: County Landscape Character Upper Stour Valley Huge and sprawling parcel of valley floor farmland with scattered woodlands. River Great Stour flows through Area: parcel with locally high ecological interest although some loss of tree cover. The character of the parcel is interrupted by the dam and embankment although the associated lake adds some ecological value. Grazing Historic Landscape Type: 7.1 Miscellaneous valley bottoms, paddocks and pastures pasture dominates to the east of the embankment with often gappy/ remnant hedgerows giving an open feel. Urban fringe to the east is largely well screened, but railway impacts locally. Largely open arable to the west Boundaries: Ashford fringe to E, Chilmington to S, Godinton/ Hothfield to N; edge of of the embankment, although a number of woodlands gives a treed feel to the landscape. Seasonal pond at study area at Pluckley to W Egg Hole to the N is shrouded in willow scrub. The private woodlands to the N appear wet, with large stands of poplar plantation evident in places. The usually insignificant topography is more apparent to the NW, offering TOPOGRAPHY Insignificant Landform Views out (long/short/restricted) fine long views down the valley. The parcel is crossed by a number of local lanes, often with strong hedgelines Mainly flat valley floor, Some long glimpses north (contrasting to internal boundaries). Notable built features include Bucksford Manor to the SE (now a complex more apparent to NW of private houses) and Swinford Manor to the centre (now a school with associated playing fields). Both areas TREE COVER Apparent Key visual elements Views within (filtered/framed/open/restricted) have mature trees in the vicinity. woodland block to N, often open across valley floor trees remaining along Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity river valley. Insignificant of the landscape and note any detracting features and their significance to SE. Continuity of valley floor landscape interrupted by dam & embankment. Mainly grazing Interrupted ENCLOSURE Apparent Key visual elements Pattern and scale pasture to east of dam & arable to west. Urban fringe and railway impacts to E. PATTERN Stock fencing, hedgerows Large open arable & often grazing pasture. Some along lanes,variable smaller paddocks. Generally more enclosed feel internal hedgerows to NW due to woodlands Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for SETTLEMENT & Insignificant Key visual elements Pattern wildlife? BUILT FEATURES Bucksford Manor to SE & isolated Swinford Manor School Extent of semi-natural habitat and Ecological corridors and Highly variable. Urban edge to far E patches networks High in woodlands and along well Brown Mill to N Grazing pasture wet in places River & drains/ streams of valley treed river corridor. Low in arable. Moderate in pasture. LANDUSE Apparent Key visual elements Seasonal variation (rush). Lake and wet pasture near bottom landscape. Some Grazing & cattle With crops and deciduous trees embankment. Rough grassland mature trees along river corridor to S of Paddock farm with mature especially to the NW. Hedgerows KEY CHARACTERISTICS – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? trees and woodland blocks. variable – better to NW. Intensity of land use and habitat trend Natural features Rivers/ knolls/ ponds Species associations River Great Stour & tributaries/ offshoots/ drains. Egg Hole Goat willow, willow, alder, iris. Very variable. Generally low intensity grazing and high intensity arable. (natural pond - dry in summer) and associated woodland – mature & regen. goat willow, hornbeam, ash, oak. Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to change Landuse/farm Primary Other Arable & pasture 50/50 Arable to E near housing & to W of dam. type Sheep grazing & rough pasture to east (small strip of currently Cattle grazing to SE. Sports pitches and Tree Cover Age structure Good ungrazed pasture to S of Paddock Farm) Swinford Manor. Mainly mature in woodlands to N and in hedgerows, rivers and scattered throughout. Poplar plantation Woodlands Coppice/plantation Species where present is of even age. Some regeneration at Strip to E of dam – varied age – mainly maturing. 2 major blocks Ash, poplar, alder, hazel, sycamore, goat to N – Glebe Shaw, Rooting Alders & Brownmill Spinney. willow, lime, field maple. Egg Hole. Glebe Shaw – some young poplar plantation with oak & ash. Brownmill Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition Variable Spinney – mature ash , poplar plantation Only some continuous hedgerows, stock fence with goat & crack willow along river. variable. Hedgerows most valuable along lanes. Rooting alders – evident poplar plantation More intact to W but still not continuous. with some willows along river. Other features Good Tree cover Groups/linear/hedgerow/scattered/shelterbelt Species Scattered mature, some in hedges. New planting in strip to Oak, horse chestnut, ash, sycamore Variable SE. Many mature oak to E boundary with new housing. Linear Poor around lake near dam. Linear scattered mature trees to S of Paddock Farm. Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Field boundaries Hedges/ditches/stock fence/electric Species vernacular, character and sense of place Hedgerows and ditches along some lanes. Hedge (often gappy) Hawthorn, blackthorn, elder, hazel, field & stock fence to SE. Strong hedge along E boundary with new maple, ash, elm housing. High hedge to S of embankment. Type Siting Design Extent Low Urban fringe E boundary mainly well Highways and Major road/railway/local road/footpath/no public access Other features (such as tree-lined lanes) screened by Crossed by many local roads & footpaths. Railway to E. footpaths mature hedgerow trees Built features Villages/settlements/farms/churches/oasts Urban edge/pylons/masts/new housing Bucksford Manor to SE – complex of houses in mature trees- scots New urban edge to E is well screened in Local railway Crosses in S section Local impact pine, ash, sycamore, sweet chestnut. Swinford Manor – now places by mature oak along hedgerow. school. Some buildings in disrepair. Dam + Bisects parcel Interrupts character embankment Other features Mown embankment/ dam to N of Worten Mill – track along top well screened by high hedgerow to south. of parcel (such as moats) Associated lake used for fishing & wet pasture with rush, white willow, goat willow and poplar.

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 94 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback E1/E4 Great Stour 95 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 E1/E4.1

E1/E4.11

Photograph locations/ direction Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO License No LA077038 © Crown copyright. All rights reserved. Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 94 95 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Survey Date: 25.11.04 Reference: E2 Location: N of Great Chart Surveyors: AK/MG Reference: E2 ctd.

Study Sector: Chilmington Green (Map ref: TQ982426) Brief summary description:

County Landscape Character Upper Stour Valley Small parcel comprising a single medium sized largely flat arable field with isolated Area: mature oaks. Continuous hedgerows to perimeter, small oak woodland fragment to N Historic Landscape Type: 1.10 Medium regular with straight boundaries adjacent to railway. Suburban fringe to S. Major footpaths of Greensand Way and Stour Valley walk to E. Boundaries: E1 arable and playing fields of E3 to E, Great Chart and Ninnn Lane to S and W, over railway to E$ pasture to N Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity TOPOGRAPHY Dominant Landform Views out (long/short/restricted) of the landscape and note any detracting features and their significance Apparent flat valley floor medium, longer to E towards Ashford Insignificant Telegraph poles, suburban fringe Intact TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within (filtered/framed/open/restricted) Interrupted Apparent Isolated oaks, small open Fragmented Insignificant woodland strip to N Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern and scale wildlife? PATTERN Apparent Hedgerows, ditch Medium, regular Insignificant Extent of semi-natural habitat and Ecological corridors and High Unenclosed patches networks Moderate SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Tiny woodland Hedgerows, ditch BUILT FEATURES Apparent Low Insignificant Unsettled Intensity of land use and habitat trend High LANDUSE Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Apparent Arable Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Insignificant to change

KEY CHARACTERISTICS – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Tree Cover Age structure Good Mature Variable Rivers/ knolls/ ponds Species associations Natural features Poor

Landuse/farm Primary Other Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition Good type Arable Intact Variable Woodlands Coppice/plantation Species Poor Small woodland Oak Other features Good Tree cover Groups/linear/hedgerow/scattered/shelterbelt Species isolated mature oaks Oak, ash Variable Poor Field boundaries Hedges/ditches/stock fence/electric Species Hedge, ditch Hawthorn, bramble Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Highways and Major road/railway/local road/footpath/no public Other features (such as tree-lined vernacular, character and sense of place footpaths access lanes) Railway to N boundary, Greensand Way/ Type Siting Design Extent High Stour Valley Walk to E boundary, Ninn lane to W boundary Moderate Built features Villages/settlements/farms/churches/oasts Urban edge/pylons/masts/new housing Low Telegraph poles Other features (such as moats)

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 96 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback E2 North of Great Chart 97 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 E2.1

2 E2.2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 96 97 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2 Settlement/ Edge conditions Survey Date: 16/09/05 Reference: E3 Location: Playing Fields Surveyors: LE/ AK Reference: E3

Study Sector: Chilmington Green (Map ref: TQ985421) Brief summary description of settlement/ edge conditions and its siting within the wider landscape: County Landscape Character Upper Stour Valley Generally level ground straddling the road behind agricultural thorn hedges, access via Area: 5 bar gates. Elm in hedge suggests that pre 1970 these trees would have been a feature Historic Landscape Type: 9.6 Post 1810 settlement (general) of the landscape. Mown amenity grassland. North side is cricket pitch with pavilion, south side includes football pitch and pavilion. Individual trees include pollarded oak, limes etc. Boundaries: E1/E4 to N & E, E2 to W, E6 to S Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity SETTLEMENT & Unsettled Key visual elements of the settlement and note any detracting features and their significance BUILT FEATURES Two cricket pavilions with open playing fields Sports grounds contained within a bocage landscape Intact TOPOGRAPHY Insignificant Landform Interrupted flat Fragmented TREE COVER Apparent Key visual elements Settlement integrity/ edge condition – how well does the settlement hold together Mature lime, pollarded oak, poplars with mature native species mix hedgerows along roadside Extent of settlement High Discrete FORM & LAYOUT Linear Straddles the road Moderate Clustered Sprawling Low

AGE & 1960-70’s ? Intensity of built form and trend CONDITION N/A KEY FEATURES – in what way do the following contribute to the local distinctiveness of the Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability settlement? to change

Building style Roof & materials/ scale Local vernacular Survival of features and condition Good N/A N/A Variable Poor

Street Scene Frontage/ verge/ boundaries/ materials Planting/ signage/ lighting Tree Cover Age structure Good N/A mature pollard oak, limes and poplars Variable Poor

Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition Good Some loss of hedge field boundaries to N Variable Edge condition New housing side with post + wire fence N/A Poor Other features Pollarded oak in Football ground Good Other features - Variable (include detractors) Poor

PERCEPTION of the place – is it tranquil/ safe/ pleasant/ legible/ accessible? Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Pleasant setting although access onto busy main road difficult vernacular, character and sense of place Type Siting Design Extent High N/A Moderate

Low

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 98 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback E3 Playing Fields 99 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 E3.1

1 2

E3.2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 98 99 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback No access to site, so distant photo record only

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 100 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback E8 South of Swinford Manor 101 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 E8.1

E8.2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 100 101 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2 Survey Date: 14.7.05 Reference: G11 Location: Swinford Manor parkland Surveyors: AM/HM Reference: G11 Study Sector: Godinton (Map ref: TQ981436) Brief summary description: County Landscape Character Upper Stour Valley Medium sizes parcel enclosed by stockfence in North and undulating river stream in Area: south. Land is used for pasture and cow grazing. Stream has potentially high wildlife Historic Landscape Type: 10.1 value. Part of the river valley sloping towards south with open views within and beyond, framed by trees Boundaries: E1/4 to W, S, E. G10 to N. All are arable, with some pasture. Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity TOPOGRAPHY Landform Views out (long/short/restricted) of the landscape and note any detracting features and their significance Insignificant Mainly flat. Slight slope Long views across valley to open pasture/ towards S. Lower part, parkland/trees Long views to E and SE. Can see houses around singleton lake. Long Intact part of valley floor views inside. Houses belonging to Godinton Estate dominate in North TREE COVER Key visual elements Views within (filtered/framed/open/restricted) Apparent scattered mature Open Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for parkland trees. Larger wildlife? woodland in south and by rivers. Extent of semi-natural habitat and Ecological corridors and High ENCLOSURE Apparent Key visual elements Pattern and scale patches networks PATTERN Vegetation along vegetation and diverse Stream has high river and stock fence. structure banks along along ecological value and links the river corridor. Some to other parcels up and SETTLEMENT & Key visual elements Pattern deadwood down stream BUILT FEATURES Insignificant Houses belonging to Godinton Estate in north Intensity of land use and habitat trend LANDUSE Key visual elements Seasonal variation Low intensity on pasture Apparent Pasture parkland, Deciduous cattle grazed Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to change KEY CHARACTERISTICS – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Age structure Rivers/ knolls/ ponds Tree Cover Good Natural features Species associations Varied with mature scrub and young growth Great Stour River along south boundary. Fish, invertabraes, dragonflies, possibly bats, mammals Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition Good River makes strong boundary Landuse/farm Primary Other type Pasture, recreation and fishing. In countryside stewardship Other features scheme. Woodlands Coppice/plantation Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Wet woodland, Some patches along river Willow, oak, aspen, alder, vernacular, character and sense of place and in S. dogrose, rushes, sedges, water lilies, elder Type Siting Design Extent Tree cover Groups/linear/hedgerow/scattered/shelterbelt Species Pasture parkland, Linear tree cover along stream. (for Oak, ash, willow, beech, species see above, under woodland.) sycamore, scattered new planting. Field boundaries Hedges/ditches/stock fence/electric Species Hedgerow in W, stockfence in Nand E. Stream in S Highways and Major road/railway/local road/footpath/no public Other features (such as tree-lined footpaths access lanes) Footpath across border in E and W Built features Villages/settlements/farms/churches/oasts Urban edge/pylons/masts/new housing Other features (such as moats)

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 102 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback G11 Swinford Manor Parkland 103 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 G11.1 G11.2

3 4 G11.3 G11.4

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 102 103 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Survey Date: 14.7.05 Reference: G12 Location: Willowbed Surveyors: AM/HA Reference: G12

Study Sector: Godinton (Map ref: TQ982431) Brief summary description: A wet woodland block in the middle of the valley floor., surrounded by wet grazed County Landscape Character Upper Stour Valley meadows. And linked by wildlife corridors of streams and hedgerows. Willow/ash canopy Area: with hawthorne/rose understorey. Streams run through it. Historic Landscape Type: 7.2 Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity Boundaries: Arable of E1/4 on all sides of the landscape and note any detracting features and their significance

TOPOGRAPHY Dominant Landform Views out (long/short/restricted) Inact woodland, views out restricted from the boundaries. There are Intact Apparent Flat part of valleybottom Views from boundary long views to surrounding wet meadow valley and distant hills with Interrupted Insignificant fields/parkland Fragmented TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within (filtered/framed/open/restricted) Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Apparent wildlife? Insignificant Extent of semi-natural habitat and Ecological corridors and High Key visual elements Pattern and scale ENCLOSURE Dominant patches networks PATTERN Apparent Partially stockfence Strong mix of woodland Wet woodland in a Moderate and river boundary Insignificant layers. Probably supports floodplain with adjoining Unenclosed high diversity corridors of streams and Low SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Pattern hedgerows. Also streams BUILT FEATURES Apparent within Insignificant Intensity of land use and habitat trend Unsettled LANDUSE Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Apparent N/a. wet woodland Deciduous Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Insignificant to change KEY CHARACTERISTICS – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Tree Cover Age structure Good All woodland layer apparent Variable Natural features Rivers/ knolls/ ponds Species associations Good scrub, herbs and shaded streams Poor Some streams run through Invertebraes, mamals, birds Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition Good Landuse/farm Primary Other Metal stock fencing and ditch/stream Variable type Wetland boundaries Poor Woodlands Coppice/plantation Species Other features Good May be coppice Willow, hawthorne, ash, Variable dogrose, oak Poor Tree cover Groups/linear/hedgerow/scattered/shelterbelt Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local vernacular, character and sense of place Field boundaries Hedges/ditches/stock fence/electric Species Some along border Nettles, bramble, thistles Type Siting Design Extent High

Highways and Major road/railway/local road/footpath/no public Other features (such as tree-lined Moderate footpaths access lanes)

Built features Villages/settlements/farms/churches/oasts Urban edge/pylons/masts/new Low housing

Other features (such as moats)

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 104 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback G12 Willowbed 105 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 G12.1 G12.2

2 3

Photograph locations/ direction

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 104 105 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2 Settlement/ Edge conditions Survey Date: 22/09/05 Reference: G13 Location: Worten House Surveyors: LE/ AK Reference: G13

Study Sector: Godinton (Map ref: TQ970434) Brief summary description of settlement/ edge conditions and its siting within the wider landscape: County Landscape Character Upper Stour Valley Worton Mill not visible form the road lies adjacent to the Great Stour, which is a narrow Area: river about 4m wide with emergent vegetation at this point. A metering station lies Historic Landscape Type: 9.2 Scattered settlement with paddocks (1810 extent) adjacent to the lane. The gardens contain native and ornamental deciduous trees and conifers. The Lane frontage is a long hornbeam hedge and inset gateway with a well Boundaries: E1/ E4 to N, W & E, E10 & G16 to S trimmed yew hedge.

SETTLEMENT & Insignificant Key visual elements Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity BUILT FEATURES House and Mill set back from the road within extensive of the settlement and note any detracting features and their significance gardens with mature trees Intact TOPOGRAPHY Insignificant Landform Interrupted level Fragmented

TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Settlement integrity/ edge condition – how well does the settlement hold together mature trees within grounds – a mix of native and Extent of settlement Settlement tied into the High ornamental species including weeping willow, plane, ash, landscape by high hedges hornbeam and hedgerow trees. Moderate FORM & LAYOUT Clustered Low AGE & Pre-war Intensity of built form and trend Assumed pre 19th century CONDITION Post-war Mill and house in large free flowing ornamental grounds 1960-70’s 1980-1990’s Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Recent to change

KEY FEATURES – in what way do the following contribute to the local distinctiveness of the Local vernacular Survival of features and condition Good settlement? House cannot be seen from public right of Variable way, glimpses suggest local vernacular Poor Building style Roof & materials/ scale House and mill are not visible from road or Tree Cover Age structure Good public footpath Young mature hedgerow trees - ashes Variable dominate Poor Street Scene Frontage/ verge/ boundaries/ materials Planting/ signage/ lighting Narrow lane with tall native mix hedgerow Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition Good of predominantly hazel and elm with Frontage to the lane – neat 2m+ Variable sloe, hawthorn, sycamore, clematis and hornbeam hedges with some laurel, Poor privet. Adjacent to House hedge is clipped second hedge of yew frames set back hornbeam. entrance. East boundary no hedge but Huntington Cottage garden fronts onto the timber rail fence, garden shrubbery and lane predominately ash trees and some horse Edge condition New housing chestnut N/A Other features Earthen dam immediately north of the Good Other features - area impounds flood water upstream Variable (include detractors) Poor PERCEPTION of the place – is it tranquil/ safe/ pleasant/ legible/ accessible? Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Tranquil and secluded feel, hidden from the road vernacular, character and sense of place

No modern development here, house secluded in wooded gardens

Type Siting Design Extent High

Moderate

Low

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 106 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback G13 Worten House 107 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 G13.1

G13.2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 106 107 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2 Survey Date: 14.7.05 Reference: G14 Location: Worten Wood Surveyors: HA Reference: G14 continued

Study Sector: Godinton (Map ref: TQ968437) Brief summary description: A small patch of woodland adjacent to other woodland in south. Placed on north slope of County Landscape Character Upper Stour Valley valley. Variety of trees of different age. Close to small lake at embankment, and has corridors Area: over to house and garden (G13). Historic Landscape Character: 4,5 Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity of the landscape and note any detracting features and their significance Boundaries: Woodland of G15 in south, and arable ++ of E1/4 around rest of the edges. Landscape around is mostly used for growing/arable. Long views down the valley/floodplain. Intact TOPOGRAHY Dominant Landform Views out (long/short/restricted) Interrupted Apparent Slight slope towards the Up and down the valley from boundary Fragmented valley floor in north. Insignificant Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for wildlife? TREE COVER Dominant Key visual elements Views within (filtered/framed/open/restricted) Apparent Mature woodland with Mostly restricted, but some clearings give filtered Extent of semi-natural habitat and Ecological corridors and High young growth in between view patches networks Insignificant Woodland Adjacent to G15 of Moderate ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern and scale similar woodland and has PATTERN Apparent corridors down to lake Low Insignificant at embankment and to Unenclosed houseing/garden at G13 SETTLEMENT & Dominant Key visual elements Pattern Intensity of land use and habitat trend BUILT FEATURES Apparent An embankment from 4m wide at top, 2-3 meters high with wide banks east edge and north Insignificant across the valley Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability to Unsettled change Key visual elements Seasonal variation LANDUSE Dominant Age structure Deciduous Tree Cover Good Apparent Some mature, many young Variable Insignificant Poor KEY CHARACTERISTICS – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition Good Natural Rivers/ knolls/ ponds Species associations Variable features Poor Landuse/farm Primary Other Other features Good type Variable Woodlands Coppice/plantation Species Poor Mixed woodland. Undergrowth varied Elder, Hornbeam, Sycamore, Horse chestnut, Larch, Fir/pine, Willow, Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local vernacular, Bramble, Nettles, Ash, Oak, Alder. character and sense of place Tree cover Groups/linear/hedgerow/scattered/shelterbelt Species The different species grow in groups. Type Siting Design Extent High Embankment across From eastedge Hidden from within Moderate Field Hedges/ditches/stock fence/electric Species floodplain and north the parcell Low boundaries Highways and Major road/railway/local road/footpath/no public Other features (such as tree-lined footpaths access lanes) Footpath along south border Built features Villages/settlements/farms/churches/oasts Urban edge/pylons/masts/new Embankment housing

Other features (such as moats)

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 108 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback G14 Worten Wood 109 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 G14.1

G14.2

1 3

G14.3

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 108 109 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Survey Date: 14.07.05 Reference: G16 Location: West of Worten Farm Surveyors: AM/MG Reference: G16

Study Sector: Godinton (Map ref: TQ970432) Brief summary description: Small parcel, that has been integrated with E9 in terms of continuous landuse. There are County Landscape Character Upper Stour valley no hedgerows on N, S or E boundaries. There are a few mature trees in the NW corner Area: and along the N boundary lane. These are mainly planted ornamental trees. A main road Historic Landscape Type: 1.10 borders the parcel on the E side. The Oust house settlement in the NW corner is screened by trees. Boundaries: Urban of G13 to N and E10 to E. Arable of E9 to S and small Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity edge to valley floor of E1/4 to W of the landscape and note any detracting features and their significance TOPOGRAPHY Landform Views out (long/short/restricted) Open outlook, uninterrupted across a large arable field which joins Intact Apparent Flatt Framed by nearby houses and vegetation, Some long glimpses seamlessly with E(. Onl devider is the invisible footpath through the crop. TREE COVER Key visual elements Views within (filtered/framed/open/restricted) Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for Insignificant Tree lined lane to Open the N boundary wildlife? Extent of semi-natural habitat and Ecological corridors and ENCLOSURE Key visual elements Pattern and scale Low patches networks PATTERN Unenclosed Small parcel of arable, no Monoculture of rapeseed No, some mature trees on enclosures crop with hedgerows N border. missing. SETTLEMENT & Key visual elements Pattern Intensity of land use and habitat trend BUILT FEATURES Unsettled LANDUSE Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation High Arable Yes Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability KEY CHARACTERISTICS – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? to change Tree Cover Age structure Natural features Rivers/ knolls/ ponds Species associations None within, Few planted just beyond Poor border to N.

Landuse/farm Primary Other Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition type None. Border of nettles to N and E. Poor Woodlands Coppice/plantation Species Other features

Tree cover Groups/linear/hedgerow/scattered/shelterbelt Species Only a few mature trees on N boundary Cherry, walnut, oak, ash, Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local alder, vernacular, character and sense of place

Field boundaries Hedges/ditches/stock fence/electric Species Type Siting Design Extent High Thin verge on E edge, tree line on N, only a footpath left divides on S edge Moderate

Highways and Major road/railway/local road/footpath/no public Other features (such as tree-lined Low footpaths access lanes) Footpaths, private- and local roads on all edges

Built features Villages/settlements/farms/churches/oasts Urban edge/pylons/masts/new housing Other features (such as moats)

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 110 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback G16 West of Worten Farm 111 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 G16.1

1 2 G16.2

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 110 111 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Survey Date: 14.07.05 Reference: G17 Location: South of Mansion Copse Surveyors: MG/HA Reference: G17

Study Sector: Godinton (Map ref: TQ971439) Brief summary description: Small L-shaped parcel comprising three regular l-shaped grazing paddocks, enclosed County Landscape Character Upper Stour Valley by stock fencing, Appears to be low intensity grazing. Rough areas to south. Land slopes Area: slightly to stream/river at S boundary, good emergent vegetation and a wide buffer strip. Historic Landscape Type: 1.9 Small reg. W. straight boundaries Few mature oaks scattered in pasture, with remnant hedgerow indicting widespread clearance. Footpath from N to S through part of parcel. Boundaries: E1/4 to E, S and N; G21 and G22 to W. Visual context and unity – assess the views, outlook, adjacent landuses and overall unity TOPOGRAPHY Landform Views out (long/short/restricted) of the landscape and note any detracting features and their significance Slight slope to SE Mainly short to medium Insignificant Evidence of hedgerow clearance, but paddocks intact Intact TREE COVER Key visual elements Views within (filtered/framed/open/restricted) Insignificant Scattered mature Open, more framed in NE paddoc Ecological integrity – how well does this area of countryside function as a habitat for trees at pond, wildlife? Boundary wood to NE Extent of semi-natural habitat and Ecological corridors and ENCLOSURE Dominant Key visual elements Pattern and scale patches networks Moderate PATTERN Grazing paddoc Small, regular Rough and grazing pasture, Stream/river with SETTLEMENT & Key visual elements Pattern some nettle patches to NE emergent vegetation and BUILT FEATURES Unsettled wide buffer strip in places

LANDUSE Dominant Key visual elements Seasonal variation Intensity of land use and habitat trend Grazing pasture Varied intensity grazing pasture, some rough KEY CHARACTERISTICS – in what way do the following contribute to local distinctiveness? Condition of heritage features – assess current condition and make note of vulnerability Natural features Rivers/ knolls/ ponds Species associations to change Slow flowing stream to S boundary with good Alder, Iris, Meadowsweet, Tree Cover Age structure bufferstrip of rough grassland nettle, dragon- and butterflies Scattered mature oak, maturing alder at Variable Landuse/farm Primary Other stream, some dead trees. type Grazing pasture, some rough Field Boundaries Survival of historic field pattern and condition Woodlands Coppice/plantation Species Remnant hedgerow, now stock fencing. Poor

Tree cover Groups/linear/hedgerow/scattered/shelterbelt Species Other features Good Scattered mature oak to north also isolated Oak, ash, sycamore Variable trees Poor Field boundaries Hedges/ditches/stock fence/electric Species Stockfence, Remnant hedgerow scrub Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local vernacular, character and sense of place Highways and Major road/railway/local road/footpath/no public Other features (such as tree-lined Type Siting Design Extent footpaths access lanes) High Footpath running N to S Built features Villages/settlements/farms/churches/oasts Urban edge/pylons/masts/new Moderate housing Other features Low (such as moats)

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 112 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback G17 South of Mansion Copse 113 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 G17.1

G17.3 G17.2 1

2 3

5 4

G17.4 G17.5 Photograph locations/ direction

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 112 113 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 114 115 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Upper Stour Valley USV: Settlements

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 114 115 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2 Settlement/ Edge conditions Survey Date: 16/09/05 Reference: A5 Location: Freight Depot Surveyors: LE/AK Reference: A5

PERCEPTION of the place – is it tranquil/ safe/ pleasant/ legible/ accessible? Moderate Secluded site, busy with lorries and restricted access to public Low

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 116 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A5 Waterbrook 117 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 1

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 116 117 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2 Settlement/ Edge conditions Survey Date: 16/09/05 Reference: A18 Location: The Forstal Surveyors: LE/AK Reference: A18

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 118 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A18 The Forstal 119 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A18.1

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 118 119 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 1 ASHFORD LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT FIELD STUDY SHEET 2

Date: 21.09.04 Location: A19 east of The Forstal Map reference: TR052391 A19 ctd.

Other trees Heritage features Species Impact of built development – how well does modern development respect local Riverside trees willow, ash vernacular, character and sense of place

Buildings Villages Farmsteads

Other features CTRL corridor and bridges

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set 120 for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council © studioengleback A19 East of The Forstal 121 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 A19.1

Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 120 121 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 122 123 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Ashford Landscape Character Assessment & Data Set for English Partnerships & Ashford Borough Council 122 123 122/doc/021 Upper Stour Valley 11/2005 © studioengleback Studio Engleback Tel: 01892 538 537 8a London Road Fax: 01892 538 438 Tunbridge Wells email [email protected] Kent TN1 2EJ web: www.studioengleback.com

studioengleback