Garth Works Industrial Estate Taff's Well
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Garth Works, Taff’s Well; Landscape and Visual GARTH WORKS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE TAFF’S WELL Landscape and Visual Assessment JULY 2013 Corscadden Associates 77 Fairleigh Road Cardiff CF11 9JW 02920 373053 [email protected] Corscadden Associates July 2013 Garth Works, Taff’s Well; Landscape and Visual CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Assessment Methodology: 2.1 General Background 2.2 Landscape Assessment Criteria 2.3 Visual Landscape Criteria 3.0 Baseline Studies: 3.1 Study Area and Context 3.2 Landscape Character 3.3 Analysis of the Landscape 3.4 Conclusion on Landscape Analysis 3.5 Landscape Policy and Designations 3.6 Visual Appraisal 3.7 Summary Site & Description 3.8 Mitigation 4.0 Landscape Assessment 4.1 Approach & Method 4.2 Effects on Physical Landscape 4.3 Visibility & Viewpoint Analysis Viewpoint 1 to 8 and Internal Panorama 4.4 Effects on Landscape character 4.5 Effects on Designated Landscapes 4.6 Effects on Recreational Users 5.0 Conclusion on Significance of Effects on Landscape Character & Visual Amenity 5.1 Significance of Effects on the Physical Landscape 5.2 Significance of Effects on Visual Amenity 5.3 Significance of Effects on Landscape Character 6.0 Landscape Strategy References Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council – Local Development Plan Cardiff County Council – Unitary development Plan CCW Landmap Information Guidance Note 1, 2008 Ecological Assessment August 2010 : David Clemence Ecology CCW Landmap Aspect Areas Figure List Figure 1 Existing Features Plan Figure 2 Landscape Character Plan and UDP Countryside Designations Figure 3 Predicted Zones of Visual Influence + Viewpoint Locations Figure 4 Topography Figure 5 Viewpoints 1 & 2 Figure 6 Viewpoints 3 & 4 Figure 7 Viewpoints 5 & 6 Figure 8 Viewpoints 7 & 8 Figure 9 Landscape Strategy Figure 10-15 Photosheets 1-6 Existing Features Appendix 1 Tree Survey Rev 31 May 2013 : David Rice Forestry Corscadden Associates July 2013 Garth Works, Taff’s Well; Landscape and Visual 1.0 Introduction This Landscape and Visual Assessment report describes the landscape character of the study area and evaluates the visual amenity and landscape of the site. The effects of the proposed development on the physical landscape characteristics of the site and on the landscape character and visual amenity of the site and its setting are assessed. This report considers Plots 1A, 1B, 1C & 2 located to the east of the Moy Road in Taff s Well in the Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough of Glamorgan near Cardiff. For the purpose of this report individual plots will be referred to collectively as 'the site'. The site is proposed for redevelopment as a residential area with associated public open space. The individual plots comprising the site are refer to Figure 1 Existing Features. Garth Works – mixed industrial, Plots 1A, 1B, 1C & 2. Plot 1A is in the south of the site and Plot 2 in the north of the site. This report should be read in conjunction with Ecological Assessment by David Clements Ecology Ltd – Moy Road Industrial Estates and the Tree Survey revised 31 May 2013 by David Rice Forestry. The visibility of the site is determined and the significance of the effects of the inclusion of any future development on the landscape character and visual amenity identified. Conclusions are drawn on the ability of the surrounding landscape to absorb future development on the site. A landscape and visual assessment was undertaken by Corscadden Associates in September 2010 and this has been revised in July 2013. 2.0 Assessment Methodolgy 2.1 General Background The methodology used to assess the landscape and visual effects of the proposed development follows where possible current ‘best practice’ guidance published by the Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2002) and in guidance on landscape character assessment published by the Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage (2002). This later guidance replaced the previous landscape assessment guidance published by the Countryside Commission as CCP423 (1993). In Wales, the Countryside Council for Wales promotes LANDMAP as a method of mapping and evaluating the landscape in terms of aspects that contribute to the whole. The process follows a standard approach using Baseline Studies to: identify the components, designations, character and quality of the landscape most likely to be affected by any future development; identify the type and potential sensitivity of visual receptors most likely to be affected by the proposed development; identify potential effects brought about by any proposed development on landscape frontage character and visual receptors through desk study and field work; judge the magnitude of effects and assessment of their significance. 2.2 Landscape Assessment Criteria Relevant landscape character areas and elements have been identified and assessed in terms of their quality, value and sensitivity to change. This requires the application of professional judgement, both subjective and objective, in respect of a range of factors that define the landscape including (refer to Figure 2): Corscadden Associates July 2013 Garth Works, Taff’s Well; Landscape and Visual • acknowledged landscape designations; • scenic quality of individual landscape character areas and their constituent parts; • landscape condition including land management, vegetation and other features; • notable features of historical, architectural, geological or biodiversity importance; • reference to any specific cultural associations; • past and present perceptions of local value. For the purpose of this assessment, landscape quality of the proposed site and local environs are categorised in Table 2.1. Magnitude of Effect on the landscape resource (i.e. landscape features, character and quality) is categorised as high, medium, low and negligible and defined in Table 2.2. The level of significance of effect upon the landscape resource is determined by correlating the magnitude of effect with the quality of the resource. Table 2.3 illustrates this correlation exercise. Table 2.1: Landscape Quality Categories Exceptional Quality: Areas of especially high, acknowledged quality through designation as AONB’s or other landscape based sensitive area. Of landscape significance within the wider region or nationally. High Quality: Areas that have a very strong positive character with valued and consistent distinctive features t the landscape unity, richness and harmony. Of landscape significance within the district. Moderate Quality: Areas that exhibit positive character but which may have evidence of alteration/ degradation or erosion of features resulting in a less distinctive landscape. May be of some local significance with some positive recognizable structure. Low Quality: Areas that are generally negative in character, degraded and in poor condition. No distinctive positive characteristics and with little or no structure. Scope for positive enhancement. Table 2.2: Magnitude of Effect High Magnitude: Substantial loss or major alteration to key elements of the landscape resource such that there is fundamental change. Medium Magnitude: Loss of, or alteration to, elements of the landscape resource such that there is partial change. Low Magnitude: Minor alteration to the landscape resource where there may be some slight perception of change. Negligible Magnitude: Very minor alteration to the landscape resource with no perceived change. Corscadden Associates July 2013 Garth Works, Taff’s Well; Landscape and Visual Table 2.3: Matrix of Significance of Effect upon Landscape Magnitude Townscape & Seascape Quality Exceptional High Moderate Low High Magnitude Substantial Major High/Moderate Moderate Medium Major High/Moderate Moderate Minor Magnitude Low Magnitude Moderate Moderate Minor Minor/Neutral Negligible Minor Minor/Neutral Minor/Neutral Neutral Magnitude 2.3 Visual Landscape Criteria To establish the visual significance of the site, representative views have been selected within the Predicted Zones of Visual Influence (refer to Figure 3). The significance of effects on visual amenity is defined by the relative sensitivity of the viewpoint receptor and the magnitude of change. In addition Figures 5 to 8 Viewpoints 1-8 have been included as background information as to site visibility. Figure 3 also gives a visibility assessment of the views towards the site. Figures 10-15 give details of Existing Features of Plot 1 and 2. Sensitivity of receptors to change in the landscape from a given viewpoint will depend on several factors including: • the type and number of receptors experiencing the view • land use and activity at the given viewpoint location • frequency of use of the location • landscape quality, rarity and designation at the receptor Scale of the landscape and context of the view receptor type is a key factor in determining sensitivity of the viewpoint, although other factors can influence the sensitivity of the given receptor to visual change. In general terms, those people that live or work within view of the development or visitors that take part in outdoor pursuits within the area, such as walking or jogging, for which landscape experience is a primary objective are regarded as the highest sensitivity group of receptors. For the purpose of assessment, the sensitivity of different receptors can be broadly categorised as shown in Table 2.4. It should be stressed that this is a general theoretical framework for the purpose of evaluation only. There will always be exceptions to the broad categorisations