WILTSHIRE COUNCIL

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990

SECTION 78 APPEAL BY ROBERT HITCHINS LTD.

LAND NORTH AND EAST OF BARROW FARM, CHIPPENHAM, SN15 5LX

Planning Inspectorate Reference: APP/Y3940/W/15/3139183

Wiltshire Council Reference: 14/10433/OUT

Date of inquiry: 11th October 2016

PROOF OF EVIDENCE by Andrea Kenworthy BSc (Hons) Dip LA CMLI

1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 My name is Andrea Kenworthy. I am a Landscape and Design Officer at Wiltshire Council and have over 20 year’s professional experience as a Landscape Architect. I have a BSc (Hons) degree in Geography, a Diploma in Landscape Design and I am a Chartered Member of the Landscape Institute.

1.2 The evidence which I have prepared and provided within this Statement represents my professional opinion and I believe the facts stated are true and accurate and have been prepared in accordance with the guidance of my professional institution.

2. THE APPEAL

2.1 This Statement relates to an outline planning application, planning reference 14/10433/OUT for the development of up to 500 residential dwellings, a new roundabout access from the B4069 Maud Heath's Causeway/ Swindon Road, ancillary access for emergency vehicles, a primary school, a local centre, employment area, play areas and open space on land to the north and east of Barrow Farm, Chippenham, Wiltshire. The development includes an extension to Bird’s Marsh wood of 7ha on land which is offsite but within the ownership of the appellant.

2.2 The southern edge of the Appeal Site lies adjacent to the Land North of Chippenham which has been approved for mixed use development including up to 750 dwellings (Planning application N/12/00560/OUT) subject to conditions and S.106 agreements, which extends east from the A350 across fields to the south of Bird’s Marsh wood adjacent to Hill Corner Road and to Maud Heath’s Causeway.

2.3 This planning application was presented to Wiltshire Council Strategic Planning Committee on 10th February 2016. At that meeting the Committee resolved that, had it been in a position to determine the application, it would have refused planning permission. Reason 5 relates to Landscape and Heritage:

The proposal would have an unacceptable impact upon the tranquil nature of this part of the countryside, the setting of listed buildings at Maud Heath’s Causeway as well as its relationship to the nearby villages of Langley Burrell and Kington Langley. The proposal is therefore contrary to the provisions of policies CP10, CP51, CP52 and CP58 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015, the NPPF as well as section 16(2) and 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990.

2.4 This Proof of Evidence will address the landscape and visual impacts and any resulting harm that may arise from the proposed development. Evidence relating to Heritage is given by Caroline Ridgwell and the overall planning balance is considered in Evidence given by Simon Smith.

3. THE APPEAL SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

2

3.1 The Appeal Site comprises five medium sized arable fields of 24.2 Ha to the southeast of Bird’s Marsh wood. The fields are Grade 2 agricultural land, and are therefore the Best and Most Versatile agricultural land. Cereal crops were harvested this season.

3.2 Bird’s Marsh wood, a large Ancient Woodland of about 24 Ha, a County Wildlife Site and Priority Habitat (Broadleaved Oak, mixed and Yew woodland) is sited on slightly higher ground at about 87m AOD closest to the Appeal Site and is a prominent and distinctive feature within the wider landscape. It has Village Green status and is well used for recreation linking to numerous public rights of way across the countryside and the Appeal Site.

3.3 From the high point at Bird’s Marsh wood the Appeal Site gently slopes from the west to the east to 72m AOD on the B4069 along the section of Maud Heath’s Causeway.

3.4 The northern and central fields of the Appeal Site are bounded by mature species rich hedgerows with deep ditches and a significant number of ancient/ veteran and notable Oaks and mature trees including Willow and Poplar to these field boundaries. Dog Kennel Plantation, a linear block of mixed woodland adjoins the northern Appeal Site boundary and is covered by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The southern part of the Appeal Site comprises larger fields divided by a ditch with scrubby vegetation and remnant Oaks marking former field boundaries.

3.5 Within the fields surrounding Barrow Farm 73 individual mature trees have TPOs. 30 of these are within the Appeal Site. The TPOs were confirmed by Wiltshire Council on 26th February 2015. (Refer to Appendix A) The species rich hedgerows comprise Field Maple, Hazel, Blackthorn, Hawthorn, Dog Rose, Holly, Elm, Ash, Elder and Bramble.

3.6 There are 5no. Public Rights of Way (PROWs) crossing the site. These are LBUR28, LBUR36, LBUR35, LBUR50 and LBUB32. These all appear on first edition OS maps dated 1872 – 1894 and are well-used by locals linking Bird’s Marsh wood with Langley Burrell, Kington Langley and Chippenham.

3.7 The Appeal Site forms an integral part of the wider rural landscape to the north of Chippenham that connects with the rolling pastoral countryside of Kington Langley, a small linear historic settlement sited on higher ground approx. 1.2km from the Appeal Site.

3.8 Directly to the northeast of the site, adjoining the B4069, is Langley House (Grade II* Listed Building c. 1780) within its parkland (post medieval park and garden, non- designated heritage asset) and St. Peter’s Church (Grade I Listed Building, dating from Saxon times with 14th century tower).

3.9 The B4069 forms the eastern boundary of the Appeal Site together with the garden boundaries of five stone cottages. These include The Pound and Pound House (Grade II Listed Building) and The Old School House (Grade II Listed Building) set within mature gardens. The B4069 follows a section of the Maud Heath’s Causeway (a 15th century routeway) which passes through the small historic village of Langley Burrell and Conservation Area approx. 250m directly to the east of the Appeal Site.

3.10 To the southeast of the Appeal Site is Kilvert’s Parsonage (Grade II* Listed Building) set within wooded grounds.

3

3.11 The southern fields of the Appeal Site are bounded by well-maintained roadside hedges to the B4069.

3.12 South of the Appeal Site the arable fields extend to housing along Hill Corner Road, which has an open aspect towards the Appeal Site. Parsonage Way Industrial Estate to the south east of the B4069 is enclosed by a mature belt of tree and woodland planting and is well screened from Maud Heath’s Causeway and the wider countryside even in winter.

3.13 Directly to the west adjoining the Appeal Site is Barrow Farmhouse (16th Century Grade II Listed Building) and Barrow Cottage (Grade II Listed Building) at the end of Greenway Lane which have glimpsed and direct views across the arable fields of the Appeal Site to the wider countryside beyond.

3.14 Historic evidence from Wiltshire Council’s Historic Landscape Characterisation project database show that fields to the west of the B4069 relate to the enclosure and conversion of former common and marshland as evidenced by the field forms and place names. In terms of the wider landscape in this area, the fields seem to be a mix of modern and historical and have derived from piecemeal enclosure. This process typically has early post medieval origins and relates to the consolidation of earlier strip fields (which have Saxon or medieval origin). Traces of ridge and furrow survive in the wider area. The area around Langley Park was part of an extensive parkland during the post medieval period, extending to Langley Burrell in the southeast. While some of this parkland survives immediately adjacent to the Manor House, much has since been converted into fields but there still remain some legible elements of this former parkland visible through veteran trees and the field boundary shape and composition. Another separate piece of parkland survives to the south of Langley Burrell in the area around Kilvert’s Parsonage, and this seems to have a similar origin and evolution to the parkland around Langley House to the north.

3.15 The first, second and third edition OS maps show very little change in the field boundaries. (Refer to Appendix A)

3.16 The distribution of heritage assets within the area of Langley Burrell is shown on Figure 5 of the report ‘Langley Burrell Heritage and Character Assessment’ (AECOM Feb 2016.)

4. LANDSCAPE POLICY CONTEXT AND LANDSCAPE EVIDENCE BASE

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

4.1 The importance of understanding landscape character and its role in sustainable development is fundamental to achieving developments that are appropriate to their site context.

4.2 ‘Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) is the process of identifying and describing variation in the character of the landscape. It seeks to identify and explain the unique combination of elements and features (characteristics) that make landscapes distinctive.’ (An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment, October 2014). Natural England defines key characteristics as those combinations of elements which help to give an area its distinctive sense of place that would result in significant consequences for the current character if they were changed or lost.

4

4.3 Paragraph 7 of the NPPF is clear that sustainable development includes an ‘Environmental’ role as well as ‘Social’ and ‘Economic’ roles by ‘contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment.’ (my emphasis)

4.4 Paragraph 17 of the NPPF lists the 12 Core Planning Principles (CPP) which should underpin both plan making and decision taking. CPP 5 states that planning should ‘take account of the different roles and character of different areas, promoting the vitality of our main urban areas, protecting the Green Belts around them, recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and supporting thriving rural communities within it.’ (my emphasis)

4.5 Paragraph 58 of the NPPF sets out the requirements of good design ‘Planning policies and decisions should aim to ensure that developments respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation.’ (my emphasis)

4.6 Paragraph 61 of the NPPF states ‘planning policies and decisions should address the connections between people and places and the integration of new development into the natural, built and historic environment.’ (my emphasis)

4.7 Paragraph 109 of the NPPF states ‘The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils.’ (my emphasis)

4.8 NPPF does not define what is meant by ‘valued landscapes’. The Landscape Institute’s Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA 3rd Edition) paras 5.19 to 5.32 gives guidance on establishing the value of undesignated landscapes.

4.9 Para.5.26 states ‘The fact that an area of landscape is not designated either nationally or locally does not mean that it does not have any value.’ ‘The European Landscape Convention promotes the need to take account of all landscapes, with less emphasis on the special and more recognition that ordinary landscapes also have their value, supported by the landscape character approach.’

4.10 Box 5.1 of GLVIA identifies the range of factors that can help in the identification of valued landscapes.

• Landscape Quality (condition): A measure of the physical state of the landscape. It may include the extent to which typical character is represented in individual areas, the intactness of the landscape and the condition of individual elements;

• Scenic Quality: The term used to describe landscapes which appeal primarily to the senses (primarily but not wholly the visual senses);

• Rarity: The presence of rare features and elements in the landscape or the presence of a rare Landscape Character Type;

• Representativeness: Whether the landscape contains a particular character, and/or features and elements, which are considered particularly important examples;

• Conservation Interests: The presence of features of wildlife, earth science or archaeological or historical and cultural interest can add to the value of a landscape as well as having value in their own right;

5

• Recreation Value: Evidence that the landscape is valued for recreational activity where experience of the landscape is important;

• Perceptual Aspects: A landscape may be valued for its perceptual qualities and/ or tranquillity; and

• Associations: Some landscapes are associated with particular people, such as artists or writers, or event in history that contribute to perceptions of natural beauty of the area.

4.11 Within the following table I consider each of the criteria for this Appeal Site and immediate surroundings.

CRITERIA COMMENTS Landscape Quality This is an attractive working agricultural landscape of medium sized fields with mature species rich hedgerows, ancient/ veteran and notable mature trees and woodland, interspersed with farmsteads and smaller traditional villages. It has the typical features of the Hullavington Rolling Lowland Landscape Character Area (LCA) and has a distinctive and intact character. Scenic Quality The Appeal Site has a strong affinity with the wider countryside and reflects the pastoral character of the LCA and has a strong sense of place. This is evident from the PROWs and the wider views afforded from the elevated ground around Bird’s Marsh wood across a wooded agricultural landscape towards the distant limestone ridges of Naish Hill, Derry Hill and Bremhill. Rarity The Tree Constraints Survey & Report undertaken by Amenity Tree Care Ltd (March 2014) in Section 7 confirms the special nature of the trees on site, the majority of which are Category A trees and para.7.2 states ‘Many represent significant cultural values (A3) due to their associated life stages, size, rarity and ecological functions. Many of the Category A trees are of special significance due to multiple criteria being achieved, have attained notable, veteran and possibly ancient stages in their life cycles. They are trees of the highest importance in all regards, as classified by BS5837:2012.’ (my emphasis) Representativeness The mature trees described above and Dog Kennel Plantation have TPOs. Bird’s Marsh wood is an Ancient Woodland and County Wildlife Site.

The Listed buildings including St Peter’s

6

Church, Langley House, The Pound and Pound House, The Old School House, Kilvert’s Parsonage, Barrow Farmhouse and Barrow Cottage are protected as important examples of their type.

Langley Burrell and Kington Langley are designated Conservation Areas. Conservation Interests The combination of features described above with wildlife, cultural and heritage interests give value to the landscape. Recreation Value Bird’s Marsh wood is registered as a Village Green, and is well used locally for informal recreation. The Rambler’s Association publication ‘12 more walks around Chippenham’ contains a walk entitled ‘Bird’s Marsh and Kilvert Country.’

The PROWs crossing the Appeal Site are well used clearly defined as pathways within the arable crops. Perceptual Aspects Bird’s Marsh wood, Dog Kennel Plantation, the ancient/ veteran and notable mature trees, the mature species rich hedgerows and the listed buildings gives the northern and central parts of the Appeal Site a strong sense of place, a tranquil and time deep character. This is lessened to the southern part of the Appeal Site where internal hedges have been lost and the housing along Hill Corner Road and traffic on the B4069 is apparent. Associations Langley Common which straddles the B4069 between Barrow Farm, Kilvert’s Parsonage and the eastern end of Langley Burrell is known as “Kilvert Country”. Francis Kilvert who lived at Kilvert’s Parsonage recorded the rural life of this area in his diaries during the 1870’s. The Kilvert Society, formed to foster an interest in the diarist and his work, is still active today.

4.11 The Appeal Site itself and immediate surroundings have demonstrable special landscape features of wildlife, cultural and heritage value. It is an attractive locally distinctive landscape with strong sense of place and high degree of susceptibility to change. It is my professional opinion that this landscape is not ordinary and can be regarded as a valued landscape, at a local level.

4.12 Policy 12, para 131, 3rd bullet of the NPPF states ‘In determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of: the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness.’ (my emphasis)

7

Wiltshire Core Strategy

4.13 The fifth reason for refusal identifies Core Policy 51: Landscape and Core Policy 52: Green Infrastructure of the Wiltshire Core Strategy. Relevant policy points are discussed in further detail at Section 5 The Council’s Case.

Landscape Character Assessments

4.14 Wiltshire Core Strategy (adopted January 2015) states at Section 6 Delivering Spatial Objectives: Core Policies, Para 6.80 that ‘Core policy 51 seeks to protect, conserve and enhance Wiltshire’s distinctive landscape character. The term landscape here is used to refer to the built, historic and natural environment in urban, peri-urban and rural areas. There are currently 10 Landscape Character Assessments (LCAs) which cover Wiltshire, and these will be used for the purposes of implementing this policy until they are replaced.’ The relevant local LCAs which comprise this Council’s landscape evidence base and cover this Appeal Site are:

4.15 Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment (scale 1:50,000 dated 2005) County Landscape Character Area, 16A Malmesbury-Corsham Limestone Lowland. The B4069 forms the boundary with 12B Avon Open Clay Vale. (Relevant extracts from the Assessment are included in Appendix B.)

4.16 Key features of this landscape character include:

• Gently undulating lowland farmland over underlying geology of predominantly mudstone and limestone with pockets of clay; • Peaceful, rural landscape with subtle variations in character relating to the varied geology, topography and water courses; • Mixture of permanent pasture and arable farmland in a pattern of large fields with a strong network of hedgerows and hedgerow trees; • Panoramic views available to the west on more open areas of higher ground, elsewhere occasional woodland blocks, copses and frequent hedgerow trees give a greater sense of enclosure with intermittent views; • Numerous rivers forming shallow valleys; • Settlements in the form of historic market towns, villages and scattered farmsteads linked by a network of rural road; • Traditional local limestone buildings are a key feature of the landscape. Noted that there is some use of brick to the east; • Villages often centred around a village green, pond or area of common land; and • Presence of historic parkland and estates marked by stone estate walls and parkland trees and avenues.

4.17 Whilst this county level assessment does not have the same level of detail as the district level assessments it nevertheless mentions development pressures and the urbanisation of rural lanes with additional traffic, lighting and signage and the need to retain the distinctive character of the villages by respecting the traditional stone built character and vernacular form.

4.18 North Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment (scale 1:25,000 dated 2004) LCA 8 Hullavington Rolling Lowland (Relevant extracts from the Assessment are included in Appendix B)

8

4.19 Key characteristics relevant to the Appeal Site and surroundings include:

• Rolling or lowland hills between 60 and 120m AOD; • Patchwork of irregular, medium sized fields, mainly pasture, and larger more recent enclosures used for arable; • Continuous hedges with many mature oaks; • Medium sized woodlands and deciduous copses; • Fine stone villages with muted colours and dispersed farms; • Use of undressed limestone to walls, ashlar quoins, lintels and mullions, and stone slates; and • Detractors of the edge of Chippenham

4.20 The management guidelines for this LCA relevant to the Appeal Site are:

• The overall objectives for the area are to conserve and enhance its pastoral character, and to ensure that any new development respects the grain of the dispersed settlement in the area and the vernacular building materials; (my emphasis) • The continuity of hedgerows is important in shaping the character of the area, and should be encouraged through appropriate land management programmes; and • Minimise the landscape and visual effects of the expansion of Chippenham. (my emphasis)

4.21 Management Strategy Actions for this LCA relevant to the Appeal Site include:

• Conserve hedgerows and mature trees, including planting new trees in existing hedges and planting specimen trees in field corners; (my emphasis) • Ensure development reinforces the locally distinctive character and respects the vernacular. The use of traditional building materials including limestone are important in this area; (my emphasis) • Discourage development in the rural hinterland; (my emphasis) and • Consider where development related to Chippenham is most appropriate in terms of landscape and visual effects. (my emphasis)

4.22 In terms of Landscape Sensitivity the LCA states ‘The whole area has an essentially tranquil and pastoral character within which only small-scale, sensitively designed development, appropriately associated with existing built form, could be successfully accommodated without adverse landscape impacts.’ (my emphasis)

The Chippenham Landscape Setting Assessment

4.23 The Chippenham Sites Allocation Development Plan Document (DPD) will undergo Examination In Public in September 2016. The Chippenham Landscape Setting Assessment (Chippenham LSA) undertaken by TEP Landscape Consultants in December 2014 was commissioned to inform the preparation of the Chippenham Sites Allocation DPD. The aim of this assessment is to identify key landscape and visual characteristics of the land around Chippenham and the key sensitivities and capacity of the settlement’s landscape setting, and the setting to some of the outlying villages to accommodate development.

4.24 The Chippenham LSA is a strategic study and assesses five Strategic Areas around Chippenham. Para. 2.21 of this report states ‘The final aspect of the strategic area

9

assessment are judgements regarding the overall development capacity, and considers the degree to which a landscape can accommodate change without detrimental effects on its character. This judgement also includes consideration of the scope for mitigation, which would be in keeping with the landscape character.

Development capacity and in turn scope for mitigation varies with the landscape and visual quality assessed and components such as:

• Existing land use • The pattern and scale of the landscape • Visual enclosure, openness of views, and distribution of visual receptors • The value placed on a landscape (although for this specific commission no national or local landscape designation applies to any site under consideration) • Extent, type and nature of vegetation present within the strategic area

Judgements will be made on what type of mitigation might be required to minimise effects or improve a settlement’s setting and appearance within views and how achievable potential mitigation would be within the strategic area’s landscape setting. This is based on ensuring that the key characteristics of the surrounding landscape (as identified in the Wiltshire County and North Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessments) are protected or enhanced through any future development. (my emphasis) Development capacity and scope for mitigation will be assessed either as being ‘high’, ‘moderate-high’, ‘moderate-low’ or ‘low’. Those locations where implementation of development, with appropriate mitigation appears most achievable (high or moderate-high) would be more favourable options to be taken forward in the Local Plan evaluation process in landscape terms than those which are less achievable with mitigation (moderate-low or low).

Each site will be assessed on its merits considering how successful mitigation is likely to be in each case. (my emphasis) Nonetheless, areas of land with ‘high’ or ‘moderate-high’ development capacity are likely to equate to areas where development with mitigation can be more readily accommodated. Areas of land with ‘moderate-low’ development capacity are likely to equate to areas where development with mitigation may be able to be accommodated. Areas of land with ‘low’ development capacity are likely to equate to areas where development with mitigation would be more difficult to accommodate.

It is anticipated that judgements within each strategic area could vary according to the part of the area being considered. (my emphasis) This information will be provided in the pro-formas and associated plans in Chapter 5.’

4.25 The Appeal Site occupies the south eastern part of Strategic Area A1, directly to the south east of Bird’s Marsh wood.

4.26 The Chippenham LSA states ‘Given the landscape sensitivities and qualities to be safeguarded the development capacity for Area A1 has been ascribed a low development capacity in the area east and north of Bird’s Marsh due to the importance of separation between Chippenham and Kington Langley and its attractive landscape character.’ (my emphasis)

4.27 ‘The area south of Bird’s Marsh has been ascribed a moderate-high development capacity. This is because the area is less sensitive being located to the edge of Chippenham and if developed would not contribute to intervisibility between Chippenham and Kington Langley.’ (my emphasis)

10

4.28 The factors that ensure that there is no intervisibility between Chippenham and Kington Langley are the screening effects of Bird’s Marsh wood and the sloping topography south of Bird’s Marsh wood whereby the land falls away and has a southerly aspect towards Chippenham.

4.29 An extract from the Chippenham LSA of the pro-forma for Strategic Area A1 is included in Appendix C.

4.30 Drawing D4646.015E titled Strategic Area A1 identifies two areas ‘Areas where development can be more readily accommodated with mitigation’ and ‘Areas where development would be more difficult to accommodate with mitigation’. The Appeal Site falls within the first category and the land directly to the north of the Appeal Site boundary falls within the second category, as does the land around the Listed Buildings along the B4069. The B4069 along Maud Heath’s Causeway is identified as ‘Preserve character of approach and distinctiveness of built form.’ The Listed Buildings are highlighted ‘Setting around buildings important to retain’.

4.31 The development proposals at the Appeal Site will be considered in the context of the Chippenham LSA.

5. THE COUNCIL’S CASE

5.1 This section specifically addresses the landscape reasons for refusal, that ‘the proposal would have an unacceptable impact upon the tranquil nature of this part of the countryside as well as its relationship to the nearby villages of Langley Burrell and Kington Langley, and is contrary to CP51 and CP52.’

5.2 Policy CP51: Landscape states that: ‘Development should protect, conserve and where possible enhance landscape character and must not have a harmful impact upon landscape character, while any negative impacts must be mitigated as far as possible through sensitive design and landscape measures. Proposals should be informed by and sympathetic to the distinctive character areas identified in the relevant Landscape Character Assessment(s) and any other relevant assessments and studies. In particular, proposals will need to demonstrate that the following aspects of landscape character have been conserved and where possible enhanced through sensitive design, landscape mitigation and enhancement measures: (my emphasis)

I. The locally distinctive pattern and species composition of natural features such as trees, hedgerows, woodland, field boundaries, watercourses and water bodies

II. The locally distinctive character of settlements and their landscape settings

III. The separate identity of settlements and the transition between man-made and natural landscapes at the urban fringe

IV. Visually sensitive skylines, soils, geological and topographical features

11

V. Landscape features of cultural, historic and heritage value

VI. Important views and visual amenity

VII. Tranquillity and the need to protect against intrusion from light pollution, noise and motion

VIII. Landscape functions including places to live, work, relax and recreate.’

5.3 I will consider each of CP51 sub-criteria further in this section.

5.4 As I have set out in Section 4 it is my professional opinion that the Appeal Site and immediate surroundings is not an ordinary landscape but has demonstrable special landscape features and a coherent, recognisably distinctive and appealing rural character with strong sense of place. It is undoubtedly attractive countryside that is unspoilt by urban influences. It represents a valued landscape locally and has a high susceptibility to the development that is being proposed which is entirely at odds with the character of the local area.

5.5 It is my view that the LVIA has not acknowledged adequately the landscape sensitivities of the Appeal Site and surroundings, and that the value placed on the local landscape features and landscape character is understated. Within the LVIA the baseline information fails to mention that any of the trees within the Appeal Site are ancient/ veteran and notable mature trees, with TPOs, that the adjacent properties are Listed and that Langley Burrell and Kington Langley have Conservation Areas. There is no assessment according to the criteria identified in Box 5.1 of the GLVIA.

5.6 The LVIA has failed to address the impacts associated with the scale of this development and has not put forward any design development parameters to mitigate for the loss of attractive countryside or address the issues of coalescence with Langley Burrell and Kington Langley. These design development parameters are fundamental to the development proposals and must be put forward at the Outline stage of the application. It is totally erroneous to suggest that they can be dealt with as reserved matters.

5.7 The information in the Design and Access Statement does not specifically address how the layout responds to the site context and no Parameters Plan has been submitted identifying the mitigation proposals and design development parameters across the Appeal Site. The Character Areas described do not specifically relate to this site and could apply to any location. Likewise there is no rationale as to the building heights and massing that includes 3 storey dwellings within the northern part of the site that will be visible from Kington Langley and the adjacent countryside. (Refer to Amec Figure 2.4 Building Heights – Revised August 2015, Amec Figure 2.5 Areas of Highest Quality Material/ Special Character – Revised August 2015 and Amec Figure 2.6 Areas of Highest Quality Material Sections – Revised August 2015.)

5.8 The measures incorporated to mitigate potential significant effects are detailed in Table 9.4 on p.134 of Chapter 9 of the Environmental Statement and comprise buffer planting to Barrow Farm, Barrow Cottage and barn conversion, Pound Cottage, Old School House, 12-16 Swindon Road and that the ‘layout incorporates overwhelming

12

majority of on-site trees and hedges and adds new planting to strengthen hedgerows.’

5.9 Buffer planting and the retention of vegetation are generic mitigation measures that apply to every site.

5.10 Within the LVIA effects on local landscape character are given as a moderate/ substantial level of landscape effect (negative, long term and irreversible) of SIGNIFICANT effect. For properties adjacent to the Appeal Site including Barrow Farm house and barn, Barrow Cottage, Old School House, Pound Cottage and 11-16 Swindon Road the visual effects are substantial reducing to moderate/ substantial (negative, long term and irreversible) with establishment of screen planting, and are of SIGNIFICANT effect. Visual effects for PROWs crossing the Appeal Site are given as substantial (negative, long term and irreversible) and are of SIGNIFICANT effect. The effects are the same without and with the Land at North Chippenham development.

5.11 Table 9.9 within the LVIA gives the matrix of EIA Significance. Effects of substantial and moderate/ substantial are considered significant in EIA terms.

5.12 The LVIA has not considered the implications of the loss of trees and substantial lengths of hedgerow to create the new roundabout at Maud Heath’s Causeway and the emergency access close to the historic gardens of Langley House, and associated adverse impacts on landscape character. I estimate that approx. 380m of hedgerow will need to be removed.

5.13 The overall conclusion within the LVIA states ‘that the development proposals are considered suitable and acceptable in landscape and visual terms’ which does not concur with the findings of the LVIA assessment. The Addendum to the LVIA dated September 2015 states within the Conclusions ‘the amendments to the Masterplan do not alter the overall assessments of significance in the 2014 LVIA’ yet development proposals are now stated as being ‘beneficial in landscape and visual terms.’ There is no explanation to justify this statement.

5.14 The LVIA makes reference to the Hullavington Rolling Lowland LCA but fails completely to acknowledge that the development should be informed by its objectives as required by Core Policy 51, and specifically to ‘conserve and enhance its pastoral character, and to ensure that any new development respects the grain of the dispersed settlement in the area and to minimise the landscape and visual effects of the expansion of Chippenham.’ In terms of Landscape Sensitivity the LCA states ‘The whole area has an essentially tranquil and pastoral character within which only small- scale, sensitively designed development, appropriately associated with existing built form, could be successfully accommodated without adverse landscape impacts.’ The scale of the proposed development, which is a major urban extension, does not conserve or enhance the attractive pastoral character or respect the dispersed settlement pattern but will completely undermine it and be completely at odds with the vernacular form of the adjacent villages.

5.15 The Landscape Institute’s best practice guidelines ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment’ (GLVIA, 2013) states that the LVIA forms a crucial part of the iterative design process that should inform the site layout and design development parameters at the earliest stages to mitigate adverse impacts. It is my professional opinion that a landscape led approach has not been adopted and the LVIA has not informed any design development parameters. As a result the proposed development will cause significant harm to the receiving landscape.

13

5.16 With regard to CP51 sub-criteria, all are relevant to this Appeal Site except that relating to Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs). The development proposals are assessed against each sub-criterion.

5.17 Effects upon the locally distinctive pattern and species composition of natural features such as trees, hedgerows, woodland, field boundaries, watercourses and water bodies The historic pattern of mature hedgerows and ditches with ancient/ veteran and notable mature trees and back drop of Bird’s Marsh wood will be completely obliterated by the extent of the development across the Appeal Site. No design development parameters have been put forward to address this issue or to retain the existing hedgerows and mature trees within functional landscape buffers.

5.18 Effects upon the locally distinctive character of settlements and their landscape settings The area is characterised by dispersed farmsteads and cottages with smaller historic villages of Kington Langley and Langley Burrell surrounded by countryside.

5.19 The Appeal Site is located adjacent to the Land at North Chippenham site and beyond the existing urban edge. It will therefore extend significantly the urban edge of Chippenham further north into the countryside. Langley Burrell directly east of the Appeal Site is a linear medieval and post medieval settlement located along Maud Heath’s Causeway and has a historic character with many listed buildings and is designated a Conservation Area. It is a quiet rural village surrounded by fields and those of the Appeal Site contribute to its rural setting. This rural context will be completely eroded by the proposed development through the urbanising effect of built form associated with the Local Centre, Employment Centre, School and upto 500 houses that will be clearly visible with associated traffic, noise and lighting. The narrow and rural character to Maud Heath’s Causeway will be completely lost by the removal of 180m of hedgerow at the new roundabout and road realignment with associated lighting and signage. These effects will significantly diminish the rural setting of Langley Burrell.

5.20 Effects upon the separate identity of settlements and the transition between man- made and natural landscapes at the urban fringe The northeast approach to Chippenham along Maud Heath’s Causeway has a very rural character. The arable fields directly adjoin the housing along Hill Corner Road which forms the urban edge. Parsonage Way industrial estate is enclosed and visually contained by a dense belt of tree and woodland planting that contributes to the overall wooded character including the woodland around Kilvert’s Parsonage. This effective screening means that the industrial estate is not a detractor in the landscape and does not diminish the rural character. (Refer to Figure 4 Photo 1) There is no transitional landscape or urban fringe. The Chippenham LSA states ‘The character of this rural approach is special and should be safeguarded.’

5.21 The issue of settlement coalescence is an important planning consideration. The Appeal Site farmland currently serves to separate the settlements of Chippenham and Langley Burrell, and further afield Kington Langley to the north.

5.22 The new roundabout giving access to the development will be located on Maud Heath’s Causeway approx. 375m beyond the existing housing at Hill Corner Road, which currently defines the urban edge, and closer to the turn off with Langley Burrell. This means of access with adjacent proposed Local Centre, Employment Centre,

14

School and housing will substantially urbanise the rural character of the Maud Heath’s Causeway and effectively merge Chippenham with Langley Burrell.

5.23 Amec Figure 9.14a Viewpoint 4: Langley Burrell within the LVIA represents views from the western edge of the village and clearly illustrates the existing rural context of the village and the closeness of the Appeal Site. The cottages and listed buildings along Maud Heath’s Causeway are clearly visible on the edge of the gently rising ground of the Appeal Site with backdrop of Bird’s Marsh wood. The housing along Hill Road Corner and Parsonage Industrial Estate are barely discernible screened by intervening hedgerows and woodland belts, even in winter as this viewpoint demonstrates. The proposed development will be clearly visible and prominent across the extent of the view which will have an urbanising effect completely altering the appearance and rural setting of Langley Burrell. The proposed development will result in the loss of countryside that forms the rural buffer between Chippenham and Langley Burrell and there will be coalescence of the two settlements.

5.24 Kington Langley village occupies a ridgeline approx. 1.2km to the north of the Appeal Site and has a southerly aspect towards the Appeal Site. Amec Figure 9.15 Viewpoint 5: Kington Langley - South of Lime Tree Farm gives an indication of probable views from adjacent properties, as stated within the LVIA. This viewpoint demonstrates that the northern fields of the Appeal Site are clearly visible and that there is therefore intervisibility between Kington Langley and the Appeal Site. The proposed development may be partially screened by intervening trees but the proposed housing, including the 3 storey dwellings will extend along the northern edge of the Appeal Site introducing an uncharacteristic urban built form completely changing the rural character of the view.

5.25 Whilst the LVIA has stated that the visual effects on the villages of Langley Burrell and Kington Langley will be ‘adverse, long term and irreversible’ the issue of coalescence has not been considered.

5.26 Effects upon visually sensitive skylines, soils, geological and topographical features The prominence of Bird’s Marsh ancient woodland on higher ground surrounded by arable fields is a distinctive feature of the wider rural landscape. PROWs crossing the Appeal Site around Bird’s Marsh wood have elevated views over the surrounding countryside towards Kington Langley and Langley Burrell and the distant hills towards Calne. These views and the prominence of Bird’s Marsh Wood will be engulfed by the proposed development.

5.27 Effects upon landscape features of cultural, historic and heritage value As described above the Appeal Site and its immediate surroundings has demonstrable special landscape features – Bird’s Marsh ancient woodland, the ancient/ veteran and notable mature trees to the hedgerows (protected with Tree Preservation Orders), the cultural associations with Kilvert’s Diaries and the heritage assets including the listed buildings of St Peter’s Church, Langley House, The Pound and Pound House, The Old School House, Kilvert’s Parsonage, Barrow Farmhouse and Barrow Cottage plus Langley Burrell and Kington Langley are designated Conservation Areas. This combination of features that has retained its farmland setting allows an appreciation of the historical context of the site, which the proposed development will completely undermine. (Refer to Figure 4 Photo 2)

5.28 The effects on the heritage assets will be considered further in Evidence given by Caroline Ridgwell.

5.29 Effects upon important views and visual amenity

15

The findings of the LVIA state that there will be adverse, long term and irreversible visual effects on adjacent residential properties, PROW crossing the site and the villages of Langley Burrell and Kington Langley. The proposed development will be uncharacteristic and incongruous within these views introducing an urbanising effect into an otherwise rural and undeveloped landscape. Properties adjacent to the Appeal Site boundaries that currently have open views across the arable fields will be enclosed by 10-20m of buffer planting which will be overbearing and oppressive.

5.29 Effects on tranquillity and the need to protect against intrusion from light pollution, noise and motion The LVIA has made several references to tranquillity and acknowledges that the north western and central parts of the Appeal Site are relatively tranquil, particularly near Bird’s Marsh wood where the large established mature trees contribute to the sense of tranquillity.

5.30 Tranquillity is defined as a state of calm and quietude associated with a peace and is considered to be a significant asset of the landscape.

5.31 The Campaign to Protect Rural England’s (CPRE) Tranquillity Map indicates that there is variation in tranquillity across the Appeal Site from the B4069 as to be expected. Significantly there is a distinct and apparent change in tranquillity from the edge of Chippenham to the northern and western parts of the Appeal Site, suggesting that there is a marked increase in levels of tranquillity rather than a gradual transition as would be suggested by a gradation of colours. (Refer to Figure 5)

5.32 The B4069 beyond the entrance to Kilvert’s Parsonage is not lit by street lighting. The urbanising effects of the proposed development across this large area of farmland, including light spill and noise will significantly alter the existing levels of tranquillity in all areas surrounding the Appeal Site, such that the area can no longer be considered as tranquil.

5.33 Effects on landscape functions including places to live, work, relax and recreate The Appeal site is 24.2 hectares of farmland and this year produced cereal crops. It is Grade 2 agricultural land and therefore is the Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land. The grade and quality of agricultural land lost to development must be considered (NPPF Policy 11, para 112).

5.34 The proposed development will completely engulf the PROWs that cross the Appeal Site changing their character from rural open countryside to enclosed urban development, and substantially alter the rural approach to Bird’s Marsh ancient woodland across farmland. The proposed development will result in the loss of a substantial area of Kilvert’s Country.

5.35 Regarding Policy CP52: Green Infrastructure the following is relevant: ‘Proposals for major development should be accompanied by an audit of the existing green infrastructure within and around the site and a statement demonstrating how this will be retained and enhanced through the development process.’

5.36 The appellant has submitted a Tree Constraints Survey & Report undertaken by Amenity Tree Care Ltd, dated March 2014. This identifies the trees and woodland with Root Protection Areas (RPAs) but does not include an Arboricultural Impact Assessment to identify trees to be retained and those which are to be removed. A Hedgerow Survey to identify which hedgerows are important under the Hedgerows

16

Regulations 1997 has not been submitted, and likewise there are no details of hedges to be removed.

5.37 Trees and hedgerows to be removed at the new roundabout on Maud Heath’s Causeway and at the Emergency Access have not been identified on any drawings. It is estimated that an approx. length of 180m of hedge and an Ash tree will need to be removed at Maud Heath’s Causeway to accommodate the new road alignment and roundabout. To achieve the required highway safety standards at the Emergency Access approx. 200m of hedge and two Oaks (both TPOs) will need to be removed.

5.38 The Appeal Site contains TPO ancient/ veteran and notable mature trees and species rich hedgerows with adjoining woodland. Trees of this stature and size will typically have Root Protection Areas (RPAs) of 15m minimum and the shading effects of a large tree canopy are likely to extend well beyond this. These trees must be retained within wide landscape buffers/ green infrastructure corridors which must be included as design development parameters at the Outline application stage.

5.39 The Indicative Masterplan Amec Figure 2.2 (Revised August 2015) and Green Infrastructure Plan Amec Figure 2.7 (Revised August 2015) that have been submitted are no more than concept diagrams and do not give an adequate level of detail and understanding of the potential impacts on green infrastructure. No information has been submitted regarding the retention of trees and hedgerows.

Conclusions

5.40 Having considered Core Policy 51: Landscape and Core Policy 52: Green Infrastructure it is my professional opinion that the development at this Appeal Site will not protect, conserve or enhance landscape character or retain the green infrastructure associated with the Appeal Site. The development will undoubtedly have significant and demonstrable harm on this attractive rural landscape due to nature and scale of the development which is totally uncharacteristic of the receiving landscape and would be completely at odds with the existing grain of dispersed historic villages surrounded by countryside.

5.41 The proposed development conflicts with the requirements of NPPF to recognise the character and beauty of the countryside. This is an attractive valued landscape with demonstrable special landscape features, tranquil nature and strong sense of connection with the past through the listed buildings, the ancient woodland and ancient/ veteran and notable mature trees. The proposed development will completely obliterate this unique sense of place and the open far reaching views associated with this farmland. It will undermine the essential rural qualities of this landscape.

5.42 The proposed development is a major urban extension that would substantially extend the edge of Chippenham into open countryside with significant adverse landscape and visual impacts that have not, in any way, been adequately addressed or mitigated by a robust landscape strategy and design development parameters.

5.43 The proposed development at the Appeal Site does not represent an appropriate and logical extension to Chippenham or an effective transition to the neighbouring villages. It will substantially undermine the attractive rural character of Maud Heath’s Causeway and the rural setting and landscape buffer to Langley Burrell. This small historic village will no longer retain its separate identity with surrounding farmland and backdrop of Bird’s Marsh wood. The proposed development will be visible from

17

Kington Langley pushing the urban edge of Chippenham further north into the countryside reducing the separation between this village and Chippenham.

5.44 The Land North of Chippenham development to the south west of Barrow Farm is on sloping ground with a southerly aspect overlooking Chippenham and will extend eastwards into the arable fields adjacent to Hill Corner Road with a new link road and roundabout adjoining Maud Heath’s Causeway opposite Parsonage Way. This link road along the northern edge will be contained by a belt of woodland planting that will define the new northern extent of Chippenham. (Refer to Figure 6)

18

Appendices supporting this Statement

Appendix A Wiltshire Council’s Tree Preservation Orders Map and Listing Figure 1 - 1 ed OS Map (1872-1894) Figure 2 - 2 ed OS Map (1897-1914) Figure 3 - 3 ed OS Map (1910-1933) Figure 4 - Site photographs Figure 5 - CPRE’s Tranquillity Map Figure 6 - Topography and Land North of Chippenham Site

Appendix B: Landscape Character Assessments Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment - 16A Malmesbury Corsham Limestone Lowland North Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment - 8 Hullavington Rolling Lowland

Appendix C: Chippenham SLA Pro-forma for Strategic Area A1

19

Appendix A

20

WILTSHIRE COUNCIL TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 SECTION 78 APPEAL BY ROBERT HITCHINS LTD LAND NORTH AND EAST OF BARROW FARM CHIPPENHAM, SN15 5LX Planning Inspectorate Reference: APP/Y3940/W/15/3139183 Wiltshire Council Reference: 14/10433/OUT Date of inquiry: 11th October 2016

PROOF OF EVIDENCE by Andrea Kenworthy BSc (Hons) Dip LA CMLI

FIGURE 1 WILTSHIRE COUNCIL TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 SECTION 78 APPEAL BY ROBERT HITCHINS LTD LAND NORTH AND EAST OF BARROW FARM CHIPPENHAM, SN15 5LX Planning Inspectorate Reference: APP/Y3940/W/15/3139183 Wiltshire Council Reference: 14/10433/OUT Date of inquiry: 11th October 2016

PROOF OF EVIDENCE by Andrea Kenworthy BSc (Hons) Dip LA CMLI

FIGURE 2 WILTSHIRE COUNCIL TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 SECTION 78 APPEAL BY ROBERT HITCHINS LTD LAND NORTH AND EAST OF BARROW FARM CHIPPENHAM, SN15 5LX Planning Inspectorate Reference: APP/Y3940/W/15/3139183 Wiltshire Council Reference: 14/10433/OUT Date of inquiry: 11th October 2016

PROOF OF EVIDENCE by Andrea Kenworthy BSc (Hons) Dip LA CMLI

FIGURE 3 Photo 1 View south east towards Parsonage Way Industrial Estate and Hill Corner Road from southern edge of Appeal Site

Photo 2 View north east towards Listed Cottages on B4069 from eastern part of Appeal Site WILTSHIRE COUNCIL TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 SECTION 78 APPEAL BY ROBERT HITCHINS LTD LAND NORTH AND EAST OF BARROW FARM CHIPPENHAM, SN15 5LX Planning Inspectorate Reference: APP/Y3940/W/15/3139183 Wiltshire Council Reference: 14/10433/OUT Date of inquiry: 11th October 2016

PROOF OF EVIDENCE by Andrea Kenworthy BSc (Hons) Dip LA CMLI

FIGURE 4 CPRE’s Tranquillity Map WILTSHIRE COUNCIL Areas in RED have the lowest tranquillity, areas in GREEN have the highest tranquillity TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 SECTION 78 APPEAL BY ROBERT HITCHINS LTD LAND NORTH AND EAST OF BARROW FARM CHIPPENHAM, SN15 5LX Planning Inspectorate Reference: APP/Y3940/W/15/3139183 Wiltshire Council Reference: 14/10433/OUT Date of inquiry: 11th October 2016

PROOF OF EVIDENCE by Andrea Kenworthy BSc (Hons) Dip LA CMLI

FIGURE 5 APPEAL SITE

WILTSHIRE COUNCIL TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 SECTION 78 APPEAL BY ROBERT HITCHINS LTD LAND NORTH AND EAST OF BARROW FARM CHIPPENHAM, SN15 5LX Land North of Planning Inspectorate Reference: Chippenham APP/Y3940/W/15/3139183 Link Road Wiltshire Council Reference: 14/10433/OUT Date of inquiry: 11th October 2016

PROOF OF EVIDENCE by Andrea Kenworthy BSc (Hons) Dip LA CMLI

FIGURE 6 Appendix B: Landscape Character Assessments

21

LANDSCAPE TYPE 16: LIMESTONE LOWLAND 16: LIMESTONE LOWLAND

12A

11B 8A

8A 11A

9A 16A 9A 4A 12B 1B 9A 10A 5A 7C 1A 2A

10B 15A

11C 2B

3B 6A 3A 7A 5D 5E 2E 6B

5C 68 2E

3C 8523 D L

7A A o 7B N nce ce 7B i 14A UC L L ,

13A ht g

2F i r y p

5F Co 6C n w 7B 5B 2C o Cr , ce i

2D f f O y r ne o i 14B t a t S s ' y t s e j a M r e H f o r e l l o r nt Co e h T f o n o i s s i m r

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER AREAS pe e h t h t i w n o i t a m r o f n i

16A Malmesbury-Corsham Limestone Lowland y e v r u S ce n a

Urban Area n d r O m o r f d e uc d o pr e R TYPE 16: LIMESTONE LOWLAND

DESCRIPTION

Location and Boundaries The Limestone Lowland Landscape Type covers a large swathe of northwest Wiltshire. The area extends from Bradford-on-Avon in the south to the Kemble Airfield in the far north. The county border constrains the area to the north and west. The boundary to the east is a less distinct transition, occurring with the change in underlying geology from limestone to clay. There is only one character area within the Limestone Lowland Landscape Type, 16A: Malmesbury-Corsham Limestone Lowlands. The western edge of the Limestone Lowlands Landscape Type forms part of the Cotswolds AONB.

Key Characteristics • Gently undulating lowland farmland over underlying geology of predominantly mudstone and limestone with some pockets of clay.

• A peaceful and rural landscape with subtle variations in character relating to the varied geology, topography and water courses.

• Mix of permanent pasture and arable farmland.

• Strong network of hedgerows with hedgerow trees.

• Dry stone walls field boundaries in some areas and around settlements.

• Field pattern predominantly large geometric field typical of eighteenth and nineteenth century enclosure with small scale irregular fields of medieval pattern close to close to settlement.

• More open areas of higher ground to the west offer panoramic views over the type, elsewhere occasional woodland blocks, copses and frequent hedgerow trees give a greater sense of enclosure, with intermittent views.

• Numerous rivers forming shallow valleys, with the watercourses sometimes lined with willows.

• Settlements in the form of historic market towns, villages and scattered farmsteads distributed throughout the type linked by network of rural roads.

• Traditional buildings of local limestone buildings an outstanding feature.

• Presence of historic parkland and estates marked by stone estate walls, grand entrances and parkland trees and avenues.

Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment 149 Land Use Consultants

Final Report December 2005 Physical Influences The underlying geology of the Limestone Lowland Landscape Type is from the Great Oolite Groups, formed in the Mid Jurassic Period. A parallel band of Forest Marble mudstone and Cornbrash limestone underlie most of the area. The boundary between these formations is irregular and intermittent occurrences of Forest Marble limestone and Kellaways clay are also apparent, to the west and east respectively. This fragmentation in underlying geology gives rise to the subtle variations in land cover and character over the type in a gradual transition from the west which is dominated by limestone to the eastern borders of Kellaways clay. There are two SSSIs designated for their geological interest. Corsham Railway Cutting exposes an area of Forest Marble Mudstone revealing important coral ‘reef knolls’ of palaeontological interest and inter-reef oolitic sediment. Stanton St Quintin Quarry SSSI provides one of the country’s few complete exposures of cornbrash, yielded ammonites of biostratigraphic importance. The landform undulates, rising from around 60m to 130m AOD with an overall slope from higher ground in the west to the lower clay land to the east. Some flatter areas occur on higher ground and localised valleys associated with the numerous rivers are also evident throughout.

Biodiversity The landscape as a whole is a valuable habitat for bats, in particular Box Hill Mine (SSSI and part of the Bradford on Avon SAC).There are several areas of ecological interest in the Limestone Lowland Landscape Type including three nationally important SSSIs (one of which is also a SAC) and numerous Country Wildlife Sites, often where ancient woodland or pockets of chalk grassland are present. There is also a strong network of hedgerows and frequent hedgerow and standard trees including veteran oaks, ash and willow along water courses. Inwood SSSI is an area calcareous ash-wych elm and dry maple woodland with an extremely rich ground flora including species of plant that are nationally rare. The area also includes an area of unimproved neutral hay meadow. Harries Ground SSSI at Rodbourne is also an area of species rich neutral lowland hay meadow on an area of clay in the Avon vale. Box Hill Mine is designated as a SSSI and as a SAC. It comprises a network of man-made tunnels which is used by bats for hibernation, mating and as a staging post prior to dispersal. Box mine seasonally supports up to 10% of the total British population of greater horseshoe bats. County Wildlife Sites include: Stanton Park, an ancient woodland on the site of a Roman villa with a very rich ground flora including wood millet, wood spurge and woodruff in the semi- natural areas; Hazelton Wood, a small ancient semi-natural woodland site which, although is is now mixed plantation, retains much of the understorey and ground flora of interest including bath asparagus; and Hebden Leaze House Meadows, species-rich meadows of limestone grassland adjacent to Luckington Brook - upright brome is abundant and also present are burnet saxifrage, cowslip and dwarf thistle.

Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment 150 Land Use Consultants

Final Report December 2005 Historic environment Prehistoric sites include two chambered long mounds near Luckington plus a Neolithic chambered long barrow at Lanhill and a Bronze Age bowl barrow at Barrow Farm. The area became more heavily settled in the Roman period with Easton Grey, to the north of the area, dating from the first century A.D. There are also a number of Roman roads in the area. The Domesday Book shows that a large part of the Limestone Lowlands Landscape Type was at one time owned by the Bishop of Glastonbury. The boundaries of royal forests lying to the west of Chippenham were declared in 1228, although these were largely felled and enclosed in the 17th century. Evidence of small and irregular medieval field patterns are still apparent, particularly close to settlement, although most of the fields are larger and more regular indicating more recent enclosure. There are a number of imposing houses set in historic parkland, such as Luckington Court, notable for its tree collection, and Corsham Court where Lancelot ‘Capability’ Brown and Humphrey Repton worked on the grounds.

Settlement and built character Settlement in the Limestone Lowland Landscape Type is in the form of scattered villages and farmsteads, connected by a network of rural roads, and constructed almost universally of limestone to the west of the area with occasional use of brick on the eastern edges of the type. Villages are peaceful and rural, often centred around a village green, pond or area of common land. Buildings are traditional in style, with many dating from the 17th and 18th centuries. Large stately homes and manor houses also occur throughout the landscape, often with large parkland estates. Dry stone walls occur more frequently around and close to villages in western areas but are less common as field boundaries elsewhere. This distinctive pattern and style of settlement within the Limestone Lowland Landscape Type is a key element of its character. Larger stone settlements are Corsham and the ancient market town of Malmsbury. Chippenham however, is the largest settlement in the area, expanding considerably since the 1950s. More recent housing development is visible from the A350, which defines the western edge of the town and acts as a main north/south route thought the area. Other developments that have an impact of the landscape include two air fields, on areas of higher and flatter ground Kemble and Hullavington. Most of the roads in the type are modest rural road however the M4 motorway passes though from east to west with an increased sense of movement and localised noise.

CHARACTER AREAS

16A: Malmesbury-Corsham Limestone Lowlands Malmesbury-Corsham Limestone Lowlands is the only area within of the Limestone Lowlands Landscape Type. It covers a large area of northwest Wiltshire occurring between areas of limestone valleys and higher limestone wold to the west (outside the county) and clay to the east.

Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment 151 Land Use Consultants

Final Report December 2005 The area is predominantly rolling mixed pastoral and arable farmland, in a pattern of large fields bounded by hedgerows with hedgerow trees. The hedgerows vary in condition with some gappy and low flailed hedges in evidence for example around Grittleton. Changes in the underlying geology and land use cause subtle localised variations throughout the area within an overall graduation from higher ground founded on limestone to the west to lower ground on clay to the east. On the higher and steeper ground of the Forest Marble Limestone to the west, and particularly to the south of Corsham, hedgerows are less prominent with dry stone walls dividing the fields. With less visual obstruction, there are panoramic and distant views the farmland as it falls away gently to the east. There are also some more open areas around Biddestone and to the north of the area. Here a comparative scarcity of tree cover creates a greater sense of exposure. Shallow valleys along the numerous springs and brooks in the area have a more intimate and enclosed feeling. The most prominent of these is along the River Avon where the locally steep valley sides give a sense of containment, and the rich vegetation including willows line the river bank. There are also areas of estate and historic parkland, often associated with large houses. Areas of open pastoral land with numerous standard trees can be found throughout the area, some contain more designed element such as the large avenue near Monkton Farleigh. A key element in the area is the distinctive limestone villages and towns, connected by a network of winding rural lanes and straight Roman roads. Some brick built dwellings and farmhouses appear to the east of the area reflecting the changing geology. Traditional buildings are frequently centred around village greens and ponds or form a more linear settlement forming a main street along one of the rural roads.

EVALUATION

Positive landscape features of significance • Peaceful rural landscape.

• Panoramic views from higher ground.

• Strong network of hedgerows, hedgerow trees and occasional woodland copses.

• Dry stone walls.

• Remaining areas with medieval field pattern.

• Historic parklands.

• Remaining areas of ancient woodland, chalk grassland and other areas of ecological diversity.

• Distinctive traditional limestone villages.

• Network of rural road.

Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment 152 Land Use Consultants

Final Report December 2005 Forces for change • Continued amalgamation and enlargement of fields.

• Some hedgerow field boundaries have been intensively flailed.

• Some dry stone wall field boundaries are becoming overgrown.

• Increasing traffic on narrow rural lane network leading to urbanisation though kerbing, additional lighting and signage.

• Pressure for new development along rural lanes and around existing settlements.

Condition The condition of the Limestone Lowland Landscape type is generally good with intact hedgerows, traditional villages of vernacular stone dwellings, village greens and stone walls. In some sections of the areas there are elements in poorer condition such as gappy and flailed hedgerows, overgrown stone walls and encroaching horse pasture close to some of the larger settlement.

Strength of character The Limestone Lowland Landscape Type is united by the strong character of its traditional stone built settlements however, other elements such as land use, topography and field boundaries vary subtly across the type making it less distinctive and cohesive and therefore the strength of character overall is judged as moderate.

Inherent landscape sensitivities • The peaceful rural nature of the area.

• Areas of ecological importance including ancient woodland and chalk grassland.

• The setting, containment and scale of the limestone villages.

• The remaining medieval field patterns and dry stone walls around and close to settlement.

• Historic parkland.

Strategy The strategy for the Limestone Lowland Landscape Type is to conserve those elements intrinsic to the type’s character or important in their own right, such as the distinctive stone villages, the areas of ecological importance and the historic parkland and to strengthen locally degraded elements such as the flailed hedgerows and overgrown stone walls.

Broad Management Objectives • Conserve the network of hedgerows, hedgerow trees and woodland copses and take opportunities for new planting where this will strengthen local character (for instance

Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment 153 Land Use Consultants

Final Report December 2005 avoiding planting that will affect the open views in the high ground at the west of the area).

• Encourage conservation and rebuilding of dry stone wall field boundaries, particularly close to settlement.

• Conserve the remaining areas of ecological interest such as those with statutory designations, areas of ancient woodland, veteran hedgerow trees and chalk grassland.

• Maintain the subtle variations that occur throughout the landscape, encouraging local distinctiveness for instance in the variation in field boundaries from hedgerows to stone walls.

• Encourage management and restoration of the historic parkland landscapes that are characteristic of the area.

• Retain the distinctive character of the villages; ensuring any change respects the traditional stone built character and vernacular form.

• Resist urbanisation of the country lanes through addition of road markings and concrete kerbs or lamp posts or excessive signage that detracts from the rural character of the area.

LANDSCAPE CHARACTER CONTEXT The character of the Wiltshire landscape has already been investigated in a number of studies as detailed above in Appendices 1 and 2. The Limestone Lowland landscape type is largely within the area covered by the North Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment (2004). The type broadly covers the same area as the Limestone Lowland Farmland Landscape Type from the North Wiltshire study, and includes areas of the following North Wiltshire character areas: Sherston Dipslope Lowland, Minety and Malmesbury Rolling Lowland, Hullavington Rolling Lowland, Corsham Rolling Lowland and Upper Avon Valley. The western part of the type is also covered in the Landscape Character Assessment and Guidelines for Cotswolds AONB (2004). Areas of the Dip Slope Lowland and Cornbrash Lowlands Landscape Types are encompassed in the Limestone Lowland.

Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment 154 Land Use Consultants

Final Report December 2005

Volume 1: Final Report North Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment

sized woodlands remain, however, both to the Character Area 8 north of the M4 and west of Chippenham. Corsham Court provides a significant large scale parkland Hullavington Rolling landscape at the southern tip of the area. The seat was first kept by King Aethelred in the early 9th Lowland century and was passed to various noblemen subsequently. Capability Brown prepared plans to enlarge the park in 1760 which was finished by General description Repton in 1799. 4.136 This large area lies between Malmesbury in 4.140 A major early road ran from London, the north and Chippenham in the south. It is a through Hungerford, Marlborough and Chippenham rural area of gently rolling hills and shallow to Bristol – now the route of the A420. This was valleys, based on a number of geological part of a highly developed national road system by formations, predominantly Forest Marble the mid-fourteenth century and would have been limestone, Oxford Clay and Cornbrash. The of particular importance to the locally important landform rises from approximately 60mAOD in the cloth trade. east of the area close to the Avon valley, to over 120m with some localised high points of up to 4.141 Limestone from the Cotswolds is the 139m AOD. predominant building material, for both houses and the stone walls which are common in villages. Dry stone walls are also evident but not common as field boundaries. The villages of Kington Langley and Kington St Michael are notable for their fine stone buildings, many dating from the 17th and 18th centuries, and include the use of undressed stone to walls, ashlar quoins, lintels and mullions, and stone slates. This extensive use of weathered stone creates a landscape of muted colours.

4.142 The M4 motorway now carves a major

swathe through the centre of the area, connecting with the A429 running north south, and the A420 running west from Chippenham. The edge of 4.137 This diverse geology gives rise to an area of Chippenham is in the character area where it rises mixed soil conditions, from predominantly pasture onto higher land bordering the Avon valley. Just on the clay, to arable on the better soils of the south of Malmesbury there is a former airfield at Cornbrash. Field patterns are a mix of medium to Hullavington with large hangars and associated large sizes, with a pattern of irregular medieval buildings. boundary shapes to more regular shapes from later enclosures. There are a number of villages within 4.143 In many places there are wide views over the area, but few other settlements and a the area, where agriculture is the dominant and dispersed pattern of farms. Woodlands and shaping force in the landscape, which in places has generally intact hedgerows with mature trees been to the detriment of local distinctiveness, for further contribute to the patchwork of fields in example in the loss of distinctive features of this gentle landscape. habitats associated with waterside environments. 4.138 The area has evidence of a succession of occupation with evidence of prehistoric settlement in the area such as the Neolithic chambered long barrow at Lanhill and an early Bronze Age bowl barrow at Barrow Farm. This part of Wiltshire is likely to have been Romanized from the latter part of the 1st century A.D. with the large Roman settlement at Easton Grey to the north, and a number of villas in the vicinity. Although the first recorded settlement in the locality of Kington St Michael is in the 10th century, it is likely that there was earlier Saxon settlement in this area. 4.139 The Domesday Book records that Main characteristics considerable lands in the area were owned by the bishop of Glastonbury, and included much 4.144 The main characteristics of the area can be woodland, which was much reduced shortly defined as follows: afterwards. The bounds of the royal forests of • Rolling or lowland hills between 60-120m AOD, Chippenham and Melksham were declared in 1228, on Forest Marble limestone, Oxford Clay and lying to the west of Chippenham, but the Cornbrash. woodlands were largely felled and enclosed in the early 17th century. A number of small and medium

WHITE consultants 26 June 2004

Volume 1: Final Report North Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment

• Patchwork of irregular, medium sized fields, • Discourage development in the rural mainly pasture, and larger more recent hinterland. enclosures used for arable, especially in on • Conserve the setting of Corsham Park. the richer soils. • Continuous hedges with many mature oaks. Long term • Medium sized woodlands and deciduous copses. • Consider where development related to • Fine stone villages with muted colours and Chippenham is most appropriate in terms of dispersed farms. landscape and visual effects. • Historic Corsham Park. • Use of undressed limestone to walls, ashlar Key views management strategy quoins, lintels and mullions, and stone slates. • Detractors of the M4, the edge of Chippenham 4.152 Many wide views are possible over this and Hullavington airfield. broad, rolling landscape. Within the rural hinterland, the key visual elements are the mature trees and the patchwork of small irregular fields. A Management guidelines number of major roads cross the area, including 4.145 The overall objectives for the area are to the M4 motorway and the A429 and A420. Views conserve and enhance its pastoral character, and from these roads, and the connecting B roads, are to ensure that any new development respects the important for the perceptions of many local grain of the dispersed settlement in the area and people. Much of the rural hinterland, however, is the vernacular building materials. relatively remote and tranquil. 4.146 The continuity of hedgerows is important in 4.153 Indicators of change from chosen viewpoints shaping the character of the area, and should within this character area might include: encourages through appropriate land management • Loss of hedgerows and mature oak trees. programmes. • Landscape elements associated with riverside 4.147 River valleys should be enhanced by environments – in particular wet meadows, encouraging habitat creation and planting of waterside trees, and reed beds or other riverside trees. wetland species. • Built form using traditional stone materials 4.148 The use of limestone in buildings and free and detailing. standing walls should be supported, both in helping conserve existing features, and in the appropriate use of materials in new construction. Landscape sensitivity 4.149 Protect the setting and intrinsic character 4.154 Corsham Park is designated as an Historic of Corsham Park. park and garden and forms part of a small Special Landscape Area which is an indication of its 4.150 Minimise the landscape and visual effects of perceived high value. The broader area is typified the expansion of Chippenham. by a gently undulating patchwork of arable and pasture with mature hedgerows, some woodlands and nucleated settlement in the form of fine stone Management strategy: actions villages. In some areas the distinctive features of the landscape have been lost, such as the relative 4.151 The following actions are recommended to lack of diversity in river corridors. help realise the overall objectives for the area: 4.155 The landscape retains many features which are of local value, especially the woodlands, Short term mature trees and continuous hedgerows. These could be lost through intention or neglect, • Conserve hedgerows and mature trees, especially if agricultural futures for pastureland in including planting new trees in existing hedges particular become more uncertain. The riverside and planting specimen trees in field corners. and wetland areas, however, have lost much of • Encourage woodland management to provide their visual and ecological diversity. continuity of cover while optimising ecological value. 4.156 The whole area has an essentially tranquil • Enhance the wetland character in riverside and pastoral character within which only small- locations by planting willows along water scale, sensitively designed development, courses in informal groups and broken lines, appropriately associated with existing built form, and by encouraging landowners to help in the could be successfully accommodated without creation of more diverse waterside habitats. adverse landscape impacts. • Ensure development reinforces the locally distinctive character and respects the vernacular. The use of traditional building materials including limestone are important in this area.

WHITE consultants 27 June 2004

Appendix C: Chippenham SLA

22