Barratt Homes South Wales Land at Heol Pentre Bach, Gorseinon

Barratt Homes South Wales

WYG Land at Heol Pentre Bach, Gorseinon [OFFICE ADDRESS] [TEL NO] Landscape and Visual Amenity Statement [EMAIL ADDRESS] www.wyg.com Februarycreative minds 2017 safe hands

LVAS Contents

1 Introduction 3 1.1 Scope of the statement 3 1.2 Methodology 4 1.3 The Proposed Development 5 2 Landscape Policies and Designations 5 2.1 Planning Policy 5 2.2 Landscape Designations 8 2.3 Ecological Designations 8 2.4 Interim Summary 8 3 Potential effects on the Landscape 9 3.1 Landscape baseline 9 4 Effects on the Landscape 12 5 Effects on Visual Amenity 17 5.1 Visual baseline 17 5.2 Effects on Visual Amenity 18 6 Conclusion 22 Appendix 1: Figures 23 Appendix 2: LVIA Methodology 25

LVAS Tables

Table 3-1 LANDMAP 10 Table 4-1 Magnitude of change – potential landscape effects 14 Table 5-1 Indicative criteria for assessing Visual Sensitivity 18 Table 5-2 Magnitude of change – potential visual effects 19 Table AP-6-1 Indicative criteria for Landscape Sensitivity 26 Table AP-6-2 Indicative criteria for Magnitude of Landscape Change 26 Table AP-6-3 Indicative criteria for assessing Landscape Effects 27 Table AP-6-4 Indicative criteria for Visual Sensitivity 27 Table AP-6-5 Indicative criteria for Magnitude of Visual Change 28 Table AP-6-6 Indicative criteria for assessing Visual Effects 28

LVAS 1 Introduction

1.1 Scope of the statement

1.1.1 WYG are instructed by Barratt Homes South Wales to prepare this Landscape and Visual Amenity Statement. It relates to the proposed housing development on land to the west of Gorseinon, Swansea. The site extends to approximately 1.25 hectares and is currently agricultural pasture.

1.1.2 The appraisal provides the baseline against which the effects of the proposed development on the landscape of the site and its context and on visual amenity are outlined. The potential for effects on features identified as important to the landscape quality, or effects on the landscape character of the site and its setting are identified. Potential effects on views of the site and its setting, or visual amenity, are also identified. 1.1.3 For the purposes of landscape and visual effects of this proposal, study areas have been defined:

 The “site” extends to the boundaries of the site identified on the Site Location plan, Figure LA.01  The “landscape context” extends to a radius of about 2.0 kilometres from the site.  Given the scale of the proposal the visual study area was limited to 2.0km, a distance beyond which the proposal would either not be visible or barely perceptible in the view.

1.1.4 The objectives of this Landscape and Visual Amenity Statement (LVAS) are to:

 Describe and evaluate the landscape of the site and surrounding landscape context and visual amenity of the surrounding area, which may be affected by the proposed development.  Set out possible mitigation / enhancement measures which could be incorporated into the proposals to avoid, reduce or offset potential adverse effects.  Identify potential landscape and visual effects of the proposed development.

1.1.5 The LVAS is presented with separate chapters dealing with landscape character and visual amenity. It is supported by plans and photographs, as follows:

 LA.01 Site Location  LA.02 Landscape Appraisal  LA.03 Site Context  LA.04 Site Appraisal  LA.05 Appraisal Photographs  LA.06 Character photographs  LA.07 Site photographs

LVAS 1.2 Methodology

1.2.1 The methodology followed for this LVAS is based on the recommendations in Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd Edition published by The Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment in April 2013 (GLVIA3). 1.2.2 This statement is for a “non-EIA project”. The Landscape Institute has advised in relation to Landscape and Visual Appraisals / Statements outside a formal EIA process in its “Statement of Clarification 1/13”:

In carrying out appraisals, the same principles and process as LVIA may be applied but, in so doing, it is not required to establish whether the effects arising are or are not significant given that the exercise is not being undertaken for EIA purposes. … The emphasis on likely ‘significant effects’ in formal LVIA stresses the need for an approach that is proportional to the scale of the project that is being assessed and the nature of its likely effects. The same principle – focussing on a proportional approach – also applies to appraisals of landscape and visual impacts outside the formal requirements of EIA.

1.2.3 This Statement provides an assessment of the degrees of the effect without commenting on their “significance”. The assessment process comprises a combination of desk studies and field surveys, with subsequent analysis, and involved:

 A review of landscape designations and planning policies for the landscape, and of other landscape studies relevant to the area, including national and local landscape character;  A survey of the site and landscape context study areas and inspection of views of the site from publicly accessible viewpoints, including a photographic survey;  Evaluation of the features and elements of the landscape and their contribution to the landscape character, context and setting, based on these studies;  Consideration of potential landscape and visual effects of the proposed development;  Examination of the development proposals and analysis of the potential effects on the landscape and visual amenity associated with the scheme’s design or operation; and  Assessment of the sensitivity of the landscape and visual amenity to the changes likely to arise from the development along with the potential impacts.

1.2.4 The effects of the development, whether beneficial or adverse, may vary in nature and degree through its lifecycle. Mitigation measures are proposed to be incorporated in the design of the development, or measures such as management of the construction and operational processes are proposed. The purpose of mitigation measures is first, to prevent the potentially adverse impacts identified, and if that is not possible, to reduce the potential adverse effect, or where adverse effects are unavoidable, the purpose is to offset or compensate for the effect.

LVAS Photography

1.2.5 In addition to GLVIA3, the Landscape Institute’s Advice Note 01/11 Photography and photomontage in landscape and visual impact assessment was referred to. 1.2.6 Photographs have a special role in describing landscape character and illustrating key views. In order for photographs to be representative and to create an image that is as similar as possible to that which is seen with the human eye, accepted practice is to use a lens with a focal length equivalent to 50 mm for a 35 mm Single Lens Reflex (SLR) camera, and a horizontal field of view of a little under 40 degrees1. The camera used for the appraisal photography was a Canon EOS 5D III digital SLR camera. Photographs were taken with a focal length equivalent to 50mm on a conventional SLR camera.

1.2.7 Landscape photography includes wide angle or panoramic views requiring a sequence of photographs to be taken across the view. Where this approach is taken, a series of overlapping photographs are digitally spliced together in Adobe Photoshop CS using a cylindrical projection to provide a panorama approximating to the normal field of view in a landscape context. Where necessary, the contrast and brightness of individual photographs is slightly manipulation in order to create a consistent panorama without visible joins. The viewpoints are located with their Ordnance Survey grid reference and height above Ordnance Datum.

1.3 The Proposed Development

1.3.1 The proposed housing development of 41 no Houses is as shown on the accompanying planning application drawings, including Planning Layout 1619-100 Rev C. 1.3.2 Existing vegetation around site boundary is to be largely retained, although several small areas would be removed to form the site vehicular access points from Heol Pentre Bach. The mature trees and hedgerow in the southern part of the site would be removed. The dense scrub vegetation and several trees would be removed from the northern part of the site. Some trees along Heol Pentre Bach would need to be removed to accommodate the services corridor. Wherever possible, planting has been incorporated into the proposal to supplement retained vegetation and mitigate for the removed vegetation.

2 Landscape Policies and Designations

2.1 Planning Policy

2.1.1 The Swansea Local Development Plan is currently at Deposit stage, with the Deposit Plan consultation taking place in 2016, and the Plan is expected to replace the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) within the next few years. The UDP was adopted in 2008 and is the authorities’ most up to date Development Plan covering the administrative area. 2.1.2 The Proposals Map of the UDP indicates that the site lies within an area designated as Green Wedge (Policy EV23) and is also covered by Policy EV20 New Dwellings in the

1 The Landscape Institute, Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/11, Photography and photomontage in Landscape and Visual Assessment, March 2011

LVAS Countryside. Within the Draft Deposit LDP the site is allocated as a non strategic housing site (site UL002). Strategic policies and policies of relevance to the site are: 2.1.3 Policy SP2 - Creating a quality environment: The countryside will be protected and conserved, with green wedges shaping the urban form and safeguarding the distinctive interplay of town and country. Village character will be protected. 2.1.4 Policy SP7 – Providing homes and community facilities: Land will be made available for the development of 14668 new homes over the period from 2001 to 2016 to support a population of 233,000 by:

 Maximising the use of the existing committed landbank and previously developed land and buildings within settlements,  Appropriate infill and rounding off within and at edge of settlements with good transport links,  Securing appropriate provision to meet the County’s need for affordable housing,  Making allowance for the creation of 500 new homes through the maintenance, improvement, redevelopment and reoccupation of void properties.

2.1.5 Policy EV2 – Siting and Location: The siting of new development should give preference to the use of previously developed land over greenfield sites, and must have regard to the physical character and topography of the site and its surroundings by:

 Avoiding locations that would have a significant adverse impact on prominent buildings, landscapes, open spaces and the general locality, including loss of visual amenity,  Effectively integrating with the landscape, seascape or coastline by utilising topography to integrate into the contours of the site and avoiding conspicuous locations on prominent skylines and ridges,  Taking into account and where possible retaining site features including existing buildings, topography, landscape, archaeological and water features, trees and hedgerows, and, where appropriate,  Not prejudicing the viability and function of any agricultural land adjoining the site.

2.1.6 Policy EV12 - Lanes and Public Paths: The character of lanes and public paths that contribute to the amenity, natural, and historic qualities of an area will be protected. Development proposals that include requirements to set back improvement lines, remove hedgerows, and provide new access and visibility splays will be resisted where this would result in a loss of character. In rural areas the design of any necessary works should be appropriate to the character of the area and should not detract from the landscape or suburbanise the area. 2.1.7 Policy EV20 - New Dwellings in the Countryside: In the countryside new dwellings will only be permitted where:

 The dwelling is required to accommodate a fulltime worker solely or primarily employed in agriculture, forestry or an appropriate use to serve the rural

LVAS economy who needs to live on the premises rather than a nearby settlement, and  There is no alternative existing dwelling available in nearby settlements and there are no existing buildings on the farm or forestry unit suitable for conversion to residential use, and  The proposed dwelling is located as close as possible to the existing farm buildings, forestry complex or place of work.

2.1.8 Policy EV23 – Green Wedges: Green wedges are identified at:

 Gorseinon (including land between Gorseinon, Grovesend and Penllergaer and the Estuary area around Loughor and Penyrheol),

Within these areas development will only be permitted if it maintains the openness and character of the green wedge and does not contribute to the coalescence of settlements or adversely affect the setting of the urban area. Appropriate development within the green wedge comprises the following:

 Justified development in association with agriculture or forestry,  Essential facilities for outdoor sport and recreation or cemetery use,  Limited extension, alteration or replacement of existing dwellings,  Small scale farm diversification  The re-use of existing permanent/substantial buildings,  Affordable housing for local needs under Policy EV18  Other uses of land and forms of development that maintain the openness of the green wedge and do not conflict with the purpose of including land within it.

2.1.9 Policy EV30 Trees, Woodland and Hedgerow Protection: Protection and improved management of woodlands, trees and hedgerows which are important for their visual amenity, historic environment, natural heritage, and/or recreation value will be encouraged, with priority being given to:

 Protecting the remaining areas of ancient semi natural woodland and planted ancient woodland sites,  Promoting new planting with species appropriate to the location, where there is no conflict with other land uses or nature conservation interests, and  Ensuring that where management involves commercial felling and replanting, protection of amenity interests is achieved.

2.1.10 The Local Plan through policies SP2, EV20 and EV23, seeks development to safeguard “the distinctive interplay of town and country” and that “it maintains the openness and character of the green wedge and does not contribute to the coalescence of settlements”.

LVAS 2.2 Landscape Designations

2.2.1 Landscape designations provide an indication of landscape value; they are areas that have been recognised for the scenic beauty, natural and/or recreational potential of the landscape. Designations are shown on Figure LA.02.

2.2.2 The site is not located within an area that has a nationally important landscape designation, such as a National Park or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The nearest AONB is Gower, the boundary of which is several kilometres to the southwest at Penclawdd. There are no local landscape designations within the site or nearby. 2.2.3 There are no listed buildings within or adjacent to the site boundary. The nearest listed building is approximately 800 metres to the south on Glebe Road. Loughor, approximately 1.4 km to the south-west, is the nearest conservation area and is focused on the traditional centre of the town at the eastern end of Loughor Bridge. The landscape character and setting of the conservation and listed buildings in the area has been considered during the landscape and visual appraisal (refer to Landscape Appraisal Figure LA.02). 2.2.4 Approximately 1.4 km to the north and 1.4 km to the east are the scheduled monuments of St Michael's Chapel, Cwrt-y-Carne (a medieval chapel) and Melin Mynach, Gorseinon (a post-medieval/modern mill), the nearest to the site. 2.2.5 The Wales Coast Path and National Cycle Route 4 ‘The Celtic Trail’, pass approximately 1.3 km to the south of the site at their nearest point.

2.3 Ecological Designations

2.3.1 The Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Bury Inlet and Loughor Estuary Site of Scientific Interest (SSSI) lie approximately 150m to the north-west of the site at their nearest point.

2.4 Interim Summary

2.4.1 In terms of the local landscape planning context (Figure LA.02) the following locally specific issues need to be considered in the appraisal of landscape and visual effects:

 Development should retain the local character of the landscape, conserve landscape and townscape character and protect important areas of vegetation;  Careful consideration should be given to the impact development proposals may have on residential amenity within the immediate context of the site;  Further consideration should be given to the potential effects the development proposals may have on the setting of historic assets including listed buildings and scheduled monuments; and  Careful consideration should be given to the potential changes in the view from Glanymor Park, an important local visitor destination.

LVAS 3 Potential effects on the Landscape

3.1 Landscape baseline

3.1.1 The landscape baseline is a description and analysis of the existing landscape, against which the potential effects are assessed, first, by reference to landscape character assessments for the area in which the site is located, at national and local levels and, then, from site-specific surveys and analysis carried out for the purposes of this assessment.

Landscape context

3.1.2 The site is located on the west side of Gorseinon on a west facing slope between approximately 10m and 20m AOD. To the east are the residential areas on Heol Pentre Back and Clos Y Morfa and to the west is pastoral farmland consisting of small tree lined fields.

3.1.3 The first stage of the appraisal was a review of published landscape assessment, which at a National level is LANDMAP published by Natural Resources Wales. LANDMAP is “the national information system, originally devised by the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW), for taking landscape into account in decision-making”. It allows “information about landscape to be gathered, organised and evaluated into a nationally consistent data set … that aims to be as objective as possible”. Individual studies of topics, or “aspects”, are carried out. These are:

 Visual and Sensory;  Geological Landscape;  Landscape Habitats;  Historic Landscape; and  Cultural Landscape.

3.1.4 For each of these five aspects, individual areas are defined within them which have common characteristics; these are known as ‘aspect areas’. Each aspect area is evaluated according to the following evaluation criteria:

 Outstanding: international or national importance,  High: regional or county importance,  Moderate: local importance,  Low: little importance; and  Unknown insufficient information exists to evaluate.

3.1.5 The aspect areas within the site and its immediate context are set out in Table 3-1, along with their overall evaluations and summary descriptions:

LVAS

Table 3-1 LANDMAP

Aspect Area Category Summary (Evaluation)

Visual & Sensory

SWNSVS691 Mosaic Rolling Rolling farmland on land ranging from 20m to 160mAOD, with mosaic pattern derived

(Moderate) Lowland from hedges and fields... Urban influence is strong in the eastern area, where the urban edge of Gorseinon and Grovesend encircles the rural area, and elements such as telecom towers and pylons are highly visible detractors... The western area is less influenced by urban pressures and has views out to estuary... The northern end is strongly influenced by the presence of the M4.

SWNSVS726 Urban Urban area that encompasses the settlements of Gorseinon, Gowerton and (Low) Grovesend... The area is largely residential with some retail and small areas of industry... Views out are largely on to farmland with some views to the south east edge out on to saltmarsh and Loughor estuary.

Geological Landscape

SWNSGL032 Lowland Low rounded ridges in dip and scarp topography of low level plateau in gently dipping

(Moderate) escarpment north limb of E-W synform in Wesphalian (Upper Carboniferous) South Wales Pennant Formation (Grovesend Beds) sandstones with thin coals... Extensive cover of boulder clay draping topography... N-S to NE-SW faults (e...g... Grovesend, Gwili Faults) forming gullies through ridges... Disused mines... Bounded by N-S fault controlled river valleys to W (Loughor) and E (LLiw).

Landscape Habitats

SWNSLH349 Improved Improved grassland with field boundaries (Moderate) Grassland

SWNSLH361 Residential/Gr Urban area, buildings/roads

(Low) een Space

Historic Landscape

SWNSHL571 Irregular The main basis of this aspect area is agricultural with an irregular fieldscape formed by (Unassessed) Fieldscapes successive enclosures of open ground, probably going back to the pre-Norman period and continuing into the 19th century... There was a significant industrial component at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century, but this has now largely disappeared; it has however left a significant mark on settlement form and distribution, the settlements being ribbon developments which grew up to service collieries and tinplate works.

SWNSHL254 Nucleated Now a near-continuous block of settlement with associated industrial areas... The

(Unassessed) Settlement Loughor component had its origin in the Roman period as a fort on the lowest crossing

LVAS Aspect Area Category Summary (Evaluation) point of the River Loughor, succeeded by a medieval castle and borough, but there was no significant growth until the 19th century and the development of collieries and metal-processing industries... Industrial component now less important and than residential and service aspects

Cultural Landscape

SWNSCL019 Urban These are three post-industrial settlements whose history predates the industrial era

(Unassessed) of coal and metal industries, all now virtually a single conurbation to the west of Greater Swansea (033)... Loughor has the longest history, having been chosen as a strategic location, first by the Romans and subsequently by the Normans, both of whom respectively erected defensive fort and castle, before becoming coal-mining town... Gorseinon is the largest settlement of the three, containing a number of infrastructural amenities such as a small rehabilitation hospital, and well-regarded secondary school and college of Further Education... Prior to coal and then the Grovesend Tin Works and Steelworks, local water power supported woolen and corn mills... The town is eager to regenerate... The conurbation has greatly expanded from the Garden Village in Kingsbridge - a small inter-war enclave on the edge of Gorseinon - to what is increasingly a dormitory suburb of Swansea... There is an uncomfortable mix of 19th century terraced housing and new build estates... The local commercial radio station, Swansea Sound and The Wave, are slightly isolated from the conurbation on moorland between Gorseinon and Gowerton.

3.1.6 The field study followed the review of LANDMAP to refine the landscape appraisal findings. It provided a broad overview of the main features of the landscape including topography, vegetation, settlement pattern, and landscape character, as summarised in the following paragraphs. 3.1.7 The topography of the area consists of a rolling landform of locally important ridgelines and hills. Within the locality the Loughor Estuary is defined by higher areas of land forming north-south aligned ridges. The ridgeline on the western side of the estuary has steep side slopes near Bryn and on the outside edge of a meander of the River Loughor.

3.1.8 In contrast to land along the eastern side of the estuary, the ridge on the western side of the estuary rises consistently above 50m AOD. It generally rises from the water / salt marsh edge, whereas on the eastern side there is a more gradual transition. Land between Gorseinon falls gently towards the Loughor; and the ridgeline in this location is made of a series of rounded hills rather than a continuous ridge. Within the locally the higher ground is within the urban area at Penyrheol and Loughor, suburbs of Gorseinon; refer to Landscape Appraisal Figure LA.02. The site is located between these higher areas at approximately 20m AOD. The land between the site and the Loughor generally descends gently towards the estuary, although there are undulations within the overall pattern. 3.1.9 A small watercourse to the north of the site and its associated valley are a notable topographic feature near the site. The site itself descends gently in a northerly direction

LVAS towards this watercourse, which is well wooded beyond the settlement boundary. The watercourse crosses the minor road to the northwest of the site near Pentre Bach, which is located in the valley; refer to Site Context Figure LA.03.

The landscape of the site

3.1.10 The site boundary is shown on Site Appraisal Figure LA.04. It comprises two fields of rough pasture currently used for livestock grazing. Land within the site slopes gently towards a low point at the northern boundary. From here it rises by a couple of metres towards the centre of the site at approximately 20m AOD and by a further metre or so at the southern boundary. The western boundary of the site is slightly higher than the eastern boundary.

3.1.11 The fields within the site are enclosed by mature trees (refer to Site Photographs on Figure LA.07). There are no individual trees within the fields but field boundaries to the west of the site are overgrown with continuous mature trees. The eastern boundary of the site has an area of amenity grassland and specimen trees separated from the remainder of the site by an overgrown hedge / bramble scrub (refer to Site Photograph 05 on Figure LA.07).

3.1.12 Views from the site are defined by the extent of boundary vegetation, which largely precludes views to the west when the mature trees at the site boundary have foliage. During winter months there would be filtered views towards the west from the central part of the site (refer to Site Photograph 01 on Figure LA.07). The northern end of the site is more enclosed and lower lying, reducing the opportunities for views. At the southern end of the site the higher elevation and discontinuous field boundary hedge offer more open views. However, other field boundary hedges again largely obstruct distant views towards the west (refer to Character Photograph 04 on Figure LA.06). 3.1.13 There is a degree of intervisibility between the site and existing residential development to the east, particularly the houses along Heol Pentre Bach. Boundary vegetation reduces the extent of the houses visible from the site. The gentle rise towards the western boundary of the site creates a more open view eastwards from this boundary, but a relatively small number of houses are visible; those which are visible largely obscure houses further eastwards due to the gentle increase in elevation towards Bryn Road (refer to Site Photograph 02 on Figure LA.07).

4 Effects on the Landscape

4.1.1 This section examines the potential landscape effects arising as a result of the proposed development with reference to:

 the potential effects on landscape fabric within the site;  the potential effects on landscape character, including consideration of the effects on designated landscapes; and  the potential effects on the landscape amenity of local residents, users of public rights of way and roads.

LVAS Potential Effects on Landscape Fabric

4.1.2 Effects of the landscape fabric may occur where there are either direct or indirect physical changes to the landscape. Direct changes to landscape fabric would only occur within the application boundary.

4.1.3 The proposed development retains the majority of vegetation around the site boundary and further supplements it in key locations with additional planting. It is noted that this vegetation contributes to the pattern of vegetation in the wider landscape. A short section of trees and hedgerow, a section of hedgerow and scrub and the pasture within the site would be largely lost as a result of the proposed development.

Potential Effects on Landscape Character

4.1.4 The effect of the proposed development on landscape character would depend on key characteristics of the receiving landscape; the degree to which the proposed development is integrated or at odds with them; and how the proposed development would be perceived within the setting, with perception being influenced by:

 the distance to the site;  weather conditions; and  the appearance and ‘fit’ of the proposed development within the landscape.

4.1.5 There is an overlap between the perception of change to landscape character and visual amenity, but landscape character is derived from the combination and pattern of landscape elements within the view. The effects of the proposed development on landscape character would arise from its relationship to these combinations and patterns.

Sensitivity

4.1.6 In considering the impact of the proposed development on the site and its context the most sensitive features in the landscape are the existing vegetation on the site boundary and the enclosed, undeveloped character of the site. The main issues are the effects of proposed development on the features which contribute to landscape character. 4.1.7 The main issues likely to be critical are the effects of proposed development on the features which contribute to landscape character on the rural urban fringe of Gorseinon, including the pasture of the site contained by boundary vegetation. These are key features of the landscape surrounding the site and landscape character of the site context are of medium sensitivity. 4.1.8 The character of the site and the adjacent landscape context is partly derived from the vegetation pattern, which includes the site boundary vegetation. The individual landscape elements in the site (vegetation and pasture) are of medium sensitivity to change but collectively the vegetation pattern of the wider landscape is high sensitivity, because it contributes to the character of the wider area.

4.1.9 Recreation and enjoyment of publicly accessible places is inextricably linked to the landscape character of the wider area, which is regarded as a landscape receptor of high sensitivity. The landscape amenity as experienced by people who use the public byways, footpaths and roads in the immediate vicinity of the site is of medium

LVAS sensitivity. The landscape amenity of residents in their own homes is a receptor of high sensitivity.

Table 4-1 Magnitude of change – potential landscape effects

Receptors Magnitude of change – short term / Magnitude of change – long term construction of proposed development / occupation proposed development

The The proposed development would The proposed development would landscape retain the majority of the vegetation maintain the majority of mature fabric of around the northern, western and vegetation around the site the site southern site boundary which would boundary and supplement this with (medium be fully protected during the additional planting within the site. In sensitivity) construction period. Vegetation addition there would be the potential removal would occur in within the site, for biodiversity enhancements, where

along the eastern boundary with Heol shrubs replace agricultural pasture. Pentre Bachto allow for the service This would be beneficial and a small corridor and to create site access. change when considered against the loss of an area of agricultural The boundary vegetation is visible pasture, which while adverse would from the wider landscape and forms be a negligible effect and not an important landscape feature, notable. screening the interior of the site. The proposal would retain this vegetation almost in its entirety during construction resulting in a small change and a minor adverse effect. The loss of the pasture would have a small change on this particular landscape element resulting in a minor adverse effect, but this impact would not be notable given its limited contribution to landscape character.

Landscape During construction the movement of The landscape fabric of the site character equipment and construction activity contributes to the character of the (high has the potential to be apparent in the landscape context of the site. This sensitivity) wider landscape with potential for character is partly derived from the short term impact on landscape vegetation pattern, which includes

character. However, this activity the site boundary vegetation. The would be interpreted in the context of proposed development retains this vehicle movements and activity in the mature vegetation and supplements surrounding landscape, resulting in a it with additional planting which medium change and a moderate would be a small change and would adverse effect. This impact would have a negligible effect in terms of not be notable given the scale of its contribution to the vegetation change. pattern. Pasture and vegetation within the site would be lost with the potential for a change in character, although the site is largely contained by its boundary vegetation. The loss of the field would not create a large change in the landscape character in the

LVAS Receptors Magnitude of change – short term / Magnitude of change – long term construction of proposed development / occupation proposed development context of the site. Peoples’ perception is influenced by views towards Loughor Estuary from the surrounding area, these views would not be obstructed or altered. Whilst the loss of openness would be adverse it would be a small change and would have a minor adverse effect.

Landscape There would be a medium change to In the long-term the proposed amenity: the setting of the properties to the development would become Local east and south of the site during integrated into its landscape setting. residents construction. The separation of the Proposed planting would establish to (medium site from nearby properties created by supplement existing vegetation. The sensitivity) Heol Pentre Bach and site boundary potential initial adverse impacts on vegetation would result in a landscape amenity would reduce for

moderate adverse effect during all receptors, including those with the construction. most adverse change at the eastern boundary of the site. In the long The change in the setting of local term the overall impact on the residences would be substantial and landscape amenity of local residents unavoidable. The change, which would be a medium change with a would be adverse, would be most moderate adverse effect. apparent from the houses on Heol Pentre Bach. There would be no change perceived from other properties nearby.

Landscape There would be medium change to In the long term there would be a amenity: the setting of the public footpaths that small change to the landscape Users of run parallel to the sites western and amenity of footpath users using the public eastern boundary due to the screening public rights of way adjacent to the footpaths created by the retention of the mature site boundary due to separation, and roads vegetation. This would result in a distance and/or intervening features. (medium moderate adverse effect during In the long-term the proposed sensitivity) construction. development would become There is potential for a small scale of integrated into its landscape setting. change to the setting of the public Proposed planting would establish to footpaths roads within 0.5 km of the supplement existing vegetation along site. Given the vegetation and the eastern boundary. The potential landform pattern, and the separation initial adverse impacts on landscape provided by site boundary vegetation amenity would reduce for all there would be no change in the receptors resulting in a minor setting of public footpaths and roads in adverse effect. the wider area during construction.

There would be no change in the

setting of more distant public footpaths. There would be no adverse impact on the landscape amenity as experienced along these footpaths and

LVAS Receptors Magnitude of change – short term / Magnitude of change – long term construction of proposed development / occupation proposed development within Glanymor Park.

Designated The individual landscape elements in While there would be localised landscapes: the site (vegetation and pasture) are impacts on landscape character Green of medium sensitivity to change, but adjacent to the site there would be Wedge collectively the vegetation pattern of no change to the landscape the wider landscape is of high character of the Green Wedge as a (high sensitivity because it contributes to the whole. sensitivity) character of the Green Wedge.

Whilst there would be localised impacts on landscape character there would be no change to the landscape character of the Green Wedge as a whole during the construction period. The vegetation pattern of the site and its context, and the landform context of the site would absorb a development of this scale, which would result in a minor adverse effect.

LVAS 5 Effects on Visual Amenity

5.1 Visual baseline

5.1.1 This chapter considers effects on visual amenity, arising from changes in the views available to people in the surrounding area.

Factors affecting visibility of the site

5.1.2 The site, as described above, is well enclosed by boundary vegetation which is typical of the landscape context of the site. During the site context appraisal the extent of the visibility of the site was noted within the study area, and features such as vegetation and topography, which define actual visibility, were identified and noted on Figure LA.04.

5.1.3 A range of representative viewpoints were selected to inform the study of potential visual effects. The location of the ten views selected is shown on the Landscape Appraisal drawing Figure LA.02 the Site Context drawing Figure LA.03, and the photographs are reproduced on Figure LA.05.

Visual receptors

5.1.4 There are a number of visual receptors identified during the landscape and visual appraisal. The locations of available views and the potential impact are described below with references to representative viewpoints. 5.1.5 Potential views from the Loughor Estuary are represented by the view from Glanymor Park; refer to Appraisal Photograph 1. The view is from an open area approximately 0.6km from the site. The park contains several footpaths with views from them being focused to the west across the estuary; the site lies to the east. From the low mound to the north of the park the site location can be identified among the mature trees in front of the buildings on Heol Pentre Bach. Vegetation along the western site boundary is just visible in the view but the site itself is not. Views closer to the site are screened by vegetation, as represented by Appraisal Photograph 4. 5.1.6 Views from the existing housing development to the east of the site are represented by Appraisal Photographs 2 & 3. The viewpoints look into the western part of the site from the public footpath and residential road that runs parallel to the site boundary. Two residential properties on Heol Pentre Bach are orientated towards the site, views from these are similar to Appraisal Photograph 2 and the view from a nearby green space is shown in Appraisal Photograph 3. More distant views from the east are screened by buildings and vegetation. 5.1.7 An area of higher ground to the west of the Loughor Estuary offers potential views towards the site. There are a number of houses and several public footpaths in this area. The view from the minor road is the most open publicly accessible view available; refer to Appraisal Photograph 5, hedgerows and trees screening views from the majority of locations. While the vegetation along the site boundary was identifiable in the view the ground surface was not visible. 5.1.8 There are potential views towards the site from the public footpath which runs parallel to the western site boundary. Once the footpath leaves the site boundary in a north-

LVAS westerly direction potential views are typically obscured by site boundary vegetation; refer to Appraisal Photograph 4.

5.2 Effects on Visual Amenity

Sensitivity

5.2.1 The sensitivity of viewers, view locations, and views, is affected by factors such as whether few or many viewers are affected, and the importance of the site or proposed development in the overall view. The context of the viewpoint may contribute to the sensitivity, for example, people viewing from residential properties or from a valued landscape are likely to be more sensitive than people viewing from an industrial context: Table 5-1 Indicative criteria for assessing Visual Sensitivity

Category Indicative criteria

High Viewers in residential or community properties sensitivity Views experienced by many viewers Daily, prolonged or sustained views available over a long period, or where the view of the landscape is an important attractant Views from a nationally or internationally valued landscape or recreation facility Medium Frequent open views available sensitivity Viewers are pursuing activities such as sports or outdoor work, where the landscape is not the principal reason for being there or the focus of attention is not the view Views from a regionally valued landscape, or a regionally important recreation facility Low A view of low importance, or where the view of the landscape is not the reason sensitivity for visiting A view from a landscape of moderate value, or a locally important recreation facility Occasional open views or glimpsed views; passing views available to travellers in vehicles A view available to few viewers

5.2.2 The sensitivity of each appraisal viewpoint would be different for each receptor at that location. However, an over level of sensitivity has been set based on the balance of receptors in this locations: Red = high sensitivity, Yellow = medium sensitivity and green = low sensitivity.

LVAS

Table 5-2 Magnitude of change – potential visual effects

Receptors Magnitude of change – short Magnitude of change – long term / term / construction of proposed occupation proposed development development

Appraisal Existing View: The view is a panoramic view over the Loughor Estuary Photograph 1: from a low mound within the north of the park, approximately 0.6km to the View from west of the site. The site boundary vegetation and houses on Heol Pentre Glanymor Bach are just visible, the site itself is screened by mature vegetation. The Park (high primary focus of views from the viewpoint are across the estuary to the sensitivity) west.

During construction the The view of the development following Receptors: movement of equipment and construction would result in a small /  Visitors to construction activity at the site barely perceptible increase in the Glanymor Park; would not be easily apparent from extent of built development visible in and this location. Given its scale in the view. Given the negligible scale  Visitors to the view the change would be of change in the view, despite the high Loughor Estuary negligible, resulting in a sensitivity of the receptors, the effect SAC and SSSI negligible effect as a result of would be negligible as a result of the the proposed development proposed development. construction.

Appraisal Existing View: The view is contained by the existing settlement boundary Photograph 2: to the east and by vegetation within the northern part of the site to the View from west. A glimpsed view to the south from the public open space is available public along the line of the public footpath, through which the mature trees on the footpath and western site boundary are partially visible. public open space (medium During construction the The proposed development would sensitivity) movement of equipment and introduce a built element into the view construction activity at the site in a direction that currently consists of

would be apparent from this vegetation. The impact of the built Receptors: location. There would be large development would be softened over  Users of Public change as a result of the removal time with the establishment of footpath users; of adjacent site boundary vegetation and it would be seen in vegetation which would have a context of the existing settlement in all  Users of green space; and major adverse effect as a other directions. The view of the result of the proposed development following construction  Nearby residents. development. would result a notable increase in the extent of built development visible in the view. There would be a medium change in the view resulting in a moderate adverse effect as a result of the proposed development.

LVAS Receptors Magnitude of change – short Magnitude of change – long term / term / construction of proposed occupation proposed development development Appraisal Existing View: The view is from the public footpath as it runs along Heol Photograph 3: Pentre Bach along the eastern site boundary and is also representative of View from the view available from nearby residences. Scattered semi-mature trees Heol Pentre filter views into the site and proposed planting would further supplement Bach (high the screening effect. sensitivity) During construction the The proposed development would be

movement of equipment and visible thorough the existing boundary Receptors: construction activity at the site vegetation, although this would be  Nearby would be apparent from this supplemented by additional vegetation residents; location. There would be a large which would soften the impact of the change as a result of the new development when it becomes  Users of Public footpath; and construction of the proposed established, filtering the views from development which would have a the existing nearby residences and  Passersby on public road. major adverse effect. from the public footpath. This would result in a long term medium change and a moderate adverse effect as a result of the proposed development.

Appraisal Existing View: Views towards the site from lower ground to the west are Photograph 4: unusual, the majority being screened by intervening vegetation. The View from viewpoint, where a public footpath joins a minor road, provides a filtered Gwynfe Road view towards the north-western site boundary. The vegetation obscures (medium both the site and the existing development beyond. sensitivity) During construction the The proposed development would not

movement of equipment and be visible from Gwynfe Road. The Receptors: construction activity at the site screening created by the intervening  Users of public would not be apparent from this and boundary vegetation offers footpath; location. The intervening effective mitigation of impacts. The vegetation screens the site from scale of change would remain none  Passersby on public road; and view and offers effective post construction and in the long term mitigation of adverse effects. the development would result in  Nearby There would be no change in the negligible visual effect. residents view and a negligible effect for the construction period.

Appraisal Existing View: Views towards the site from high ground to the west of Photograph 5: Loughor Estuary are unusual due to screening vegetation with only View from occasional filtered or glimpsed views available. The viewpoint provides a Heol Pencoed glimpsed view across the estuary towards Gorseinon with the location of Isaf (Medium the site just being identifiable behind mature vegetation and in front of the sensitivity) current housing developments.

During construction the The boundary and intervening Receptors: movement of equipment and vegetation between the site and the  Passerby on construction activity at the site viewpoint offer effective mitigation of public road; and would not be apparent from this impacts. The no change effect location. The boundary and during the construction period would  Nearby intervening vegetation to the west be maintained as the proposed residents of the site offer effective development would not be visible in

LVAS Receptors Magnitude of change – short Magnitude of change – long term / term / construction of proposed occupation proposed development development mitigation of adverse effects. the view. In the long term the There would be a negligible development would result in a effect and no change in the view negligible visual effect. during construction.

LVAS 6 Conclusion

6.1.1 The landscape fabric of the site contributes to the character of the landscape context of the site. Whilst the proposed development would maintain the majority of the existing mature vegetation along the northern, western and southern site boundary and this would be supplemented with additional planting, the existing area of pasture and mature trees within the site boundary would be lost. Proposed planting would offer biodiversity enhancements where shrubs replace agricultural pasture. This change when considered against the loss of an area of agricultural pasture is minor adverse to negligible. 6.1.2 The development would create a residential character to the eastern side of Heol Pentre Bach that would be similar to the existing development to the west. Where this development makes a contribution to the landscape amenity of public footpaths and roads in the longer term then the potential adverse impact would be mitigated through the careful design of the proposal to create an appropriate frontage with screening vegetation. In the long term the impact on the landscape amenity of public footpaths and roads is minor adverse. 6.1.3 In the long term the overall impact on the landscape amenity of local residents would be adverse. For those properties adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site there would be a moderate adverse impact as a result of a change in their outlook, although this would in part be mitigated by the filtering effect of existing vegetation and the establishment of proposed vegetation. In the long term there would be no change to the landscape amenity of footpath users in the wider area due to separation distance and/or intervening features.

6.1.4 Landscape character is partly derived from the vegetation pattern of the site, which includes the site boundary vegetation. The proposed development retains and supplements this vegetation which would be a small-scale change but beneficial in terms of its contribution to the vegetation pattern. In the long-term the proposed development would become integrated into its landscape setting. The potential initial adverse impacts on landscape amenity would reduce for all receptors, including those with most adverse change near the eastern boundary of the site. In the long term the impact on the landscape amenity of local residents is moderate adverse. 6.1.5 The site is visible from points around the Loughor Estuary, but intervening and boundary vegetation effectively mitigates adverse change. In the long term the proposed development would result in a negligible visual effect from these viewpoints. 6.1.6 Other views of the proposed development are available from the public open space and public footpath adjacent to the eastern side boundary. The removal of the boundary vegetation and the introduction of a built environment would have a major adverse effect during construction, with the establishment of screening vegetation and the settling of the development into its environment, this would reduce to a moderate adverse effect. 6.1.7 The findings of this landscape and visual amenity statement are that while moderate adverse landscape and visual impacts would occur none of the effects are notable.

LVAS Appendix 1: Figures

 LA.01 Site Location  LA.02 Landscape Appraisal  LA.03 Site Context  LA.04 Site Appraisal  LA.05 Appraisal Photographs  LA.06 Character photographs  LA.07 Site photographs

LVAS North 01 Feb 2017 Feb LA. Site boundary Buffers at 1kmintervals fromsite boundary Unitary 100 m 0 200 400 600 800 Heol Pentre Bach, Heol Pentre Swansea Location Site Key Scale @ A3 - 1:15,000 LA-01A083749-1 Location.mxd Site 0100031673. Survey 2017 Ordnance rights and database copyright Crown © 3050297 Number: England in Registered 2016. Limited Transport Planning WYG Environment © Grovesend

GORSEINON A484

Penyrheol

i s

Loughor m

k A4240

2 Loughor River Brynhyfryd North 02 Feb 2017 Feb LA. Site boundary Buffers at 1kmintervals fromsite Unitary boundary Ancient andWoodland Natural Semi Category Unknown of Site Woodland Ancient Restored Ancient Woodland Site Monuments Scheduled Areas Conservation Listed BuildingsII) (Grade Ramsar / Special Protection Area Special Areas of Conservation Sites of SpecialScientific Interest Sites of Importance Nature for Conservation Public Footpath Bridleway CoastalWales Path Way Gower Route Cycle National Land CROW Access Space Open Public - Park Glanymor Wedge Green EV23 100 m 0 200 400 600 Heol Pentre Bach, Heol Pentre Swansea Landscape Appraisal Key Scale @ A3 - 1:15,000 LA-02 Appraisal.mxd Landscape A083749-1 0100031673. Survey 2017 Ordnance rights and database copyright Crown © 3050297 Number: England in Registered 2016. Limited Transport Planning WYG Environment © Public Rights of Way: - UDP Swansea Adopted Grovesend

GORSEINON A484

Penyrheol

i s

Loughor m

f A4240

2km Loughor River Burry Inlet and Loughor Estuary SSSI SAC ac Aberoedd and Estuaries / Carmarthen Bay Carmarthen Bae Caerfyrddin Burry Inlet Ramsar / SPA Brynhyfryd North 03 Feb 2017 Feb LA. Site boundary site from at 500mBuffers intervals boundary Unitary II) (Grade Building Listed Order Preservation Tree Special Area of Conservation Site of Special Scientific Interest Public Footpath Bridleway 25 m

0 50 100 150 200 250 Heol Pentre Bach, Heol Pentre Swansea Context Site Key Scale @ A3 - 1:5,000 LA-03 A083749-1 Context.mxd Site 0100031673. Survey 2017 Ordnance rights and database copyright Crown © 3050297 Number: England in Registered 2016. Limited Transport Planning WYG Environment © Public Rights of Way: LC119

LC96

LC46

25 LC46

LC18

LC45

LC18

LC109

25 LC44

LC44

LC123

LC44

f SAC

m k 1 Burry Inlet ac Aberoedd and Loughor Estuary SSSI

and Estuaries / Carmarthen Bay Carmarthen

Bae Caerfyrddin LC43

0 0 Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries / Bae Caerfyrddin ac Aberoedd SAC

Burry Inlet and Loughor Estuary SSSI Heol Pentre Bach, Swansea Site Appraisal LA.04

Gwynfe Road

H e o l P e

c h

Key

Site boundary

Special Areas of Conservation / Site of Special Scientific Interest

Public Footpath

Site features

Mature trees / overgrown hedges 25

Rough pasture

Amenity grassland / garden

Bramble and ruderal grassland

010 20 40 60 80 100 m

Scale @ A3 - 1:2,000 North

A083749-1 LA-04 Site Appraisal.mxd Feb 2017

# $ % &'( % ) *+,

# % -( % .( *+, % 8

!5 6()(.7'

# % .( % .( *+, !" / 012 .(3)4 " 2 " 8

# 2 " .( *+, % 8

8 : ! 2 !5 6()(.7'

# $% .4-9 % -) *+, !" / 012 .(3)4 "

!" #!$%&

' #"" #""$%&

! ("#!.' /01"!"(23

("$%& )*+, - , ' '

4+/ 5" ("$%&

! ("#!.' /01"!"(23

" )*+, -

2 3

'01 ( * ( ! )*+, - ./ (

$ % & '

!"#

2 " % # - 3 '01 ( * ( ! )*+, - ./ (

$ % & '

% % % % !"#

LVAS Appendix 2: LVIA Methodology

6.1.8 The methodology followed for the Landscape and Visual Statement is based on the recommendations in Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd Edition published by The Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment in April 2013 (GLVIA3). This statement is for a “non-EIA project”. The Landscape Institute has advised in relation to Landscape and Visual Appraisals / Statements outside a formal EIA process in its “Statement of Clarification 1/13”:

6.1.9 This Statement provides an assessment of the degrees of the effect without commenting on their “significance”. The assessment process comprises a combination of desk studies and field surveys, with subsequent analysis, and involved:

6.1.10 The effects of the development, whether beneficial or adverse, may vary in nature and degree through its lifecycle. Mitigation measures are proposed to be incorporated in the design of the development, or measures such as management of the construction and operational processes are proposed. The purpose of mitigation measures is first, to prevent the potentially adverse impacts identified, and if that is not possible, to reduce the potential adverse effect, or where adverse effects are unavoidable, the purpose is to offset or compensate for the effect.

LVAS Landscape Assessment methodology

6.1.11 The assessment methodology for assessing the likely effects is outlined in paragraph 1.2.8 above. The degree of the likely landscape effects of the proposed development is determined by relating the sensitivity of the receptors to the changes arising from the development proposals, and the degree and nature of the changes in the landscape arising from the proposals. 6.1.12 The sensitivity of landscape receptors2 is dependent on their value and susceptibility to, or ability to accommodate, the changes that would be brought about by the proposed development. 6.1.13 The following criteria for landscape sensitivity to change are used: Table AP-6-1 Indicative criteria for Landscape Sensitivity

Category Indicative criteria

High sensitivity A landscape of national or international importance, whose character or key characteristics are very susceptible to change The landscape character is judged to be intact and in good condition and particularly vulnerable to disturbance A valued landscape with no or limited potential for substitution or replacement Low sensitivity No evidence of value or importance attached to the landscape area or features Few features or qualities susceptible to disturbance or particularly susceptible to improvement or upgrading Good potential for substitution or replacement

6.1.14 The scale of magnitude of the changes is related to considerations of the size or scale of the change, the geographical extent of the area influenced, and its duration and reversibility. Table AP-6-2 Indicative criteria for Magnitude of Landscape Change

Magnitude of Criteria Change

Greatest change Large size or scale of change, affecting the landscape type or character or the area within which the proposal lies or extending over the wider area; continuing into the longer term or permanently, with low prospect of reversibility Lesser change A small proportion of the total extent of the character type or area is affected or the contribution of the changed elements or characteristics to the character of the landscape is not important; the changes occur at the level of the site or immediate context, are short term and reversible

2 The term used for elements and aspects of the landscape that might be affected by the proposals and people with views of the development

LVAS 6.1.15 The degree of effect, whether adverse or beneficial, is then assessed by relating the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of change, by considering the following indicative criteria: Table AP-6-3 Indicative criteria for assessing Landscape Effects

Landscape effect Indicative criteria

Major Highly sensitive landscape completely degraded or greatly changed, with little or no scope for mitigation Great improvement, sufficient to upgrade overall landscape character Minor Localised or limited adverse change to the existing landscape character Considerable scope for mitigation Localised improvement to the existing landscape Negligible Little or no perceived change to the existing landscape character The change is difficult to discern

6.1.16 In some instances the effect may be offset by other considerations, for example, through the mitigation proposals, and the resulting effect is neither beneficial nor adverse. In such cases, the effect is assessed as neutral.

Visual Assessment methodology

6.1.17 The assessment methodology for assessing the likely effects is outlined in paragraph 1.2.8 above. The degree of the likely visual effects of the proposed development is determined by relating the sensitivity of the receptors to the changes arising from the development proposals, and the degree and nature of the changes in the view arising from the proposals.

6.1.18 The sensitivity of viewers, view locations, and views, is affected by the susceptibility of the viewer to changes in views and visual amenity and the value attached to particular views. The context of the location contributes to susceptibility, for example, people viewing from residential properties, or from a valued landscape are likely to be more susceptible to change than people viewing from an industrial context. Particular views may have importance and be valued, for example, as “classic” views depicted in art or reported in literature, or as part of the experience of a landscape of importance or promoted recreation facility or route. 6.1.19 The following criteria for visual sensitivity are used: Table AP-6-4 Indicative criteria for Visual Sensitivity

Category Indicative criteria

High sensitivity Viewers in residential or community properties with open views of the site Views experienced by many viewers Daily, prolonged or sustained views available over a long

LVAS Category Indicative criteria period, or where the view of the landscape is an important attractant A view from a landscape, recreation facility or route valued nationally or internationally for its visual amenity Medium sensitivity Viewers in residential or community properties with partial or largely screened views of the site Frequent open views available of the site Viewers are pursuing activities such as sports or outdoor work, where the landscape is not the principal reason for being there or the focus of attention is only partly on the view A view of the site from other valued landscapes, or a regionally important recreation facility or route Low sensitivity A view of low importance or value, or where the viewer’s attention is not focused their surroundings A view of the site from a landscape of moderate or less importance, or a locally important recreation facility Occasional open views or glimpsed views available of the site passing views available to travellers in vehicles A view available to few viewers

6.1.20 The degree of the likely visual effects of the proposed development is determined by relating the sensitivity of the receptors and the changes in the landscape or view of the landscape to which they will be subjected. The scale of magnitude of the changes in visual amenity is evaluated in terms of size or scale, the geographical extent of the area influenced, duration and reversibility, as follows: Table AP-6-5 Indicative criteria for Magnitude of Visual Change

Magnitude of Indicative Criteria Change Greatest change Large size or scale of change, affecting a large proportion of the angle of the view or affecting views from a wide area; continuing into the longer term or permanently, with low prospect of reversibility Lesser change A small proportion of the angle of view is affected or the contribution of the changed elements or characteristics to the composition of the view is not important; the changes are viewed from longer distances, are short term and reversible

6.1.21 The degree of effect, whether adverse or beneficial, is then assessed by relating the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of change, using the following indicative criteria: Table AP-6-6 Indicative criteria for assessing Visual Effects

Visual effect Indicative criteria Major Large or very large change or visual intrusion experienced by highly sensitive viewers or from highly sensitive public

LVAS Visual effect Indicative criteria viewpoints The proposal would cause a great deterioration in the existing view, with little or no scope for mitigation Large or very large improvement in the view, sufficient to upgrade overall visual amenity Minor Small or localised visual intrusion in the existing view Good scope for mitigation Localised reduction in visual intrusion, or improvement in the view Negligible The change in the view is imperceptible or difficult to discern

6.1.22 Where appropriate, the relative degree of intermediate effects is indicated in the assessment below. In addition to these criteria, in some instances the effect may be neither beneficial nor adverse. In such cases, the effect is assessed as neutral.

LVAS

All drawings and photographs are by WYG Group Limited unless stated otherwise Drawings based on the Ordnance Survey map are reproduced with the permission of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office: © Crown copyright 30 WYG Environment Planning Transport Limited licence number: AR 1000 17603 LVAS