Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Denis Lambert

Spout Farm Preston Road Longridge Lancashire Contents

1. Introduction ______4 1.1. Background ______4 1.2. The Site and Proposals ______4 1.3. The Study Area ______5 2. Planning policy ______6 2.1. National Planning Policy ______6 2.2. Local Planning Policy ______6 2.3. Saved policies from the Districtwide Local Plan ______7 3. Report Structure ______11 4. Methodology ______12 4.1. Introduction ______12 4.2. Best Practice Guidance ______12 4.3. Landscape and Visual Effects ______12 4.4. Assessment of Significance ______13 4.5. Steps in the Assessment Process ______14 5. Baseline Conditions ______15 5.1. Introduction ______15 5.2. Topography ______15 5.3. The Site and its Context ______15 5.4. Landscape Character Baseline ______16 5.5. Landscape Designations Baseline ______16 5.6. Landscape Features ______17 5.7. Visual Baseline ______18 5.8. Visual Environment of the Site ______18 5.9. Public Rights of Way ______18 5.10. Residential Receptors ______19 6. The Proposed Scheme ______20 6.1. The Proposal ______20 7. Effects ______21 7.1. Timescales and Nature of Effects ______21 7.2. Effects During Construction ______21 7.3. Effects on Landscape Character ______21 7.4. National Landscape Character Areas ______21 7.5. A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire, December 2000. ______23 7.6. Visual Effects ______24 7.7. Desktop Mapping Study ______24 7.8. Viewpoint Analysis ______25 7.9. Effects on Designated Landscapes ______25 7.10. Effects on Landscape Features ______26 7.11. Public Rights of Way ______26 7.12. Residential Receptors ______27 8. Summary and Conclusion ______28 8.1. Assessment Summary ______28 8.2. Landscape Effects ______28 8.3. Viewpoints ______28 8.4. Effects on Landscape Resources ______28

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

2 Appendix 1 – Methodology ______29 Appendix 2 – Glossary ______40 Appendix 3 – References ______42 Appendix 4 – Extracts from National, Regional and Local Landscape Character Assessments ______43 Appendix 5 – Viewpoint Analysis ______44 Appendix 6 – Summary of Effects upon Completion ______45 Appendix 7 – Drawings ______46 Appendix 8 – Photograph Panels ______47

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

3 1. Introduction

1.1. Background

1.1.1. This report presents the findings of a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) study undertaken in conjunction with proposals for an outline planning application for a 32-unit housing development at Spout Farm, Preston Road, Longridge, Lancashire. The report is written by Bana Elzein, CMLI, and forms part of a suite of documents supporting the outline planning application for this development proposal.

1.1.2. This report defines the existing landscape and visual baseline environments; assesses their quality and sensitivity to change; describes the key landscape- and visual-related aspects of the proposed development; describes the nature of the anticipated change upon both the landscape and the visual environments; assesses the magnitude and significance of the changes for both the construction and operational stages; and describes the mitigation measures that will be incorporated within the proposed development to assist in reducing effects upon particularly sensitive receptor groups and landscape environments.

1.1.3. It is important to note that the current proposals may change in varying significance upon submission for reserved matters. This LVIA may require updating at a later date in response to such changes. This could include elements such as the selection of building materials, arrangement and height of the structures, and arrangement of proposed landscape treatments amongst others.

1.1.4. At the time of writing, the outline planning application seeks only to establish the access to the site within the application and all other matters reserved for future approval.

1.2. The Site and Proposals

1.2.1. The site of the proposals is a relatively flat parcel of land approximately 1.8hectares in area. It is bounded by Preston Road, Alston Reservoir No. 2, a County Biological Heritage site (CBH) wetland created from a former reservoir and an existing garden centre/nursery, with which it is associated.

1.2.2. A combination of existing hedgerows and mature trees form the boundary treatments against the wetland edges and a mortared stone wall against the reservoir edge. A low hedge runs along Preston Road with an existing buffer of naturalised and ornamental trees and shrubs. The remaining boundary is shared with the existing farm buildings at Spout Farm and the proposals intend to share the access at this point to the proposed housing estate with the existing farm/nursery which will remain.

1.2.3. The proposals site is currently in use as a managed Christmas tree farm plot and a yard area supporting the garden centre.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

4 1.3. The Study Area

1.3.1. The study area has been limited to 2km radius due to the site's relatively small scale. This radius was established following a review of mapping and topographical data and a visibility analysis on site and was considered to be the maximum distance at which the development could potentially be perceptible in views. Potential for viewing the development at a distance greater than 2km is considered improbable.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

5 2. Planning policy

2.1. National Planning Policy

2.1.1. The Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) have adopted the new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) with effect from March 27, 2012. The NPPF makes the following statements:

 always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings;

 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;

 contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment and reducing pollution. Allocations of land for development should prefer land of lesser environmental value, where consistent with other policies in this Framework;

 encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value;

 the design of developments should aim to:

o respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation;

o be visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping;

o minimise impacts on biodiversity and provide net gains in biodiversity where possible;

2.1.2. Consideration will be given to the relevant elements of the NPPF in relation to the development proposal in further sections of this report.

2.2. Local Planning Policy

2.2.1. Current Local planning policy is described in the following adopted documents:

 Saved Policies from the Districtwide Local Plan

 Joint Lancashire Structure Plan: Supplementary Planning Guidance “Landscape and Heritage” (2001) (JLSP:SPG)

2.2.2. In addition to adopted documents, there are currently documents under consultation which consider recent changes to the planning system. Most significant of these documents is the Local Development Framework Core

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

6 Strategy document. While the policy is not yet finalised and currently submitted to the Secretary of State for approval, the document provides insight into the direction that local policy is headed in the future.

 Ribble Valley Local Development Framework Core Strategy document (submitted to Secretary of State)

2.3. Saved policies from the Districtwide Local Plan

2.3.1. The most relevant policies and statements from the above documents regarding landscape matters are as follows:

2.3.2. Policy ENV9 – Other Important Wildlife Site states that “Development proposals within or adjacent to a County Biological Heritage Site or other site of local nature conservation importance identified on the proposals map will be permitted, provided the development would not significantly harm the features of interest which led to the identification of the site or other material factors outweigh the conservation interests of the site.” - Consideration will be given to this policy in relation to the development proposals in further sections of this report.

2.3.3. Policy ENV13 – Landscape Protection states “The Borough Council will refuse development proposals which harm important landscape features including traditional stone walls, ponds, characteristic herb rich meadows and pastures, woodlands, copses, hedgerows and individual trees other than in exceptional circumstances where satisfactory works of mitigation or enhancement would be achieved, including rebuilding, replanting and landscape management.” - Consideration is given to this policy as it relates to landscape features which may or may not exist on the site.

2.3.4. Policy G1– Development Control states “All development proposals will be expected to provide a high standard of building design and landscape quality. Consideration is given to Policy D19 since the development involved the conversion of a rural building into a residence.” - Consideration is given to this policy as it relates to landscape provision within the proposed development.

2.3.5. Joint Lancashire Structure Plan Supplementary Planning Guidance “Landscape and Heritage” This SPG has been retained from the former Joint Lancashire Structure Plan, replaced in 2008 by the Regional Spatial Strategy (The Regional Spatial Strategy has been revoked by current changes to the planning system but the SPG is still currently relevant in association with other current policy). In that same year, the guidance produced for Landscape and Heritage were given status as Supplementary Planning Guidance and development should 'give regard' to the advice given therein. Within this document the following statements are considered:

 “Development must be appropriate to the landscape character type within which it is situated and contribute to its conservation, enhancement or restoration, or the creation of appropriate new features.”

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

7 PROPOSALS WILL BE ASSESSED IN RELATION TO:

(a) LOCAL DISTINCTIVENESS; (b) THE CONDITION OF THE LANDSCAPE; (c ) VISUAL INTRUSION; (d) The layout and scale of buildings and designed spaces; (e) the quality and character of the built fabric; (g) HISTORIC PATTERNS AND ATTRIBUTES OF THE LANDSCAPE; (h) LANDSCAPE BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGICAL NETWORKS; (I) SEMI-NATURAL HABITATS CHARACTERISTIC OF THE LANDSCAPE TYPE; (k) noise and light pollution.

Recommendations for the Undulating Lowland Farmland Character Area

2.62 Conserve the distinctive rural hedgerow network

o Encourage continued hedgerow management, re-planting gaps and planting of a new generation of hedgerow saplings to conserve the hedgerow network.

2.68 Conserve the distinctive settings to rural settlements

o Ensure new development on the edges of villages reflects the characteristic clustered form; development should be sited to retain views to landscape features and landmarks, such as church towers on the approaches to villages.

o Encourage tree planting as an integral part of new development, creating links with existing farm woodlands and the network of hedgerows.

2.69 Enhance the wooded character of the lowland landscapes

o Promote the restoration, where appropriate, of semi-natural habitats to increase the resource and to develop linkage and corridors for wildlife.

2.3.6. Ribble Valley Local Development Framework Core Strategy (Regulation 22 Submission Draft) The Local Development Framework (LDF) is currently under submission to the Secretary of State following its preparation. Although the document has not yet been adopted it can be considered as emerging policy and consulted for guidance. The following extracts may all be considered in relation to the development:

 KEY STATEMENT EN2: LANDSCAPE states “As a principle the Council will expect development to be in keeping with the character of the landscape, reflecting local distinctiveness, vernacular style, scale, style, features and building materials.”

KEY STATEMENT EN4: BIODIVERSITY AND GEODIVERSITY states “The Council will seek wherever possible to conserve and enhance the area’s biodiversity and geodiversity and to avoid the fragmentation and isolation of

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

8 natural habitats and help develop green corridors. Where appropriate, cross- Local Authority boundary working will continue to take place to achieve this.

Negative impacts on biodiversity through development proposals should be avoided. Development proposals that adversely affect a site of recognised environmental or ecological importance will only be permitted where a developer can demonstrate that the negative effects of a proposed development can be mitigated, or as a last resort, compensated for.”

 POLICY DMG1: GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS states “In determining planning applications, all development must:

o Be sympathetic to existing and proposed land uses in terms of size, intensity and nature as well as scale, massing, style, features and building materials

o Consider the environmental implications […]

o Consider the protection and enhancement of public rights of way and access

o Achieve efficient land use and the re-use and remediation of previously developed sites where possible

o Consider the density, layout and relationship between buildings, which is of major importance. Particular emphasis will be placed on visual appearance and the relationship to surroundings, including impact on landscape character, as well as the effects of development on existing amenities.

 POLICY DME2: LANDSCAPE AND TOWNSCAPE PROTECTION states “Development proposals will be refused which significantly harm important landscape or landscape features.”

 POLICY DME3: SITE AND SPECIES PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION states “Development proposals that are likely to adversely affect the following will not be granted planning permission”

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

9  POLICY DMB5: FOOTPATHS AND BRIDLEWAYS states “The Borough Council will unless suitable mitigation measures are made, protect from development footpaths which:

o provide a link between towns/villages and attractive open land,

o are associated with local nature reserves,

o are heavily used.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

10 3. Report Structure

The report is structured as follows:

Section 4 – briefly summarises the methodology that has been used in this assessment;

Section 5 – describes the site and surrounding area, and defines the landscape and visual receptors against which potential impacts resulting from the development proposals can be assessed;

Section 6 – briefly describes those aspects of the scheme design that are of specific relevance to landscape in relation to key views, the design of any planting or other measure aimed at minimising potential impacts;

Section 7 – examines the predicted effects of the development proposals on landscape resources (landscape character and landscape designations) and visual amenity (the enjoyment of representative views by people), assessing the changes brought about by development against the baseline situation;

Section 8 – summarises the overall landscape and visual effects that are predicted to arise from this development proposal.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

11 4. Methodology

4.1. Introduction

4.1.1. Methodologies for completing Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments (LVIAs) can vary between professionals and must be tailored to the site and environment of the proposed developments. The standard methodology is described below along with any variations specific to this assessment. Further explanation of the methodology, including the basis upon which judgements have been made on the sensitivity of receptors, magnitude of change and significance of effects, is included in Appendix I.

4.2. Best Practice Guidance

4.2.1. The methodology for undertaking this Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment has been developed in accordance with relevant best practice guidance, including:

 Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLAVIA), Second Edition – Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Managers, 2002;

 Landscape Character Assessment – Guidance for England and Scotland – Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural heritage, 2002.

4.3. Landscape and Visual Effects

4.3.1. Landscape and visual effects are assessed separately, in accordance with best practice guidance (GLAVIA, paragraph 2.13-2.15) which states that: “Landscape and visual assessments are separate, though linked, procedures. The landscape baseline, its analysis and the assessment of landscape effects all contribute to the baseline for the visual assessment studies. The assessment of the potential effect on the landscape is carried out as an effect on an environmental Resource i.e. the landscape. Visual effects are assessed as one of the inter-related effects on population.”

Landscape effects derived from changes in the physical landscape, which may give rise to changes in its character and how this is experienced. This may in turn affect the perceived value ascribed to the landscape. The description and analysis of effects on the landscape resource relies on the adoption of certain basic principles about the positive (or beneficial), and negative (or adverse) effects of change in the landscape. Due to the inherently dynamic nature of the landscape, change arising from a development may not necessarily be significant.

Visual effects relate to the changes that arise in the composition of available views as a result of changes to the landscape, to people's responses to the changes and to the overall effects with respect to visual amenity.”

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

12 4.4. Assessment of Significance

4.4.1. The process of forming a judgement on the significance of an effect is based upon an assessment of the magnitude of change affecting the landscape or the views experienced by people, combined with the sensitivity of the 'receptor' to change the nature proposed. Thus, a high level of change affecting a highly sensitive receptor (landscape Resource or viewer) will be more significant than a small degree of change affecting less sensitive landscape or visual receptors.

4.4.2. The level of significance will be the factor influencing planning decisions and it is therefore important that judgements on sensitivity, magnitude of change and overall significance of effect are clearly understood, and a measure of proportion established. Indicative criteria used in this assessment to define levels of sensitivity, magnitude of change and significance of effects are set out in the table below. It should be emphasized that, while the methodology is designed to be robust and transparent, professional judgement is ultimately applied to determine the significance of each impact.

4.4.3. For the purposes of this assessment, 'significant effects' resulting from the proposed development are judged to be those effects likely to result in a 'Major' or a 'Major-Moderate' effect (highlighted bold in Table I). The remaining effects are not considered to be 'significant'. Predicted changes can be positive as well as negative or neutral.

Table I – Sensitivity, Magnitude and Significance

MAGNITUDE

Minimal Moderate Major- Major SENSITIVITY Moderate

High Minimal Moderate Major- Major Moderate Medium Minimal Moderate- Moderate Major- Slight Moderate Low Minimal Slight Moderate- Moderate Slight

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

13 4.5. Steps in the Assessment Process

4.5.1. The main steps in the assessment process are set out below:

4.5.2. Desk study:

 Familiarisation with development proposals, site location, etc.;

 Review of current planning policy context relating to landscape, including designations

 Review of existing landscape character assessments for the area (national, regional, local);

 Where appropriate or necessary, preparation of mapping studies to identify the potential visibility of the proposals from the surrounding areas, potential visual receptors and key viewpoints, to be checked on site.

4.5.3. Field survey:

 Visit to site to record landscape character/key features on the site and within surrounding area;

 Field checking of mapping studies to confirm extent of visibility, key viewpoints and receptors, photographic record, etc.;

 Field-based identification of mitigation opportunities

4.5.4. Design:

 Input into site design including liaison with other professionals. Identification of landscape mitigation/ creation opportunities

4.5.5. Assessment:

 Assessment of potential effects on landscape Resources, of the site itself and surrounding landscape character, and assessment of potential effects on any landscape designations;

 Confirmation of representative viewpoints for assessment, assessment of effects on views from these viewpoints;

 Assessment of effects on private dwellings and public rights of way.

4.5.6. Presentation

 Preparation of report, supported by visual material (e.g. plants, photographs and, where appropriate, photomontages) to assist understanding of the assessment findings.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

14 5. Baseline Conditions

5.1. Introduction

5.1.1. An overview of the baseline study results is provided in this section with the full baseline description of the individual landscape character areas and viewpoints being provided alongside the assessment in the “Effects” section (Section 7) for ease of reference.

5.2. Topography

5.2.1. Topography is illustrated on drawing 1304-01 Viewpoint, Topography and Site Location Plan. The landform within the study area is very gently rising from southeast to northwest. The majority of the central and western portion of the site is in part a Christmas tree plantation and naturalised and ornamental trees and shrubs. The eastern portion of the site beyond a leylandii/evergreen hedge is a working yard on compacted earth and gravel. A pair of buildings occupies the southern part of this area while the remainder is used as storage for machinery and materials.

5.2.2. To the north beyond the mortared stoned wall boundary is an access area for the Alston Reservoirs. Beyond the access area is the steeply rising earthen retaining feature of the reservoir. To the east, a former reservoir has been flattened and converted into a wetland area. The wetland is registered as a County Biological Heritage site. To the south are the main retail buildings of Spout Farm Nursery and the main farm house building, parking areas and yards. Beyond the collection of farm buildings is open countryside and fields which form part of the Undulating Lowland Farmland character area.

5.2.3. The banks of the reservoirs form the most significant rise in the area, while the surrounding countryside, undulates gently away downwards towards the eventual openness of the coastal plains or river valleys.

5.3. The Site and its Context

5.3.1. The proposed development is for a 32-unit housing development made up of a mix of detached and semi-detached, 2-storey houses.

5.3.2. The main access road to the development makes a loop through the site with the houses spread along both sides. The main access is also to be shared with the existing Spout Farm nursery which will remain.

5.3.3. On the opposite side of Preston Road, are semi-detached houses, an existing collection of farm buildings, and land which has had planning permission approved for the construction of 60 houses of mixed types.

5.3.4. The majority of houses along Preston Road are of red-brick construction with tile roofs.

5.3.5. Adjacent to the development to the east is a wetland formed from the deconstruction of a reservoir associated with the remaining Alston reservoirs.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

15 The wetland has been identified as a County Biological Heritage site noted for wetland bird nesting and commuting.

5.4. Landscape Character Baseline

5.4.1. A hierarchy of landscape character assessments have been carried out in England, from national (largest) down to local (smallest and most detailed) scales. Due to the relatively small scale of the proposed development, the smallest, local character assessments provide the most appropriate baseline against which to assess landscape effects.

5.4.2. The 1-2km study area is covered by the following landscape character assessments:

 National Scale: Natural England coordinated the identification and description of Landscape Character Areas across England. They are currently in the process of updating the character assessments thus some areas are referred to as the new National Character Areas while unupdated areas are referred to as Joint Character Areas. The site lies fully within Joint Character Area 35: Lancashire Valleys but the village of Longridge is predominantly within National Character Area 33: Bowland Fringe and Pendle Hill. Both character areas will be considered as part of this report.

 Regional Scale: Lancashire County Council commissioned and published A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire, December 2000. The site lies within regional landscape character type 5: Undulating Lowland Farmland.

 Local Scale: Lancashire County Council’s report, A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire, December 2000 further sub-divides the regional character types. The site lies within local landscape character type 5c: Undulating Lowland Farmland - Lower Ribble. Like the National Scale areas, Longridge forms a boundary between 5c and 5h: Undulating Lowland Farmland – Goosnargh-Whittingham.

All publications will be used to assess the landscape character baseline for this report.

5.4.3. A detailed baseline description and assessment of effects on the national and regional landscape character areas are given in sections 7.3. The effects on the proposed development are assessed against both the baseline information and site observations. Extracts from the landscape character assessments used as part of the landscape character assessment are found in Appendix 4.

5.5. Landscape Designations Baseline

5.5.1. The site does not lie within any designated areas. Sharing the eastern boundary is County Biological Heritage (CBH) site number 63NW01 – Alston Reservoirs.

5.5.2. The main purpose of a CBH is to protect and enhance the natural heritage within the county. A CBH is a non-statutory designation, however, this does not diminish its importance locally. CBH 63NW01 is designated in order to

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

16 protect wildlife such as wintering wildfowl and lapwings, as well as species-rich grasslands.

5.5.3. The site lies less than one mile from three Conservation Areas within the town of Longridge, the closest is a short strip along Preston Road referred to as Newtown, which preserves a collection of stone-built terraces and cottages just north of the junction with Chapel Hill. A second lies along Chapel Hill and Chapel Brow in relation to St. Lawrence Church and again preserves a collection of traditional stone-built cottages and stone walls. The final one and furthest away is the largest and forms much of the heart of the town of Longridge and stretches along Derby Road, Berry Lane, Inglewhite Road and King Street. Again it preserves the traditional heart of the town and its stone built houses, shop fronts and civic buildings.

5.5.4. There are no Tree Preservation Orders within the site or in close proximity.

5.5.5. Effects on designated landscapes are assessed under section 7.9 of this report.

5.6. Landscape Features

5.6.1. The proposal site is currently an area of plantation farmland planted with Christmas trees of various maturities intermixed with immature wild-seeded saplings and unmaintained grasses. An area of hard standing made up of compressed soils, gravel and other hardcore rubble and is used as a storage and work area for Spout Farm Nursery and the Christmas tree plantation. The yard extends along the length of the boundary shared with the wetland portion of the CBH to the east.

5.6.2. An evergreen hedge made up primarily of Leylandii separates the area of hard standing from the plantation serving to screen the service area from the public entrance and parking area for the nursery.

5.6.3. Along Preston Road a well maintained low hedge encloses the Christmas tree plantation and is interspersed with mature hedgerow trees. At the access road to Spout Farm Nursery, ornamental shrubs are planted in informal beds on both sides of the entrance.

5.6.4. Along the boundary to the north, a crenelated stone wall extends from Preston Road along the north and part of the east boundary. The wall is approximately 1.8m (6ft) tall and in good condition. Any openings in the wall are closed off with wooden post and rails.

5.6.5. The boundary to the east, against the wetland, is made up of a mature hawthorn hedge. The hedge is tall but relatively narrow being only a single line of plants. At the base of the hedge and extending beyond the site into the car park for Spout Farm Nursery is low newt fencing.

5.6.6. The boundary shared with the Spout Farm Nursery and the main Spout Farm farmhouse is made up of various elements including the access road, a farm building, leylandii and other ornamental evergreen and deciduous hedge and tree planting. Some of the leylandii along this boundary have reached their full

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

17 height maturity of approximately 10m-15m, exceeding the height of the average two-storey house.

5.6.7. Effects on the landscape features are assessed under section 7.10 of this report.

5.7. Visual Baseline

5.7.1. Integral to undertaking the visual assessment is the need to first define the existing baseline visual environment. It is accepted practice to select and agree up a number of representative viewpoints from which the assessment of the impacts arising from the proposed development will then be assessed.

5.7.2. A desktop mapping study was prepared for this project to help illustrate the maximum potential extent of visibility (See drawing 1304-01). This study informed the site visit and helped identify representative viewpoints.

5.7.3. Photographs of the viewpoints selected are presented in Appendix 8 and are described under Viewpoint Analysis in Table 2. The locations of the viewpoints are also shown on drawing 1304-01.

5.8. Visual Environment of the Site

5.8.1. The gently sloping nature of immediate site and the surrounding area suggest that visibility of the site from down-slope areas is considered likely to be screened by either vegetation or building groups. This correlates to the area to the west through to the south-east of the site. Up-slope the reservoir is the predominant backdrop to the site.

5.8.2. The site is nestled between the collections of buildings that form Spout Farm, the nursery and the reservoir. Due to the sites use a working plantation, it does not have the maturity nor presence of a woodland, nor that of a traditional green space within the townscape of Longridge. The streetscape along Preston Road at this point is considered to be a transitional point between the rural character as described in the 5h Character Assessment and that of the urban fabric of the town. The embankments of the reservoir along Preston Road provide a large, green backdrop at street level, though there are no trees to break up the rising expanse of grassland.

5.8.3. Refer to viewpoint photographs in Appendix 8.

5.9. Public Rights of Way

5.9.1. There are several Public Rights of Way (PROW) in the vicinity of the site. The footpath numbered FP118 lies within the boundaries of the site and shares the access to the site before turning into the nursery car park and then exiting at a still into an adjacent field. Any PROW which are considered to have views of the proposed development are assessed in section 5.10. Refer to drawing 1304-01 for PROW in the area.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

18 5.10. Residential Receptors

5.10.1. As described in the detailed Methodology (Appendix 1), the assessment on residential properties is limited to where, in theory, due to their close proximity, large proportions of their views could be occupied by the proposal. However, it is the views from public areas near houses that are of relevance to the main body of the visual impact assessment.

5.10.2. The residential receptors that may potentially be affected by the proposed development are the residences on the opposite side of Preston Road. Viewpoint 8 is a representative view of the public views in proximity to the aforementioned residents facing the site. The effects on views from these locations are discussed in Table 2.

5.10.3. Effects on residential receptors are assessed under section 5.10 of this report.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

19 6. The Proposed Scheme

6.1. The Proposal

6.1.1. The proposal for the site is develop it as a housing estate. The proposals allow for 32 units made up of a mix of fully detached and semi-detached units. All the units will include rear gardens while some will include a garden frontage. Refer to Architect's drawings for further details. 6.1.2. The existing access to the farmstead including Spout Farm house, Spout Farm Nursery and the development site/Christmas tree plantation is to be retained but widened and developed to current highways standards and utilised as a shared resource for the three elements. 6.1.3. Proposed buffer planting at all boundaries will serve to both screen the development from elements such as the wetland/CBH as well as the public activity of the retail nursery. 6.1.4. In association with topography and drainage constraints a package treatment plant is located between the development and the nursery car park. 6.1.5. An open space for a local play area is provided centrally within the site allowing for passive security. Containment for the play area will likely be required as it will be adjacent to the main access road and parking areas.

6.1.6. A proposed footpath meanders from the the southern boundary, along the eastern and northern boundaries to connect with a bus shelter along Preston Road. The vegetative buffer along the eastern boundary is intentionally deeper to provide a robust buffer between the development and the wetland.

6.1.7. Appropriate tree and shrub planting at the property boundaries are proposed to accentuate the perimeter and provide buffering for the development. The existing deciduous hedge along Preston Road will be maintained and in filled as needed to provide a dense hedge buffer. Additionally, tree and shrub proposals within the development have been provided.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

20 7. Effects

7.1. Timescales and Nature of Effects

7.1.1. There are three key stages considered in this assessment which reflect the life cycle of the development as follows:

 Construction – this stage considers the effects during construction, which are described in more detail below

 Completion – this stage considers the effects of the development once complete.

 Year 15 – this stage considered the effects of the development upon maturity of any proposed planting.

7.2. Effects During Construction

7.2.1. Landscape and visual effects during the construction phase to be assessed include the following:

 The effect of plant and site fencing/scaffolding within the landscape during the construction phase;

 The effect of site vehicles and construction traffic both within the site and surrounding areas;

 Other components typical of construction including stockpiles of material and area lighting

7.3. Effects on Landscape Character

7.3.1. Section 5.4 of this assessment identifies those character areas requiring detailed assessment. In respect of this development, particular considerations that arise in association with landscape character are:

 The physical changes to the landscape fabric;

 the integration of the development with the surrounding landscape patterns and structure;

 the degree to which opportunities are taken to enhance character where condition is poor, or preserve character where condition is good;

 the degree to which the design respects the local vernacular.

7.4. National Landscape Character Areas

7.4.1. The Lancashire Valleys character area (JCA 35) is a large character area which includes portions of the Forest of Bowland AONB. The majority of the town of Longridge lies in the neighbouring character area of NCA33 – Bowland Fringe and Pendle Hill. The site, however, lies on the southern edge of Longridge at the transitional landscape between rural and urban settlements. The JCA35

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

21 describes the overall character as “... visually contained landscape which would have once shared many characteristics with the rural valley of the river Ribble in the north. However, the development of industry and settlements has created a landscape with an intensely urban character. The remnants of agricultural land are now fragmented by industry and scattered development which severely disrupt the continuity of the field pattern…”

7.4.2. National Character Area 33 – Bowland Fringe and Pendle Hill, associated with the town of Longridge, north of the site is described as a transitional landscape where “...The influence of human habitation and activity, and the area’s long farming history, contribute significantly to its character. In contrast to the predominantly rural feel of the area, this NCA includes several relatively urban areas including Clitheroe, Bentham and Longridge.”

7.4.3. The character assessment of JCA35 includes the influence of human habitation patterns. “The distinguishing characteristic of this area is the influence of human habitation. The settlement pattern is of small stone villages, hamlets and farmsteads. The isolated country houses set in well-maintained formal parkland are a typical feature of this landscape. These managed estates are enclosed by belts of woodland and estate fencing. Farms tend to be larger than those in the Bowland Fells with better quality land supporting large dairy herds. Farms generally consist of a core of stone buildings with some conspicuous modern outbuildings.”

7.4.4. Sensitivity of character area JCA 35 to the proposed development is assessed to be Low due to the location of the site on the urban fringe and the site's disassociation with the surrounding rural context.

7.4.5. Direct effects on this character area by the proposed development are considered to be Negligible. The proposed development maintains much of the qualities described within the character area assessment regarding settlement patterns and human influence.

7.4.6. Indirect effects on this character area are largely dependent on visibility outwards and inwards. It is considered that all areas with potential visibility towards the development would view the site in context with the surrounding developments and existing context and thus the character would not be perceived as significantly altered. Therefore, the indirect effects are considered to have impact thus is considered to have a Negligible magnitude. The significance of effect is then considered to be Minimal. The nature of the effect is generally considered to be Neutral.

7.4.7. Overall effects on the Lancashire Valleys character area are considered Minimal due to the context of the development within the urban fabric of Longridge and the small overall scale of the proposed development.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

22 7.5. A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire, December 2000.

7.5.1. Undulating Lowland Farmland

 The site is located within a Regional character area defined as Undulating Lowland Farmland. The character area is described generally as: “There are also many mixed farm woodlands, copses and hedgerow trees, creating an impression of a well wooded landscape from ground level and a patchwork of wood and pasture from raised viewpoints on the fells. Some of the most picturesque stone villages of the county occur within this well settled landscape type. The towns of Longridge and Clitheroe also occur within this type, but are not typical of the settlement pattern.”

 Human influence on this character type is expressed as “a small scale intimate landscape of scattered farms linked by winding roads with irregular fields and patches of surviving woodland on stream and field edges, a landscape which has remained intact to this day.”

7.5.2. Undulating Lowland Farmland: Lower Ribble

 When assessed in finer detail at a more localised level, this character area is described as “...an area of lowland gritstone farmland between Longridge Fell to the north and Mellor Ridge to the south.” In general, the character assessment states, “There is a high density of farms and scattered cottages outside the clustered settlements, linked by a network of minor roads.”

 It highlights the human interaction with the landscape as: “Although a rural valley, the area is well settled; a dense network of winding country lanes and tracks link the large number of stone farm buildings.”

 Historically, the site is located in an area first settled in ancient times but the predominant enclosure pattern was developed in medieval times and much of the hedgerows and field boundaries survive as contemporary property boundaries. The farm buildings at Spout Farm appears on the 1844 first edition OS maps in its current location identifying the site as part of a pair of field enclosure extending to the current boundary to the north and beyond the current boundary to the east. The structures associated with the farm and houses on the opposite side of Preston Road have also been in existence since at least the publication of the 1844 first edition OS map.

 The sensitivity of these character types are taken together and are considered to be Low due to the location of the site at the urban fringe of Longridge and the relative density of surrounding developments. The site's disassociation with the character of farmland as described in the character assessment is due to the occurrence of development on all sides and thus lacks any connectivity to the surround rural field pattern.

 Direct effects on this character consider the context as remaining in keeping with the feeling described above as a rural valley, but well settled.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

23 The magnitude of the effect within this character area is assessed as Negligible with a significance of Minimal.

 Indirect effects associated with the proposed development are dependent on the visibility within the study area as described in the JCA33 section above. Therefore, the magnitude of the indirect effects on landscape character is considered to be Negligible due to the cover of mature boundary planting which is expected to limit visibility of the site from the surrounding area and enhancing the perception of enclosure within of the landscape.

 The overall effect can be considered to be Minimal based on the assessments above.

7.6. Visual Effects

7.7. Desktop Mapping Study

7.7.1. A mapping study was prepared to assess the potential visibility of the proposed development and to inform the design, mitigation and selection of representative visual receptors (see drawing 1304-01). The mapping study indicates areas of land with potential visibility of all or only part of the development – an area showing potential visibility may only see a small part of the proposals.

7.7.2. The study suggests that no part of the site would be visible beyond the initial 1- 2km radius.

7.7.3. The study indicates potential visibility in the following places:

 To the south:

o from approaches to the site from Preston Road and Pinfold Lane/ BW 119 and Footpaths 118.

 To the east:

o From Pinfold Lane/BW121

o From BW66

 To the west:

o From the Preston Road

o From Fps 100, 101, 103, 104, 107

o From roads within the housing estate

7.7.4. Views are not expected from public footpaths or other public spaces to the north due to the presence of the reservoir embankment which

7.7.5. It is important to note that this is not a precise representation of the visibility of the site as visits to the area confirm that there is a lower level of visibility and

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

24 the representative viewpoints indicate the highest areas of visibility surrounding the site. The reason for this lower level of visibility on the ground is due to localised topography, mature vegetation and tree groups, residential properties and other elements not included in the study. This is particularly true of potential visibility to the west of the site where tree and hedgerow cover effectively buffers views towards the site.

7.8. Viewpoint Analysis

7.8.1. Viewpoints are assessed during construction, completion and for a point 15 years from completion. The viewpoint analysis can be found in Appendix 5.

7.9. Effects on Designated Landscapes

7.9.1. As per section 5.5 of this report, the site lies adjacent to County Biological Heritage (CBH) Site 63NW01. The designation is non-statutory, but is an important ecological resource at the county level. The CBH was afforded designation in order to protect the habitats of a variety of wildlife and in particular wetland birds, for both nesting and migrating/overwintering purposes. To this end, and to prevent disturbance by visitors, three hides have been built along Pinfold Lane/Bridleway 121. The hides overlook the wetland area and face the development site.

7.9.2. It is considered that the existing use of the site as a Christmas tree plantation and storage yard with various pieces of heavy machinery could be construed as visually unappealing and potentially disturbing to the ecology of the CBH. The proposed development proposes to widen and enhance the landscape buffer. The existing single line hawthorn hedge does not serve as an adequate buffer, particularly in winter when there are no leaves on the plants. The height of the hedge is adequate to screen the existing site and it is considered that the hedge, if enhanced as proposed, would provide a suitable backdrop for the CBH, screening activities within the site.

7.9.3. It is considered that the construction phase of the development would be the most disruptive to the ecology and visitors of the site, due to increased level of activity, noise and dust that may be produced.

7.9.4. At completion of the development it is considered that a low level of disruption may occur as a result of the potential of pedestrians using the proposed local pathway through the new landscape buffer, vehicular traffic and nightime lighting. At this time, the landscape would not be mature, but it is considered that the incidence of this type of activity to be intermittent and irregular in timing. It is considered that this type of activity would not disturb visitors to the CBH but may, in accumulated effect with people and vehicles using the nursery carpark, provide a minimal disturbance to the ecology of the CBH. It is worth noting that the CBH already experiences disturbance in the form of vehicular and pedestrian traffic within the nursery carpark and in the storage yard on the site. It is considered that the development would not be a negative element in relation to the CBH, but may, potentially, prove to be a beneficial change.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

7.9.5. The landscape buffer will grow quickly and provide buffering with 2-3 years, so it is considered that by year 15, potential for visibility into the site of pedestrians on the pathway would be near nil. Housing and back garden fences will be adequately buffered from view (note: these elements were not considered to be disruptive to either visitors of the CBH or to ecology upon completion due to both their contextual balance with the surrounding town fringe landscape and lack of threat to ecology).

7.9.6. Thus the significance of effect on County Biological Heritage site 63NW01 is considered to be Moderate at the time of construction and lower to Minimal within 2+ years of completion.

7.9.7. The designated Conservation Areas within the town of Longridge are considered to be entirely unaffected by the proposals.

7.10. Effects on Landscape Features

7.10.1. As discussed in section 5.6 of this report, a variety of landscape features exist on the site. The most significant elements exist at the boundaries of the site and all boundary treatments are proposed to be retained and in the case of vegetated buffers will be enhanced with new planting.

7.10.2. Within the site, the area of Christmas tree plantation and the associated grasses, saplings and undergrowth will be lost to development. These features are assumed to provide habitat for breeding, nesting and feeding for a variety of wildlife including birds and invertebrates. (Refer to Phase 1 Habitat Survey by others for further details)

7.10.3. The overall net loss significance is considered Moderate-Slight both during construction and upon completion. By year 15, it is considered that the maturing proposed vegetation at the boundaries will increase native biodiversity on the site through the inclusion of enhanced buffer and tree planting as well as the private garden improvements expected to increase ornamental varieties suitable for some wildlife such as birds and butterflies, thus the significance is reduced to Slight.

7.11. Public Rights of Way

7.11.1. Footpath 118 utilises the same access road currently used by vehicles and walkers alike. At this point, it is considered that the footpath will be affected during the construction phase of the development. It is considered likely that it will be require short term diversion or closure while the access road is improved. It is expected that traffic into and out of the site during construction and upon completion. The proposals suggest that the footpath will be provided a pedestrian footway at the side of the access road which will prevent interaction between vehicles and pedestrians. The comparison between the existing state of the footpath which shares the access with vehicles of all types including delivery wagons and the proposed state of removing footpath users to a pedestrian-only footpath has also been considered in this assessment.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

7.11.2. Once Footpath 118 re-enters the nursery car park it returns to its original state of shared surface with vehicles and crosses the car park to the stile and on into the field beyond. It is considered that the effect upon Footpath 118 during construction will be Moderate-Slight and reducing to Slight at completion and year 15.

7.11.3. No other PROW fall within or directly adjacent to the site and views from PROW within the mapping study area have been included within the viewpoint analysis and the effect upon views from these representative points is considered Minimal. This consideration applies to all phases of the development, from construction to year 15, due to the development blending in with the surrounding context of the town edge and existing development.

7.12. Residential Receptors

7.12.1. The residential receptors that will be particularly affected by the proposed development are the adjacent neighbour at Spout House Farm and the dwellings directly opposite on Preston Road.

7.12.2. These residential receptors are adjacent to the proposed development and the outlook from these dwellings may be affected particularly during the construction phase of the development. During construction it is considered that the significance of the effect would be Moderate. This conclusion arises out of the understanding that increased traffic, scaffolding, workmen and machinery on site, noise and dust will temporarily alter views of the site during construction, however, due to the nature and scale of the development, it is unlikely to be overwhelming in nature. Upon completion and at year 15 the assessment considers the effect to reduce to Slight as it is considered that an increase of traffic entering and exiting the site will rise though not in an overwhelming nature. It is considered that the increase in vegetation at the boundaries will mitigate much of visual impact of the development on these dwellings.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

8. Summary and Conclusion

8.1. Assessment Summary

8.1.1. This landscape and visual assessment concludes that with regard to landscape and views, the site is suitable for the proposed development. The proposals are considered to have a short-term effect on views from the surrounding areas, but eventually an improvement in the amount of vegetation and landscape features may be perceived.

8.1.2. The development is considered to have short-term effect on the existing landscape resource including existing vegetation, Public Rights of Way (footpath 118) and designated landscapes. The proposed development is considered to be in context with the landscape character of the land to be developed, based on the sites location at the urban fringe and is considered to not significantly alter the landscape character of the surrounding areas. In addition, it is considered that the development complies with other relevant policy set out by Ribble Valley Borough Council for development.

8.2. Landscape Effects

8.2.1. The nature of the proposals suggests that the effects will be predominantly localised the immediate vicinity. The effects on National Character Area JCA35 (Lancashire Valleys), Regional Character Area 5 (Undulating Lowland Farmland) and Local character Area 5c (Undulating Lowland Farmland: Lower Ribble) are considered to be Minimal.

8.3. Viewpoints

8.3.1. Based on the assessed viewpoints, the overall visibility of the site is considered to be contained within the immediate area with only limited visibility within the extended area. The viewpoints with the most visibility are from the wildlife watching hides along Pinfold Lane and along Preston Road from a point where the embankment of the reservoir gives way to allow views to the east and to a point just beyond where Pinfold Lane joins Preston Road. Beyond these points, the development is largely screened by vegetation or topography.

8.4. Effects on Landscape Resources

8.4.1. The overall significance of effects at completion of the proposals is considered to be Neutral. There will be little perceived change to the Landscape Resource and by year 15 the assessment may be considered Beneficial, particularly as perceived from the hides viewing the BHS wetland, as mature vegetation will further enhance and screen the development.

8.4.2. The overall significance of effect on Public Rights of Way is considered to be Minimal and Neutral.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Appendix 1 – Methodology

1. Introduction

1.1 The methodology has three key stages, which are described in more detail in subsequent sections, as follows:

 Baseline – includes the gathering of documented information; scoping of the assessment and agreement of that scope with the client, relevant consultees and the local planning authority.  Design – review of initial layout/ options and mitigation options.  Assessment – includes an assessment of the landscape and visual effects of the full scheme, requiring site based work and the completion of a report and supporting graphics, including cumulative assessment if appropriate.

1.2 The assessment method draws upon the established Countryside Agency methodology (Landscape Character Assessment Guidance, 2002) and other recognised guidelines, in particular the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment and the Landscape Institute’s Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, second edition 2002 (GLAVIA). 1.3 The significance of an effect on a landscape or visual receptor is a function of the sensitivity of the receptor to change and the magnitude of change caused by the proposed development. This is assessed for both landscape receptors such as designated areas and landscape character areas, and for visual receptors (people) at viewpoints. 1.4 A full glossary is provided in Appendix 2.

2. Baseline 2.1 The baseline study establishes the relevant landscape planning policy context, the scope of the assessment and the key receptors. It includes the following key activities:

 A desk study of relevant current national and local planning policy for the site and surrounding area.  A desk study of nationally and locally designated landscapes for the site and surrounding area.  A desk study of existing landscape character assessments for the site and surrounding area, at national, regional and local level.  Where appropriate or necessary, desktop mapping study to assist in identifying potential viewpoints and indicate the potential visibility of the proposals, and therefore scope of receptors likely to be affected.  Where appropriate, the identification of and the scope of assessment for cumulative effects.  Where appropriate, the identification of representative viewpoints within the study area, at which visual impacts will be assessed.  Identification of the range of other visual receptors (public rights of way, settlements and residential properties) within the study area.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

 Definition of the sensitivity of the landscape and visual receptors.

3. Design Recommendations and Mitigation 3.1 A landscape architect may assist in recommending appropriate native tree and shrub planting to use in the landscape buffer proposals. Boundary treatments, in keeping with the countryside nature of the area, are recommended such as well- maintained, deciduous hedges. In addition, earth bunding against the wetland boundary may increase the quality of immediate buffering available upon completion of the development. 3.2 During construction, non-reflective, low-contrast fencing is recommended to visually contain the works from the wetland edge.

4. Assessment 4.1 The assessment of effects includes further work covering the following key activities:

 An assessment of the magnitude and significance of effects upon the landscape character, landscape designations and the existing visual environment arising from the proposed development during construction and operational stages. Since, planting is proposed, which will help to buffer the development over time, effects during operation are assessed at years 1 and 15.  Where appropriate or necessary, the production of photomontages from a selection of the viewpoints showing the anticipated view following construction of the proposed pitch.

5. Preparation and Use of Mapping Studies and Photomontages 5.1 Desktop mapping studies are used to inform the field study assessment work, providing additional detail and accuracy to observations made on site. Mapping studies show the maximum theoretical visibility taking into account topography and urban form. The study does not take into account every localised feature and thus gives an exaggerated impression of the extent of visibility. As a result, there may be areas which, although shown as potentially visible on the mapping study, are screened or filtered by buildings, embankments, walls, and/or vegetation, which would block views of the proposed development.

6. Assessment of Landscape Sensitivity and Magnitude 6.1 Landscape Sensitivity 6.1.1 Sensitivity of landscape character areas or types is influenced by their characteristics and is frequently considered within documented landscape character assessments and capacity studies. The sensitivity of designated landscapes is assessed based on their relative value as indicated by their designation. 6.1.2 A description of how sensitivity is assessed for landscape character areas or types and for designated landscapes is included below.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Sensitivity of Landscape Receptors Sensitivity Receptor Type Definition High Landscape For example: character area/  Particularly distinctive, positive and coherent type landscape character with high aesthetic appeal  Intact landscape structure and individual elements in good condition, absence of intrusive or detracting elements.  Overall low capacity to tolerate change of a specific type and scale without significant disruption to individual valued features, or the combination of landscape elements, that contribute to distinctive character.

Designated For example: landscape  Nationally designated landscape such as National Park, AONB. (Heritage Coasts, which though nationally designated, are protected only via local plan policy would have High-Medium value and sensitivity).  Locally designated landscape (e.g. AGLV), where the reasons for designation are well- represented would have High-Medium value and sensitivity.  Overall low capacity to tolerate change without significant disruption to individual valued features, or the particular qualities of the landscape that contribute to the reasons for designation.

Medium Landscape For example: character area/  A generally positive character but with some type degradation or erosion of features resulting in areas of mixed character and condition  Presence of some intrusive elements that detract from the distinctive character of the landscape  Moderate capacity to accommodate some change of a particular type and scale without loss of essential character and local distinctiveness.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Sensitivity of Landscape Receptors

Sensitivity Receptor Type Definition Designated For example: landscape  Locally designated landscape (e.g. AGLV), where character and quality are partially degraded (Medium)  Moderate capacity to accommodate some change of a particular type and scale without significant disruption to individual valued features, or the particular qualities of the landscape that contribute to the reasons for designation  Moderate capacity to accommodate some change of a particular type and scale without loss of essential character and local distinctiveness. Low Landscape For example: character area/  Lacks a coherent or distinctive positive type character with some degradation or erosion of features resulting in areas of mixed character and poor condition.  Presence of intrusive elements that detract from the distinctive character of the landscape  A landscape type or area which can potentially tolerate substantial change of a particular type and scale without unacceptable adverse effects on its character

Designated For example: landscape  A landscape which is not designated, nor of recognised importance, and is of limited value as a local landscape Resource  A landscape type or area which can potentially tolerate substantial change of a particular type and scale without unacceptable adverse effects on its value as a landscape Resource

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

7. Magnitude of Effect on Landscape Resources 7.1 Magnitude of effect identifies the degree of change to the distinctive elements, features or characteristics of the landscape arising from the development and how this affects its distinctive character and qualities and its sense of place. It is rated as shown in the table below

Magnitude of Effect – Landscape Resource

Magnitude Receptor Type Definition High Landscape For example: character Total or major alteration to key elements, features area/ type or characteristics of the local or wider landscape Resource, such that post development the baseline situation will be fundamentally changed Designated For example: landscape Total or major alteration to key elements, features or characteristics of the designated landscape, such that post development the reasons for designation will be fundamentally affected. Medium Landscape For example: character Partial alteration to key elements, features or area/ type characteristics of the local or wider landscape Resource, such that post development the baseline situation will be noticeably changed Designated For example: landscape Partial alteration to key elements, features or characteristics of the designated landscape, such that post development the reasons for designation will be noticeably affected. Low Landscape For example: character Minor alteration to key elements, features or area/ type characteristics of the local or wider landscape Resource, such that post development the baseline situation will be largely unchanged, despite discernible differences

Designated For example: landscape Minor alteration to key elements, features or characteristics of the designated landscape, such that post development the reasons for designation will be largely unaffected.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Magnitude of Effect – Landscape Resource

Magnitude Receptor Type Definition Negligible Landscape For example: character Very minor alteration to key elements, features or area/ type characteristics of the local or wider landscape Resource, such that post development the baseline situation will be fundamentally unchanged with barely perceptible differences Designated For example: landscape Very minor alteration to key elements, features or characteristics of the designated landscape, such that post development the reasons for designation will be fundamentally unaffected with barely perceptible difference

8. Assessment of Visual Sensitivity and Magnitude 6.1 Introduction 6.1.1 Significance of visual effect is assessed for the selected representative viewpoints. General overall effects on public rights of way within the locality are also described. An assessment is made to identify whether any dwellings would be unacceptably harmed by views of the proposed development. This is described in more detail below.

 Representative viewpoints for the assessment of visual effects have been identified in the baseline assessment. These are at publicly accessible locations such as roads and public rights of way and public open space. The sensitivity of receptor, magnitude of change to the view, and the significance of the impact on the receptor are assessed for each representative viewpoint.  Private dwellings Recent public inquiry decisions have determined that effects on private residences are not a material consideration unless they will be affected by views of the development to the extent that views of the development would be ‘overwhelming’. The basis for such decision is clearly described in the Inspector’s decision for Shooters Bottom Farm wind farm (APP/Q3305/A/05/1181087), as follows:

“the planning system does not exist to protect the private interests of one person against the activities of another. Rather, it functions to regulate the use and development of land in the public interest. In the case of living conditions, public and private interest may coincide where the impact of a specific development is such as to significantly affect the attractiveness of a particular dwelling as a place to live, but only if this was in a way that would be perceived by the community at large rather than, for example, in consequence of the disposition of a particular existing householder towards the generic type of development proposed.”

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

 For this reason, sensitivity, magnitude and significance are not assessed in relation to views from residential properties, but an assessment is made to identify whether any dwellings would be unacceptably harmed by views of the proposed development. The assessment is limited to dwellings where, in theory, due to their close proximity, large proportions of their views could potentially be occupied by a proposed development.  Public Rights of Way Effects on the visual amenity of Public Rights of Way (PROW) in the vicinity of the site are assessed.

6.2 Sensitivity of Visual Receptors 6.2.1 The sensitivity of visual receptors is primarily dependent upon:

 the location i.e. proximity and context of the viewpoint;  the expectations and occupation or activity of the receptor, including awareness of their surroundings and duration of viewing opportunity, whether prolonged or intermittent;  the importance of the view, which may be determined with respect to its popularity or numbers of people affected, its appearance in guidebooks, on tourist maps, and in the facilities provided for its enjoyment and references to it in literature or art.

6.2.2 A small number of visual receptors can reasonably be anticipated to be affected by the proposed development. This range of visual receptors will include pedestrians, and recreational users of the surrounding landscape such as walkers, cyclists and those otherwise engaged in the pursuit of leisure activities within the visual envelope of the site, local residents, motorists, those working outdoors and other workers. The four main visual receptor groups are considered in more detail below under the headings of residents, workers, the travelling public, and visitors. i) Residents Local residents tend to have a higher level of sensitivity to changes in their landscape and visual environment than those passing through. For residents, the most important views are those from their homes, although they will also be sensitive to other views such as those experienced when travelling to work or other local destinations. However, it is these latter views, from public areas nearby houses that are of relevance to the main body of the visual impact assessment (assessment of effects from the representative viewpoints). ii) Workers Workers are generally less sensitive to effects as they are focussed on the tasks they are carrying out. Indoor workers generally have a Low sensitivity, and outdoor workers, such as farmers and those offering outdoor pursuits are considered to have a Low to Medium sensitivity. iii) The Travelling Public This category of visual receptor group overlaps to a degree with the other categories in that it embraces local residents, workers and those who come to visit the area. This group of visual receptors will include the following:

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

 Motorists - For major trunk routes and motorways, the sensitivity of users will be Low, as they will be travelling at speed and will be primarily focussed on achieving their destination. Users of other A-roads will have a Low to Medium sensitivity, unless these are particularly scenic or slow routes, in which case the sensitivity may be assessed as Medium. The users of local roads will have a Medium sensitivity.  Cyclists and footpath users – These groups are addressed under the heading of visitors as they are generally less concerned with the object of reaching their destination than with the enjoyment of being outside and enjoying the landscape and available views.

iv) Visitors This category includes several visual receptor groups, each with different objectives and levels of sensitivity to any change in the fabric or character of the landscape and views arising from the proposed development. This group includes those who are mainly concerned with enjoyment of the outdoor environment but also those who may pursue indoor recreational pursuits and is anticipated to include the following (arranged in decreasing sensitivity):

 Those whose main preoccupation is the enjoyment of scenery (High sensitivity).  Recreational walkers and equestrians (High sensitivity)  Those visitors engaged in cultural pursuits (High-Medium sensitivity)  Cyclists (High-Medium sensitivity)

6.3 Magnitude of Effect on Views from Representative Viewpoints 6.3.1 Magnitude of effect identifies the degree of change to the character and quality of views experience by the visual receptor. This will be influenced by:

 The distance of the viewpoint from the proposed development and the scale of change in the view with respect to the loss or addition of features in the view and changes in its composition, including the proportion of the view occupied by the proposed development;  The degree of contrast or integration of any new features or changes in the landscape with the existing or remaining landscape elements and characteristics in terms of form, scale and mass, line, height, colour and texture.

6.3.2 Magnitude of effect is rated as shown in the table below:

Magnitude of Effect on Views High Total or major alteration to key elements, features or characteristics of the view, such that post development the baseline situation will be fundamentally changed. Medium Partial alteration to key elements, features or characteristics of the view, such that post development the baseline situation will be noticeably changed Low Minor alteration to key elements, features or

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

characteristics of the view, such that post development the baseline situation will be noticeably changed Negligible Very minor alteration to key elements, features or characteristics of the view, such that post development the baseline situation will be fundamentally unchanged with barely perceptible differences.

6.4 Assessment of Significance of Landscape and Visual Effects 6.4.1 Significance indicates the importance of the effect and whether it should be a material consideration in the decision making process, taking into account the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of the effect. It is rated on the following scale:

 Major – indicates an effect that is very important in the planning decision making process.  Major-Moderate – indicates an effect that is, in itself, material in the planning decision making process.  Moderate – indicates a noticeable effect that is not, in itself, material in the planning decision making process.  Slight – indicates an effect that is trivial in the planning decision making process.  Minimal – indicates an effect that is akin to no change and is thus not relevant to the planning decision making process.

6.4.2 Significant effects (in terms of whether it is a material consideration in the decision making process) are those that are Major-Moderate or Major. 6.4.3 Where intermediate ratings are given, e.g. “Moderate-Slight”, this indicates an effect that is both less than Moderate and more than Slight, rather than one which varies across the range. In such cases, the higher rating will always be given first; this does not mean that the impact is closer to that higher rating, but is done to facilitate the identification of the more significant effects within tables.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

6.4.4 The process of forming a judgement of significance of effect is based upon the assessments of magnitude of effects and sensitivity of the receptor to come to a professional judgement of how important this effect is in terms of making a decision about whether planning permission should be granted. This judgement is illustrated by the table below.

MAGNITUDE SENSITIVITY Negligible Low Medium High High Minimal Moderate Major- Major Moderate Medium Minimal Moderate- Moderate Major- Slight Moderate Low Minimal Slight Moderate- Moderate Slight

6.5 Valency 6.5.1 Effects are defined as adverse, neutral or beneficial.

Nature of Definition Effect Adverse Effect that would result in damage to the condition, integrity or key characteristics of the landscape or visual Resource Neutral Effect that would maintain, on balance, the existing level of condition, integrity or key characteristics of the landscape or visual Resource. Whilst the nature of the change may be significant, the proposal does not compromise the inherent qualities of the Resource and can incorporate a combination of positive and negative effects Beneficial Effect that would result in improvement to the condition, integrity or key characteristics of the landscape or visual Resource.

6.5.2 The decision regarding the significance of effect and the decision regarding whether an effect is beneficial, adverse or neutral (valency) are entirely separate. For example, a rating of Major, Beneficial would indicate an effect that was of great significance and on balance positive, but not necessarily that the proposals would be extremely beneficial.

7.5 Site 7.5.1 The effect of physical changes to the site, access route and grid connection are assessed in terms of the effects on the physical fabric. Factors such as the removal or planting of hedgerows and trees, the location and materials of access routes, and the potential effects arising from temporary construction compounds and any security fencing, lighting, control station and grid connection are

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

described, as well as addition of the development including landscape and ecological measures.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Appendix 2 – Glossary Indirect effects. Effects on the environment, which are nor a direct result of the development but are often produced away from it or as a result of a complex pathway. Sometimes referred to as secondary impacts. Landscape character type. A landscape type will have broadly similar patterns of geology, landforms, soils, vegetation, land use, settlement and field pattern discernible in maps and field survey records. Landscape effects. Change in the elements, characteristics, character and qualities of the landscape as a result of development. These effects can be negative or positive. Landscape character. The distinct and recognisable pattern of elements that occur consistently in a particular type of landscape, and how these are perceived by people. It reflects particular combinations of geology, landforms, soils, vegetation, land use and human settlement. It creates the particular sense of place of different areas of the landscape. Landscape quality (or condition) Based on judgements about the physical state of the landscape, and about its intactness, from visual, functional, and ecological perspectives. It also reflects the state of repair of individual features and elements which make up the character in any one place. Landscape value. This is concerned with the relative value that is attached to different landscapes. In a policy context the usual basis for recognising certain highly valued landscapes is through the application of a local or national landscape designation. Yet a landscape may be valued by communities for many different reasons without any formal designation. Landscape capacity. The degree to which a particular landscape character type or area is able to accommodate change without significant effects on its character, or overall change of landscape character type. Capacity is likely to vary according to the type and nature of change being proposed. Landscape sensitivity. The extent to which a landscape can accept change of a particular type and scale without material effects on its character. Magnitude. A combination of the scale, extent and duration of an effect. Mitigation. Measures, including any process, activity or design to avoid, reduce, remedy or compensate for adverse landscape and visual effects of a development project. Receptor. Physical landscape Resource, special interest or viewer group that will experience an effect. Visual amenity. The value of a particular area or view in terms of what is seen. Visual effect. Change in the appearance of the landscape as a result of development. This can be positive (i.e. beneficial or an improvement) or negative (i.e. adverse or a detraction).

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Visual envelope. Extent of potential visibility to or from a specific area or feature. Zone of visual influence. Area within which a proposed development may have an influence or effect on visual amenity.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Appendix 3 – References 1. The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Second Edition, Landscape Institute with the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2002.

2. Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland, Scottish Natural Heritage and the Countryside Agency, 2002.

3. Countryside Character Map of England, Countryside Agency, 1999.

4. A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire: Landscape Character Assessment, Environment Directorate, Lancashire County Council, 2000

5. Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Landscape Character Assessment, 2009.

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Appendix 4 – Extracts from National, Regional and Local Landscape Character Assessments

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Character Area 35 Lancashire Valleys

Key Characteristics This is a visually contained landscape which would have once shared many characteristics with the rural valley of the ● The broad valley of the river Calder and its river Ribble in the north. However, the development of tributaries running northeast/southwest between industry and settlements has created a landscape with an natural backdrops of Pendle Hill and the Southern intensely urban character. The remnants of agricultural land Pennines. are now fragmented by industry and scattered development which severely disrupt the continuity of the field pattern. ● Intensely urban character derived from main towns Field boundaries on the urban fringe are hedgerows that are of Blackburn, Accrington and Burnley which have generally degraded with an overall absence of hedgerow developed rapidly since the industrial revolution. trees. At higher elevations, the field boundaries are stone ● A strong industrial heritage, associated with cotton walls and post and wire fences many of which are weaving and textile industries. Redundant or under- ineffective and in poor condition. utilised mill buildings, mill lodges and ponds. The main towns in the area are Blackburn, Accrington, ● Profusion of communication routes along the valley Burnley, Nelson and Colne which have developed rapidly bottom including the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, the since the industrial revolution. The expansion of these Preston-Colne rail link and M65 motorway. towns has also been aided by the dense transport network which lines the valley bottoms. These include the Leeds and ● Victorian stone buildings well-integrated into the Liverpool Canal, the Preston-Colne rail link and the M65 landscape. motorway. The buildings are predominantly Victorian stone ● Numerous large country houses with associated terraces generally in good condition. There are substantial parklands particularly on northern valley sides away areas of contemporary industrial development which have from major urban areas. replaced the traditional textile industries. However, there are numerous examples of industrial heritage which remain. ● Remnants of agricultural land fragmented by These act as reminders of the historical importance of local industry and scattered development. industrial development to the character of the landscape. ● Field boundaries, regular to the west and irregular to the east are degraded around the urban areas, formed of hedges with few hedgerow trees and, at higher elevations, of stone walls and post and wire fences.

● Small woodlands are limited to cloughs on valley sides.

Landscape Character

This area is located mainly in the east of Lancashire. It is bounded in the north-west by the rural valley of the river Ribble and the Millstone Grit outcrop of Pendle Hill in the

Bowland Fringe. The southern boundary is formed by the COLLECTIONS/SAM WALSH Southern Pennines. The Lancashire Valleys are concentrated Developments in industry, housing and communication in a broad trough which runs north-eastwards from Mellor routes give the valleys a strongly urban character, as seen Brook just outside Blackburn. here at Huncoat near Accrington.

101 The extensive surface exposure of bedrock has given rise to occupy a broad trough underlain by Coal Measures. The many extractive industries in the area, including stone presence of the coal accounts for the early industrialisation of quarrying and coal mining. These areas are now generally the area. Coal has been worked at depth and by open-casting well-vegetated and grazed by sheep. Most of the more at the surface. The bottom of the trough is covered in glacial conspicuous dereliction has undergone land reclamation deposits, mostly till. In the Feniscowles/Pleasington area, schemes with some reclamation by domestic waste landfill. west of Blackburn, extensive sand deposits impart a special landscape character. Bedrock resources have been quarried The surrounding fells of Pendle and the South Pennines are an where the draft cover is thin. The main materials extracted important natural backdrop which dwarf the settlements in the were sandstone, worked on a small scale for local building, valley bottom. The moorland tops are linked to the valleys by and mudstone, worked for brick-making in large pits at small wooded cloughs which extend up the steep slopes. Accrington. The Millstone Grit outcrop of Pendle Hill forms Physical Influences part of the northern boundary to this area and, when combined with the fells of the South Pennines, creates The character of the Lancashire Valleys is dominated by the enclosure and serves as an important backdrop which dwarfs key towns of Blackburn, Accrington and Burnley, which the scale of the settlement in the valley bottom.

Character Area 35: NORTH Lancashire Valleys Y ORKSHIRE 21

Area 35 boundary A65 Adjacent Area 3 l A59 o o p SKIPTON er A Road iv 5 L & A56 s Elslack ed Canal B Road Le Barnoldswick Railway and Station Earby Craven District Ribble Valley County boundary District A682 33 Kelbrook Unitary Authority boundary LANCASHIRE Foulridge District boundary Colne 4 Hurst Trawden Longridge Green A6068 Nelson Pendle District Whalley River Ribble Brierfield Ribchester Read R. Calder Great M6 Harwood BURNLEY Preston Padiham District A59 Hyndburn Burnley District District Clayton-le- A646 A677 Mellor Rishton Moors 3 South Ribble Accrington SD District A56 Higher BLACKBURN 9 Walton 32 Oswaldtwistle A677 8 M65 A666

Whittle- M61 A675 le-Woods A674 36 Canal Haslingden Leeds & Liverpool Darwen 1200-1400' M6 Wheelton 2 1000-1200' A581 Euxton BLACKBURN Chorley UA 800-1000' District 600-800' Charnock A6 400-600' Richard Chorley 7 200-400' Adlington 0-200'

Coppull height above sea- level in feet

0 10km 6 56

102 The main river is the Calder which cuts out of the trough Scattered settlements on valley sides are comprised of older through a gorge in the gritstone ridge at Whalley. It joins stone buildings, often of the Longhouse type, and isolated the river Ribble at the edge of the area to the north-west blocks of stone terraced houses perched at precarious angles of the town. on the steep slopes. There are also several large country houses along the Calder valley including those at Read Park, Huntroyde Demesne and Gawthorpe, Dunkenhalgh and Towneley Halls.

Land Cover

This is predominantly an area of built-up land with major towns such as Blackburn, Accrington and Burnley spreading across the valley bottom. In addition to these urban developments the remaining land cover is a mix of pasture with areas of acid and neutral grassland and areas of semi- natural woodland/scrub. The field boundaries in this area are hedgerows with few hedgerow trees which give way to COLLECTIONS/SAM WALSH stone walls and fencing on higher ground. Field boundaries The hills of the Southern Pennines and the Forest of adjacent to urban/industrialised areas are frequently Bowland provide a scenic backdrop to the valley bottoms. Woodland in the area is scarce, but some clough degraded indicating low economic viability. woodlands have been retained on the valley sides. Woodland is limited to small woods with areas of grassland flushes and wetland comprising of oak, alder and sycamore Historical and Cultural Influences which extend along steep-sided narrow cloughs, such as Prior to the expansion of settlement and industry during Priestly Clough, Accrington; Spurn Clough, Burnley; and the 19th century, this area would have been used Darwen Valley. There are also small areas of predominantly for agriculture and would have had a similar woodland/scrub associated with abandoned industrial land. rural character to that of the river Ribble further north. There are several areas of parkland connected to large The development which lines these valleys began as a country houses. This area also bears the scars of extractive cottage industry during the 16th century and was industries. Some of the quarries have undergone land predominantly an area of weaving rather than spinning. reclamation schemes by domestic waste landfill such as Traditionally wool came from the South Pennine hillsides Rowley and Brandwood and at Accrington Whinney Hill. and flax from the low-lying country of the Lancashire and Amounderness Plain around Rufford and Croston. By 1700 each district was specialising in the production of one type of cloth. Blackburn was a centre for fustians and most woollens and worsteds were manufactured in Burnley and Colne. The textile industry grew rapidly and, with new machines, the domestic system was replaced by factory systems which further accelerated the growth of these weaving communities. The proliferation of mills and associated residential development has created a fragmented landscape with a heavily industrialised character. Since the 1920s the textile industry has been in steady decline with VID WOODFALL/WOODFALL WILD IMAGES VID WOODFALL/WOODFALL many mills becoming derelict or converted to other uses. DA A neglected mill close to the Leeds and Liverpool Canal at Buildings and Settlement Brierfield illustrates the area’s historic associations with the cotton weaving and textile industries. Settlement within the Lancashire Valleys is extensive. There is a high proportion of built up land which includes the The Changing Countryside towns of Blackburn, Darwen, Accrington, Burnley, Nelson ● Development pressures in the valley bottom particularly and Colne. Buildings are predominantly constructed from associated with junctions on the M65. stone and are generally in good repair. There is substantial new industry in the area as well as many artefacts of the ● Rationalising farming operations leading to the conversion area’s industrial heritage. of traditional farm buildings to alternative uses. 103 ● Pressures on remnant farmland adjoining urban areas causing degradation of field boundaries and alternative uses such as golf courses.

● Loss of hay meadows and reduction in biodiversity.

● Loss of industrial heritage features along the Leeds and Liverpool Canal.

Shaping the Future

● The restoration of field boundaries especially those adjacent to urban areas needs to be addressed.

● The conservation of remaining hay meadows is important as wildlife and landscape features.

● Opportunities are available for areas of new woodland especially on degraded farmland and derelict industrial

sites surplus to current needs. MIKE WILLIAMS/COUNTRYSIDE COMMISSION

● Semi-natural woodland, improved grassland and hedgerows The retention of valuable, industrial, heritage features are characteristic of the more rural Ribble valley landscape. should be considered especially along Leeds and Liverpool Canal. Selected References

Bagley. J J, (1976), A History of Lancashire, Phillimore and Co, London. Kenyon. D (1991), The Origins of Lancashire, Manchester University Press, Manchester and New York. Lancashire County Council (1993), Lancashire Structure Plan 1991-2006. Report 17: Landscape Evaluation. Lancashire County Council (c 1990), Lancashire A Green Audit. Trueman. A E (1972), Geology and Scenery in England and Wales, Penguin Books Ltd, Middlesex. GROUNDWORK EAST LANCASHIRE GROUNDWORK The river Calder running through agricultural land at Whittow. J (1992), Geology and Scenery in Britain, Chapman Padiham. In the valleys, grazing land – commonly with and Hall, London. poorly maintained field boundaries – is found on the fringes of the urban areas. Glossary

cloughs: ravines; steep valleys

104 Landscape

Character Assessment Environment Directorate A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment

Figure 8: Landscape Character Types & Landscape Character Areas

Scale approx 1:325,000 at A3 page size

29 A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment

Landscape Character 5 Generally below 150m, the Undulating 5i 5j Lowland Farmland lies between the major valleys and the moorland fringes The 5a 5f underlying geology is largely masked by heavy 5g 5i 5b boulder clays and hedgerows predominate 5e over stone walls. This lowland landscape is 5h traversed by deeply incised, wooded cloughs 5c and gorges. There are also many mixed farm 5d 5k woodlands, copses and hedgerow trees, creating an impression of a well wooded landscape from ground level and a patchwork of wood and pasture from raised viewpoints on the fells. Some of the most picturesque stone villages of the county occur within this UNDULATING LOW- well settled landscape type. The towns of Longridge and Clitheroe also occur within this LAND FARMLAND type, but are not typical of the settlement pattern. The area also has many country houses whose boundary walls and designed Character Areas landscapes add to the species diversity and 5a Upper Hodder Valley visual appeal. There is a high density of farms and scattered cottages outside the clustered 5b Lower Hodder and Loud Valley settlements, linked by a network of minor 5c Lower Ribble roads.Typical view - photo 19 below. 5d Samlesbury-Withnell Fold 5e Lower Ribblesdale (Clitheroe to Gisburn) 5f Lower Ribblesdale (Gisburn to Hellifield) 5g South Bowland Fringes 5h Goosnargh- Whittingham 5i West Bowland Fringes 5j North Bowland Fringes 5k Cuerden-Euxton

49 A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment

Physical Influences 18th century date points to an earlier, perhaps The Undulating Lowland Farmland forms a medieval, successful farmstead, attesting to the transitional zone between the low lying plains favourable nature of the site. of soft glacial deposits and the high fells of By the Roman period it is probable that much Bowland, formed from Mill stone Grit. To the of this landscape type was already settled fairly west of the Forest of Bowland, running along densely and the fort established at Ribchester the line of the M6, a substantial fault separates is known to have had some civilian the soft Triassic rock of the lowlands from the government functions. Whilst Roman remains harder Carboniferous rocks of the fells. The (besides roads) outside the immediate area of Clitheroe Reef Knolls SSSI, located between the forts are poorly represented in the record, Worston and Downham, comprise an the presence of Roman Kilns at Quernmore important geological feature. This is one of show that they exploited the natural resources several Reef Knolls which support species-rich of the area. calcareous grassland. Medieval population pressures, which saw the This landscape type, whether composed of utilisation of small areas of the mosslands limestone, grit, shale or sandstone, is of gentle elsewhere in Lancashire also led to the topography when compared to the fells and continuation of small woodland clearances hills. Glacial action has accentuated the along the Ribble and the Lune. This created a differences by further tempering the relief of small scale intimate landscape of scattered the low-lying areas by the deposition of glacial farms linked by winding roads with irregular drift. Deep drift is conspicuous where hedges fields and patches of surviving woodland on predominate over stone walls, as quarrying is stream and field edges, a landscape which has only possible where the drift is sufficiently thin. remained intact to this day. Many of the woodlands which survive on the The majority of enclosure dates from the steep slopes of the deep cloughs and valley medieval period and has created a landscape sides are of ancient origin and represent a rich of small fields which are mostly hedged natural resource. They include alder and ash although stone walls are evident where woods on the base-rich soils of the valley geology lies close to the surface. floors grading through to lowland oakwoods Country houses are a feature of the area and and upland oak woods on the upper valley are often surrounded by parklands and well sides. Red Scar and Tun Brook Woods, managed estates. They are evidence of the situated east of Preston between Ribbleton developing industrial enterprise and increasing and Grimsargh are classified as SSSI’s and are wealth between the 16th and 19th centuries. important for their extensive examples of ash- Architecturally distinctive yeoman and gentry wych elm woodland and alder woods. Hedges houses are also characteristic of this type and and hedgerow trees are also important as date from the 17th century onwards. habitats in an otherwise intensively managed landscape. During the 17th century lime was used for land improvement in these lowland fringe areas and Standing bodies of water are important many small farm kilns remain in the landscape, habitats within the area; especially for birds. along with the larger industrial kilns and Rough Hey Wood, located south east of quarries of the 19th and 20th century. The Garstang is designated as a SSSI and contains mining of Millstone Grit also proved to be one of Britain’s largest heronries. important in this landscape type. Where suitable stone was available, querns and Human Influences millstones could be quarried and manufactured The landscape proved more favourable to to meet the needs of the population. Remains early settlers than the nearby uplands. At of 19th century millstone production near Portfield above Whalley, large earthworks of Quernmore can still be seen on the flanks of Iron Age date defend the neck of a steep- Clougha Pike. Lead and Silver were extracted sided promontory whose flat top had been in Rimington from the 17th century and mined utilized since the Neolithic period. The and manufactured in places such as at presence of a large aisled barn of probably Quernmore to meet the demands of the rapidly industrialising county. 50 A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment

CHARACTER AREAS - UNDULATING LOWLAND FARMLAND Undulating Lowland Farmland occurs on the lower fringes of the uplands, below about 150m AOD, across the whole study area.

Local Character Areas Description 5a Upper Hodder This is a unique hidden area of settled farmland enclosed by shale and Valley limestone uplands and the grit moorland of the Bowland Fells. It is a lush oasis in the middle of a bleak landscape. The landscape is centred around the upper River Hodder and its tributaries and is well wooded. The underlying geology is largely overlain by boulder clays although the underlying limestone is evident as outcrops known as `Reef Knolls’ as well as in the white stone walls, bridges and limestone built villages, such as Slaidburn. The Reef Knolls are particularly characteristic of this area as are stands of beech which are often visible on hill tops. 5b Lower Hodder This area forms part of the Undulating Lowland Farmland to the south of and Loud Valley the Forest of Bowland and includes the deeply incised wooded course of the Hodder below Whitewell and its tributary, the River Loud, as far as its confluence with the Ribble. The underlying bedrock is limestone which is overlain by good soils, providing lush green pastures and good tree growth. The course of the Hodder is particularly well wooded and the pattern of incised minor wooded tributaries is distinctive to this character area. The area is little affected by modern development and the picturesque limestone villages of Chipping and Waddington have retained their vernacular character. 5c Lower Ribble The Lower Ribble is an area of lowland gritstone farmland between Longridge Fell to the north and Mellor Ridge to the south. It has a distinctive broad valley landform; the north and south valley sides are separated by a flood plain which contains the meandering course of the River Ribble. There is a particularly distinctive pattern of wooded cloughs which descend the valley sides, their streams emptying into the Ribble. A complex pattern of hedges and woodland form links to these wooded cloughs, giving an overall impression of a well wooded landscape. Although a rural valley, the area is well settled; a dense network of winding country lanes and tracks link the large number of stone farm buildings. Other features of this area are the country houses and designed landscapes, for example Stonyhurst College, Huntingdon Hall and Showley Hall. The Roman settlement of Ribchester is sited at an historic crossing point of the Ribble, a tranquil village in the centre of the valley. 5d Samlesbury- An area between the Ribble Valley to the north and the Industrial Withnell Fold Foothills to the south. It is underlain by millstone grit and sandstone, but the landscape is influenced by the mantle of glacial till which covers the surface, producing a gently undulating landscape of large lush green pastures divided by low cut hedgerows and hedgerow trees. Dramatic steep sided wooded valleys wind their way through the landscape carrying the River Darwen and its tributaries. Designed landscapes and parkland associated with Samlesbury Hall,Woodfold Hall, Pleasington Old Hall and Hoghton Tower add to the overall woodland cover in this lowland landscape and Witton Country Park provides a countryside resource on the edge of Blackburn. It is also influenced by infrastructure (major road

51 A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment

Local Character Areas Description and rail routes), industrial works, the airfield at Samlesbury and built development on the edges of Preston. 5e Lower Ribblesdale This area forms the southern valley side of the Ribble, between Copster (Clitheroe to Green and Gisburn, on the lowland fringes of Pendle Hill. It is a Gisburn) particularly well settled area and provides a corridor for communication routes along the Ribble Valley. The A59(T) runs the length of the area, linking the settlements of Copster Green,Whalley, Clitheroe, Chatburn and Gisburn. The railway links the valley to Blackburn and Yorkshire. This communication structure has encouraged built development and industry; the large cement works at Clitheroe is a prominent visual landmark for miles around. This character area is underlain by limestone and has some good examples of limestone reef knolls, particularly around Clitheroe; Clitheroe Castle is located on top of one of these knolls. 5f Lower Ribblesdale This character area follows the upper reaches of the River Ribble between (Clitheroe to Bolton-by-Bowland and Long Preston on limestone geology. It occurs on Gisburn) the fringes of the Slaidburn Rolling Upland Farmland between 100 and 150m AOD. It is a highly rural area which is dominated by lush green pastures divided by hedgerows with many hedgerow trees. The mixed plantation woodlands associated with estates of Bolton Hall and Halton Place and the ancient woodlands along the Ribble itself contribute to the wooded character of this landscape character area. 5g South Bowland This character area forms the lowland fringes of Waddington Fell, to the Fringes south of the Forest of Bowland. It is a well wooded area whose limestone slopes are particularly notable for their pattern of wooded cloughs - the tributaries which descend the valley side before feeding into the Ribble. The villages of Waddington,West Bradford, Grindleton and Holdon are located at the foot of wooded cloughs. Browsholme Hall has an influence over landscape character; shelter belts and beech hedges are features of the area around Cow Ark. 5h Goosnargh- The undulating lowland farmland on the north-east fringes of Preston Whittingham forms a transitional landscape between the upland landscape of the Bowland Fells to the north-east and the agricultural Amounderness Plain to the west. It is an historically interesting area on the fringe of the Forest of Bowland AONB. The landform gently descends from 150m at the moorland fringe of Beacon Fell to the 30m contour (approximately) which defines the edge of the sandstone agricultural plain of the Fylde. However, this is not a clear boundary and the visual transition from one to the other occurs across a broad area between the M6 and main Preston to Lancaster railway line. As a result of this gradual transition it demonstrates characteristics of both the Fydle and the Bowland fringes. It is a pastoral landscape which is relatively open and intensively farmed with much hedgerow loss and few trees or woodlands although hedgerows along the network of lanes are important landscape features. There are often clear views over the plain below. The area is under pressure from built development as a result of its proximity to Preston. Vernacular buildings are of local stone, although a number of incongruous materials are seen throughout the area. The area is rich in evidence for Roman occupation.

52 A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire Landscape Character Assessment

Local Character Areas Description 5i West Bowland A transitional landscape between the gritstone scarps of the Bowland Fringes Fells and the coastal plain of Amounderness. A fault line provides a corridor along which the motorway, road and railway run and provides a transition to the agricultural plain. However, this transition is softened by glacial deposits, for example at Galgate where the lowland farmland merges imperceptibly with the low drumlin fields. However, at Quernmore, there is a dramatic wooded ridge (7c) which forms a definite boundary between the grit lowland fell edges and the adjacent glacial landscape to the west. The transition from fringe to fell is quite striking, particularly to the north-west below Claughton Moor where it occurs over a short distance. The valleys of the Brock, Calder and Wyre are also relatively dramatic, descending from the fells in deeply incised wooded valleys. There are exceptional views of the Amounderness Plain from the hillsides and the scarps of the Bowland fells are never far away. 5j North Bowland The north-facing gritstone slopes, known as the Forest of Mewith, is an Fringes area of undulating marginal farmland on the northern edges of the Bowland Fells It is bordered by a drumlin field to the north which influences the landform of the lowland fringe; the broadly undulating landform contrasts with the steep scarps of west Bowland. This is a rural area which is crossed by a dense network of footpaths and farm tracks; a number of small stone farm holdings are found at the end of these dead- end farm tracks. 5k Cuerden-Euxton The rural character of this landscape is largely obscured by built development which has taken place since the late 1970s. Motorways and motorway junctions dominate the northern sector. The principal landscape feature is Cuerden Valley Park, based upon the woodland and valley of the river Lostock. The park is managed for nature conservation and recreational use and is an important local resource. Pockets of farmland and vernacular buildings survive as a reminder of earlier land use and settlement pattern.

Appendix 5 – Viewpoint Analysis

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Table 2 – Viewpoint Analysis Viewpoint, description, sensitivity Assessment Magnitude of Significance of Valency effect effects Viewpoint 1 – From Footpath 118 135m Description – Footpath 118 follows a route Assessment – Construction Low Slight Neutral from Preston Road to Pinfold Lane. The During construction this viewpoint is considered route travels through the existing access to to have limited views of machinery, earthworks or Spout Farm and travels through the nursery construction due to intervening vegetation at the carpark to a stile through the hedge on the boundary of the site and the boundary of the car south side of the car park, it then follows the park. Views of construction elements are hedge line to Pinfold Lane. The actual line of considered to be limited to the area currently the footpath is blocked and one travels occupied by the storage/yard area. through a gate in a hedgeline crossing the Assessment – Completion Negligible Minimal Neutral footpath. Upon completion, it is predicted that the view at

this viewpoint will be improved as the relative The view from this location is taken once past disarray of the storage yard will have been the gate on a slight rise which gives the converted to housing and buffered by a thick viewer opportunity to see over the hedge landscaped buffer. It is considered that roofs will towards the site. blend into the surrounding landscape and the

new planting will aid in mitigating views of low- Sensitivity – The sensitivity for users of the lying elements like garden fences, cars, and footpath would be Low. This is based on the window reflections. idea that a user would be approaching an already built up and busy area, where traffic Assessment – 15yrs post Completion Negligible Minimal Beneficial and retail users of the nursery collect. Users At Year 15, it is considered that the landscape also are aware of the interaction between the buffers and boundary treatments will have footpath and shared vehicular/pedestrian reached or will be approaching full maturity and pattern from the stile into the carpark to effectively buffering views of the development. Preston Road. Maturity of hedges and trees surrounding the car park at the nursery will also serve to buffer the development from this viewpoint.

Viewpoint, description, sensitivity Assessment Magnitude of Significance of Valency effect effects Viewpoint 2 – From southernmost hide along BW 121 175m Description – Bridleway 121 follows the route Assessment – Construction Medium Moderate Adverse of Pinfold Lane. At the location of the During construction this viewpoint is considered wetland, three birdwatching hides have been to have views to machinery, earthworks or constructed. construction fencing similar to the existing views of the yard area on the site. It is considered that The view is from the southernmost hide with the existing hedge will mitigate some but not all of the most direct view towards the development the construction elements, particularly during the though all the hides have comparable growing season. It is also considered that the descriptions and assessments. construction phase of will be of a reasonably short duration thus the valency associated with this phase would be short-term Sensitivity – The sensitivity for users of the Assessment – Completion Low Moderate-Slight Neutral hide is judged to be Medium. This is based Upon completion, the view into the development on the the understanding that the users of the at this viewpoint is assessed to be limited. hides are expectant of a natural environment Existing vegetation will be enhanced with new around the wetland however understand that buffer planting. Glimpses of the development the wetland lies in pre-existing developed through the existing mature hedge will remain until landscape on the town edge. a level of maturity is achieved by buffer planting, but a significant portion of this could be attained within 2-3 years. Assessment – 15yrs post Completion Negligible Minimal Beneficial At Year 15, it is considered that the landscape buffers and boundary treatments will have reached or will be approaching full maturity and effectively fully buffering views of the development providing an improvement over the current situation.

Viewpoint, description, sensitivity Assessment Magnitude of Significance of Valency effect effects Viewpoint 3 – View from junction of Pinfold Lane/Bridleway 121 and Preston Road 300m Description – A view from the point Pinfold Assessment – Construction Negligible Minimal Neutral Lane/Bridleway 121 joins Preston Road During construction this viewpoint is considered unlikely to experience more than intermittent views The view from this point is a relatively distant of machinery, earthworks or construction, specific view looking over a small field and all the only to roof construction. Traffic along Pinfold nursery buildings, retail area and carpark. Lane, is considered to be unchanged as a result of construction. Sensitivity – The sensitivity for users at this Assessment – Completion Negligible Minimal Neutral location is considered to be Low Upon completion, it is considered that the view will change in a minimal way. Roofs of the proposed houses may be visible beyond the boundary treatments both of the development site and the nursery carpark which already exists. It is considered that the proposed planting at the boundaries will aid in screening the development and allow it to blend in with its contextual surroundings. Assessment – 15yrs post Completion Negligible Minimal Neutral Vegetation planted as part of the proposals is considered to significantly screen the development beyond the screening provided by the nursery and its boundary treatments. Rooftops which may have potential to be viewed from this point are considered to blend in with tree tops and contextual surroundings.

Viewpoint, description, sensitivity Assessment Magnitude of Significance of Valency effect effects Viewpoint 4 – View from footway along Preston Road 95m Description – The viewpoint is from a point Assessment – Construction Medium Moderate- Neutral along Preston Road when the full extent of During construction, it is considered that this viewpoint Slight the site is visible beyond the screen of the may be subject to limited views of construction and reservoir embankment. machinery associated with the works. Scaffolding, earthworks and other site or changes may be visible. Sensitivity – The sensitivity for users along The stone wall and trees at this boundary is considered Preston Road will be Low to screen views effectively at low levels but also to be visually permeable at higher levels. It is considered that the site location at the village fringe will not appear as unexpected to the casual viewer and thus the magnitude is assessed to be medium despite relatively open visibility. Assessment – Completion Low Slight Neutral Upon completion, it is considered that the view from this viewpoint will be less busy than during the construction. The changes within the site are considered to be in keeping with the existing context and is likely to be perceived in keeping with the surrounding village fringe developments. Improvements to the boundaries will aid in screening the development and reinforce the existing boundary treatments Assessment – 15yrs post Completion Negligible Minimal Neutral Mature vegetation planted as a part of the proposals is considered to provide screening from this aspect along Preston Road. Trees and shrubs will enclose the site and strengthen the boundary treatments. Dwellings, it is considered, will blend in with the surround village fringe context and the surrounding boundary and interior landscape treatments will maintain the green hedgelines described in the character assessment Viewpoint, description, sensitivity Assessment Magnitude of Significance of Valency effect effects Viewpoint 5 – From footbridge at junction of FP104 and FP 103 600m Description – Footpath 103 and 104 are Assessment – Construction Negligible Minimal Neutral typical of urban fringe footpath. 104 begins During construction this viewpoint is considered to at the edge of a housing development, have limited to no views to machinery, earthworks crosses through a local playing field ground or construction beyond the slight potential to see and crosses a stream into the rural field work on the roofs of the houses. It is considered systems. The topography is almost on the that intervening vegetation and boundary same level as the proposal site. vegetation effectively block views of the site.

Assessment – Completion Negligible Minimal Neutral Sensitivity – The sensitivity for footpath users Upon completion, it is considered that views from is considered to be Low this viewpoint will be as described for Construction above. Assessment – 15yrs post Completion Negligible Minimal Beneficial Planting proposed as part of the development is considered to further screen the site. Mature trees will blend in with other vegetation in the area.

Viewpoint, description, sensitivity Assessment Magnitude of Significance of Valency effect effects Viewpoint 6 – From Footpath 107 570m Description – Similar to Viewpoint 5, this view is Assessment – Construction Medium Moderate-Slight Neutral from the point where the footpaths in this quadrant During construction this viewpoint is enter a more rural environment. Beyond a considered to have limited to no views to footbridge, there is a relatively open field looking machinery, earthworks or construction towards the site, however, other fields and field beyond the slight potential to see work on boundaries, houses and vegetation lie between this the roofs of the houses. It is considered that footpath and the proposals site. intervening vegetation and boundary vegetation effectively block views of the site. Assessment – Completion Negligible Minimal Neutral Sensitivity – The sensitivity for footpath users will be Upon completion, the view at this viewpoint Low is considered to be similar to that which already exists. It is considered that rooftops may be visible but unlikely Assessment – 15yrs post Completion Negligible Minimal Beneficial Mature vegetation planted as a part of the proposals is considered to further enhance the screening of the site to this view. It is considered unlikely that the proposals will be visible upon maturity of surrounding and proposed landscaping.

Viewpoint, description, sensitivity Assessment Magnitude of Significance of Valency effect effects Viewpoint 7 – From footway along Preston Road 10m Description – Panorama view from footway Assessment – Construction Medium Slight Neutral alongside Preston Road on the opposite side of the During construction, visibility, activity and road from the proposals site. most aspects of the construction are considered to be likely to be visible. The Sensitivity – The sensitivity for users of Preston location of the site at the village fringe and Road will be Low opposite other structures and housing developments allow for the consideration that users will not find the construction of the development out of context with Longridge's growth patterns. Assessment – Completion Negligible Minimal Neutral Upon completion, it is considered that the development would not appear out of context with the surrounding townscape which forms the town edge. Assessment – 15yrs post Completion Negligible Minimal Neutral It is considered that vegetation planted as a part of the proposals will have reached maturity and provide a mosaic of green fingers and development as characteristic of town edges..

Viewpoint, description, sensitivity Assessment Magnitude of Significance of Valency effect effects Viewpoint 8 – From stile/fp 118 at nursery carpark 29m Description – Panorama view from the stile where Assessment – Construction Medium Moderate-Slight Neutral Footpath 118 enters the nursery car park During construction, it is considered that visibility will be significantly shielded, but Sensitivity – The sensitivity for users of footpath and noise and dust resulting from construction nursery is considered to be Low activity may present a negative element to the leisure and retail activities involved with the footpath and nursery. Assessment – Completion Low Slight Neutral Upon completion, it is considered that the development would not appear out of context with the surrounding townscape which forms the town edge. The new access to the nursery is expected to be improved and a footway along the side of the access road is considered to improve the experience of footpath users by removing the shared surface with vehicles. Assessment – 15yrs post Completion Negligible Minimal Neutral It is considered at year 15 the experience will be similar to that of at completion. Maturity of planting is considered to provide screening but currently, existing planting (to remain) serves, at this distance, to screen the development adequately. It is also considered that at year 15, the development will have become part of the town fabric and successfully integrated into the character area as described in the character assessment.

Appendix 6 – Summary of Effects upon Completion

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Table 3 – Summary of Effects upon Completion

Receptor Distance/ Direction Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Valency

National Landscape Character Lancashire Valleys 0m Low Direct effect: Negligible Direct effect: Minimal Neutral Indirect effect: Negligible Indirect effect: Minimal Overall effect: Negligible Overall effect: Minimal Regional Landscape Character Undulating Lowland Farmland 0m Low Direct effect: Negligible Direct effect: Minimal Neutral Indirect effect: Negligible Indirect effect: Minimal Overall effect: Negligible Overall effect: Minimal Local Landscape Character Undulating Lowland Farmland: 0m Low Direct effect: Negligible Direct effect: Minimal Neutral Lower Ribble Indirect effect: Negligible Indirect effect: Minimal Overall effect: Negligible Overall effect: Minimal Viewpoints 1 : From Footpath 118 135m Low Negligible Minimal Neutral 2 : From southernmost hide at BW 175m Medium Low Moderate-Slight Neutral 121 3 : From the junction of Pinfold 300m Low Negligible Minimal Neutral Lane and Preston Road 4 : From footway along Preston 95m Low Low Slight Neutral Road 5 : From footbridge at junction of 600m Low Negligible Minimal Neutral Footpath 103 and 104

Receptor Distance/ Direction Sensitivity Magnitude Significance Valency 6 : From Footpath 107 570m Low Negligible Minimal Neutral 7 : From footway along Preston 10m Low Negligible Minimal Neutral Road 8: From footway along Preston 29m Medium Low Moderate -Slight Neutral Road Landscape Resources County Biological Heritage site 0km High Low Moderate Neutral 63NW01 Landscape Features/ Vegetation 0m Low Low Moderate-Slight Neutral Public Rights of Way N/A Low Low Slight Neutral

Appendix 7 – Drawings 1304-01 Viewpoints, Topography and Site Location Plan

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

KEY

Zone of potential visibility

Potential Viewpoints: Upon site visit, no visibility from these points was acheived

2 Viewpoints with visibility

Locations of publicly BW58 accessible bird-viewing 4 hides

FP110

FP104 7 BW121 FP101

BW59

FP103 5 FP1188

FP100 1 LANDSCAPE FEATURES 2 Extents of County Biological Heritage Site 63NW01

FP107 Public Footpath BW119 Public Bridleway BW66 3 TOPOGRAPHY 6 Areas of significantly higher elevation than site Areas relatively level in elevation with site Areas slightly lower in elevation than site

Site off Preston Road, Longridge, Lancashire

Appendix 8 – Photograph Panels Panel 1 Viewpoint 1 & 2

Panel 2 Viewpoint 3 & 4

Panel 3 Viewpoint 5 & 6

Panel 4 Viewpoint 7

Panel 5 Viewpoint 8

Spout Farm, Longridge prepared for Mr Denis Lambert Rev 2 LVIA 10399 – 27th August 2013

Site; Boundary trees and shrubs are prominent including trees and shrubs Reservoir embankment to surrounding nursery carpark not included in the current planning application rear of site

Remainder of site; Nursery carpark Yard area with buildings, machinery and boundary vegetation prominent materials storage

Viewpoint 1: From Footpath 118

Site; screened by Reservoir vegetation embankement

Tall vegetation Yard area with buildings, machinery and surrounding car park materials storage

Viewpoint 2: From southernmost hide along Bridleway 121 N.B. - Photos taken on 02/04/2013 on a Nikon D80 digital SLR camera. Images in this report are for reference only and do not necessarily comply with the Panel 1 requirements in the Landscape Institute’s Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Iimpact Assessment and do not replace the benefit of site visitation. Site located behind nursery buildings and Spout Farm farmhouse

Spout Farm house nursery carpark Greenhouse

Viewpoint 3: View from junction of Pinfold Lane/Bridleway 121 and Preston Road

Reservoir Site Unitied Utilities embankment access to reservoir

Viewpoint 4: View from Footway along Preston Road

N.B. - Photos taken on 02/04/2013 on a Nikon D80 digital SLR camera. Images in this report are for reference only and do not necessarily comply with the Panel 2 requirements in the Landscape Institute’s Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Iimpact Assessment and do not replace the benefit of site visitation. Reservoir embankment

Viewpoint 5: From footbridge at junction of FP104 and FP 103

Rear aspect of a house on opposite side of Reservoir Site location Greenhouse at Preston Road from proposals site embankment nursery

Viewpoint 6: From FP107

N.B. - Photos taken on 02/04/2013 on a Nikon D80 digital SLR camera. Images in this report are for reference only and do not necessarily comply with the Panel 3 requirements in the Landscape Institute’s Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Iimpact Assessment and do not replace the benefit of site visitation. Northern extent of site Maintained low Christmas tree plantation along Preston Road hawthorn hedge beyond hedge

Mature ornamental evergreen Spout Farm house planting at entrance allowing for a visibility splay and signage for the nursery.

Viewpoint 7: From footway along Preston Road

N.B. - Photos taken on 02/04/2013 on a Nikon D80 digital SLR camera. Images in this report are for reference only and do not necessarily comply with the Panel 4 requirements in the Landscape Institute’s Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Iimpact Assessment and do not replace the benefit of site visitation. Existing screening hedge of evergreen and deciduous trees typical between carpark and proposal site.

Mature ornamental Existing gated access to Fully mature evergreen screening shrub bed storage yard area hedge

Viewpoint 8: From stile/fp 118 at nursery carpark

N.B. - Photos taken on 02/04/2013 on a Nikon D80 digital SLR camera. Images in this report are for reference only and do not necessarily comply with the Panel 5 requirements in the Landscape Institute’s Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Iimpact Assessment and do not replace the benefit of site visitation.