Ashleigh Farm, Head Dyke Lane, Preesall, Lancashire Landscape

Yew Tree and Gardens

Client: Mr & Mrs Danson. –Ashleigh Farm, Head Dyke Lane, Preesall, Lancashire

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Prepared by Yew Tree+Gardens Yew Tree House Hale, Milnthorpe Cumbria LA7 7BJ 015395 63527 07813 897631 [email protected]

19/01/2021

CONTENTS

1. Introduction ...... 2

2. Relevant Landscape Policies ...... 3

3. Site, Setting and Landscape Context ...... 4

4. Development Proposals...... 7

5. Viewpoints ...... 8

6. Character assessment ...... 12

7. Conclusion ...... 14

8. Methodology ...... 16

Appendix 1 - Image Location Map

Appendix 2 - Images

Appendix 3 - Visual Impacts Table

Appendix 4 - Landscape Baseline Effects Table

Appendix 5 – Proposed Site Landscaping Layout

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 1

19/01/2021

1. Introduction a. This document is intended to provide a landscape and visual impact assessment in relation to the proposed residential development at the site currently occupied by Ashleigh Farm, Head Dyke Lane, Preesall, Lancashire. The location of the application site is illustrated in Appendix 1. Receptor location map. The current site is comprised of an existing single storey dwelling with a number of 20th century outbuildings of brick and timber construction and an enclosed sheet material clad two storey barn. Areas of maintained gardens, driveway, car parking area and concrete surfaces are distributed throughout the site. b. An appraisal of the surrounding area has been completed using Ordnance Survey data, local policy and published landscape character assessments. This information has been used alongside the on-site analysis to identify key viewpoints, analyse the landscape character and visual environment of the local area and assess the likely extent of any notable potential landscape and visual impact effects. c. The purpose of this assessment is to evaluate the viability of the proposed development in both landscape character and visual amenity terms. This assessment has been drafted from guidance contained in GLVIA3 (Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd Edition) published by the Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment in April 2013 - electronic version and utilizing the standardized descriptors detailed in SNH Handbook on Environmental Impact Assessment 2009.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 2

19/01/2021

2. Relevant Landscape Policies

Local Planning Policy

References to the relevant local and national policies are contained within the planning statement which will accompany the application.

Previous planning history

We have searched the Wyre Borough Council online planning list and maps.

The Ashleigh Farm site has extant Class Q permissions to change the use of two of the existing buildings from agricultural buildings to dwellings, made under planning refs: 19/00861/COUQ & 19/00844/COUQ.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 3

19/01/2021

3. Site, Setting and Landscape Context a. The site is accessed via a track from the public highway Head Dyke Lane. b. The site currently contains a dwelling with vehicle access / driveway and areas of maintained gardens. c. A number of 20th century agricultural /equestrian buildings with associated ancillary structures and areas of concrete surfacing are distributed within the site. d. The site has areas of established tree and shrub / hedge cover to the North and along the Western and Southwestern boundaries. Further trees are located in the Southeast section of the site. e. Existing vehicle access is present from Head Dyke Lane. f. Vehicle access terminates at the existing dwelling entrance with the remainder of the bridleway to the West of the site being for pedestrian and horse / cycle access only.

Topography a. The land on which the site is level with no discernable changes in elevation or contours. b. Land to all side of the site is similarly level with elevation in the range of 4m. c. No change in elevation occurs until gradually rising land towards Preeseall and Stalmine is encountered over 1km way to the Northwest and Southwest respectively. The highest points are located within these villages and are at 22m and 16m respectively. d. The combination of a level landscape without any significant changes in elevation and the presence of existing field boundaries and tree groups significantly limits the extent of views within the landscape. e. Unlike land to the West of Preesall within the flat coastal landscape, the site and it surroundings do not have the expansive vistas and open aspect which it often associated with low lying and reclaimed land.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 4

19/01/2021

Cultural Pattern

The setting of the site is characterized as being outside of the boundaries of the village conurbation of Preesall which is located just over 1km to the North West. Stalmine village is located just over 1km to the Southwest of the site.

The general pattern of historic land use within the surrounding landscape has influenced the density and distribution of pre 20th century dwellings within the surrounding landscape.

Pre and early 20th century Ordnance Survey mapping shows the landscape to the North and West of the site containing scattered farms distributed at regular intervals. These traditional agricultural holdings will have generally been of a relatively small acreage. Ordnance survey 1848 6 inch to 1 mile maps indicate a field pattern which is largely unchanged from that date up to the present day. These field sizes and shapes have often been defined by the route and arrangement of drainage ditches and main dikes which they feed into. Field boundaries are often defined by hedgerows, these boundaries will traditionally have been maintained through laying.

Changes in agricultural practice have resulted in fewer of the traditionally smaller holdings with farming activity and confined to a smaller number of enlarged holdings. Where smaller agricultural holdings have been subsumed into larger acreages the dwellings which were traditionally associated with the farm have become purely residential in nature. Many of these are typified by modernized dwellings set within maintained gardens, where outbuildings are present these are often of more modern construction with an absence of traditional / vernacular agricultural buildings. Whilst these dwellings retain the word ‘farm’ in their names they are not tied to commercial agricultural activity, where these dwellings are set within larger plots they are often engaged in small holding or ancillary leisure activities i.e. caravan sites. More traditional / vernacular farm buildings are encountered towards Stalmine but the orientation of the highways and intervening vegetation and modern dwellings mean these are not experienced in the context of the site.

The landscape immediately to the North of the site is that which the site is most closely allied with. This is due to the sites proximity to Head Dyke Lane. Head Dyke Lane is the route of the A588 highway with this road being the primary transport route within the surrounding landscape. The presence of the highway and associated traffic volumes has strongly influenced the pattern of use and development along its edges. This is seen through the presence of a number of 20th century dwellings to the North of the site along the highway edge, further influence from the highway has been created by the presence of commercial and leisure business. To the North of the site these are represented by Head Dyke Garage and Wyre Car and Van Hire which is located at Head Dyke Farm. Further activity linked to the highway can be seen with a proliferation of roadside small holding sales of eggs / vegetables with associated ad hoc signage.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 5

19/01/2021

The landscape to the South of the site and to the East of Stalmine is absent of farms or dwellings until Old Tom’s Lane is reached. This is due to the low-lying nature of the land and the relatively recent draining and reclamation of this section of the landscape. The 1848 Ordnance Survey map indicates a significant area of land as being un-reclaimed and titled as Stalmine Moss and Pilling Moss. All later editions show the same areas of land as a regular arrangement of fields and drainage dykes / ditches.

Agricultural activity in the form of buildings / permanent structures has been in place at Ashleigh Farm throughout the 20th century with aerial photography from the 1940’s and 1960’s showing a number of buildings. The location of Ashleigh is typical of the farms and former farms which are located along the Southern edge of the A588 between Stake Pool and Preesall with private or shared access tracks and ‘dead end’ public highways extending Southwards from the highway. These tracks generally terminate at the farm or former farm, this again shows the influence of the former mosses to the South on limiting historic development / occupation within the landscape.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 6

19/01/2021

4. Development Proposals

The proposed development is for the construction of a single dwelling within the Southern / Central section of the site.

The design layout partially sits within the footprint area of the existing agricultural / equestrian buildings with the overall footprint and volume being reduced in from the current site layout.

The existing hedge and tree groups in the North of the site and trees in the Southwest section of the site will provide an element of screening for the proposed development. Significant volumes of screening and landscape planting are contained within the proposed landscaping scheme which accompanies the development.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 7

19/01/2021

5. Viewpoints

Viewpoints A1 to A5

Viewpoints A are located at points along the public highway Head Dyke Lane to the Northeast of the site.

When approaching from the direction of Pilling the site is glimpsed across the fields adjacent to the highway. The existing barn and outbuildings are visible and form an identifiable grouping.

When experienced by transient receptors the site is not visually significant due to the surrounding vegetation within the site. The perception of the site is also influenced by the presence of existing dwellings and buildings along the highway edge and within the backdrop of the landscape to the West of the site. These structures are of mixed ages and styles with 20th century influences being significant within the landscape.

We cannot directly assess permanent receptors (private dwellings) however, given the distance to site, orientation of dwellings and limited change from the structures within the existing site, the anticipated magnitude of impacts would not be greater than for transient receptors

We judge that the impact at the time of development will range from none to minor adverse during the construction phase through to none at 15 years. This is based upon the proposed development layout being of lesser overall area and volume than the existing site, set back further than the existing dwelling and having additional boundary vegetation.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 8

19/01/2021

Viewpoints B1 to B5

Viewpoints B are located at points along the public highway Head Dyke Lane to the North and Northwest of the site..

The proposed development site varies from partially visible to entirely obscured by intervening vegetation and structures. When approaching from the direction of Preesall the site is glimpsed across the fields adjacent to the highway. The existing dwelling, barn and outbuildings are visible and form an identifiable grouping. .

When experienced by transient receptors the site is not visually significant due to the surrounding vegetation within the site. The perception of the site is also influenced by the presence of existing dwellings and buildings along the highway edge. These structures are of mixed ages and styles with 20th century influences being significant within the landscape.

The proposed development would not represent a significant change from the current site when viewed from these receptor locations. Some degree of perceived change would be presented during construction but this would dimmish post construction. With additional landscaping the limited impacts of the proposed dwelling could be mitigated. We cannot directly assess permanent receptors (private dwellings) however, given the distance to site, orientation of dwellings and limited change from the structures within the existing site, the anticipated magnitude of impacts would not be greater than for transient receptors.

We judge that the impact at the time of development will range from none to minor adverse during the construction phase through to none at 15 years. This is based upon the proposed development layout being of lesser overall area and volume than the existing site, the visibility of the existing dwelling, outbuildings and two storey barn combined with additional boundary vegetation.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 9

19/01/2021

Viewpoints C1 and C2

Viewpoints C are located at points along the public highway Burned House Lane to the West of the site and adjacent to the corner / junction. We did not survey the entire length of Burned House Lane due to traffic volumes / speeds an absence of verge or pavements.

The existing dwelling is partially visible but the barn is more visually prominent due to the absence of boundary vegetation within the site. Existing 20th century outbuildings at Oakdene and peripherally at Head Dyke Farm are experienced to the foreground. The proposed dwelling would be located such that it would be within the area currently occupied by the barn. The relative orientation of the proposed dwelling and limited number of openings on the Western elevation combined with the distance from site and visibility of the existing barn will reduce the magnitude of impact by limiting perceived change. Additional planting to the West of the dwelling would further reduce impacts from a level of negligible adverse to none at 15 years post development

We judge that the impact at the time of development will range from none to minor adverse during the construction phase through to none at 15 years. This is based upon the proposed development layout being of lesser overall area and volume than the existing site, the visibility of the existing two storey barn, the visibility of modern structures to the foreground of views and the screening from additional boundary vegetation in the landscape plan.

Viewpoints D1 and D4

Viewpoints D are located at points along the public bridleway to the North of the site.

The site is experienced by users of the bridleway approaching from Head Dyke Lane. Users of the bridleway currently view the existing dwelling to the foreground and sheet / profile clad barn and outbuilding to the rear. These create a perception of a residential site with a significant volume of structures / buildings; this is further reinforced by maintained garden hedges and associated paraphernalia (vehicles etc.).

The proposed dwelling is set further to the South than the existing dwelling and several the outbuildings. It would not represent a significant change from the current site for these receptor locations. When combined with additional planting within a landscaping scheme it would form a less visually significant arrangement than the current site layout

We judge that the impact at the time of development will range from negligible to minor adverse during the construction phase through to none at 15 years. This is based upon the proposed development layout being of lesser overall area and volume than the existing site, the visibility of the existing two storey barn, the dwelling consolidating the site to a single structure set further to the South and the screening from additional boundary vegetation in the landscape plan.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 10

19/01/2021

Viewpoint E1 to E10

Viewpoints E are located at points along the public bridleway immediately to the West of the site and to the South of the site.

The bridleway is located directly adjacent to the Western boundary of the site. Users of the bridleway currently experience the dwelling, barn, outbuildings and associated equestrian activity. Impacts of development would be greatest at the time of construction and most notable for the section of bridleway directly adjacent to the existing barn location and to the South of the site.

The character of the existing site with the current arrangement of a number of separate buildings being reduced to a single unit and combined with additional landscape planting would lead to a rapid reduction of impacts from the proposed development post construction. Allied to this is the perceived character of the surrounding landscape which forms the backdrop to the site and is experience with it. As illustrated in image E9, a significant number of 20th century dwellings, buildings and structures are experienced in concert with the existing site

We judge that the significance of the development would be moderate to minor adverse at construction phase changing to negligible adverse to none at 15 years. This is based upon a reduction in the overall volume and footprint combined with additional planting to offset the magnitude of any perceived change through the visibility of the rear of the dwelling at locations E7 and E8.

Viewpoints F1 to F6

Viewpoints F are located at points along the public bridleway to the South West of the site.

Visibility of the site is partially obscured by the existing vegetation. Views of the existing barn are gained nearer to the site but reduce towards the highway due to increasing volumes of vegetation which line the bridleway sides. As shown in F1 and F2, similarly to the previous locations, receptors experience a significant number of dwellings to the background and periphery of views when approaching / departing the site. These dwellings / structures are of differing styles with a considerable volume of 20th century buildings visible.

We judge that the impact at the time of development will range from negligible to minor adverse during the construction phase through to none at 15 years. This is based upon the proposed development layout being of lesser overall area and volume than the existing site, the visibility of the existing two storey barn, the influence of existing dwellings and structures within the surrounding landscape on receptors and the screening from additional boundary vegetation in the landscape plan.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 11

19/01/2021

6. Character assessment

The character assessment identifies that the setting of the site is made up of a combination of a dwelling set within maintained gardens grounds and allied to several single storey outbuildings and a two storey barn.

The surrounding fields and the area which it sits within are set within a transitional zone between the type 16a North Fylde Mosses and the 15d Fylde Coastal Plain in the Lancashire Landscape Character assessment, these Character Assessment Areas are further enclosed within the National Landscape Character Area 32 Lancashire and Amounderness Plain.

As noted in Appendix 4 the description within the Lancashire Character Assessment for the 16a and 15d landscape types both contain elements which can be seen within the landscape surrounding the site

15d ‘…There are many hedgerows, some ancient in origin, and trees shelter scattered farmsteads. The farmsteads and villages are linked by a network of raised lanes and stone bridges connect farms to roads. A large amount of infill development at Stake Pool, Pilling and Knott End-on-Sea contributes an array of more modern building styles and materials. Pumped drainage continues to allow the land to support some arable crops…’

16 a ’…the reclaimed mosses are devoid of development, but the low islands surrounding the mosses support a network of minor lanes and modern houses. Dead end raised tracks run from the farmsteads into the mosses, where the dominant land use is improved pasture for dairy herds. The principal building material is red brick and modern styles and materials are common. The fields are large and some shelter belts of Scot’s pine and beech together with occasional birch copses on dried out peat, give a sense of a well wooded horizon. Raised roads are hedged and bordered by ditches. Vertical elements such as telegraph poles and pylons are prominent in this landscape and there are distant views to Blackpool Tower, the Pleasure Beach rides and industrial development on the outskirts of Blackpool. Geese and over-wintering birds use pastures for winter feeding …’

As noted in the assessment of cultural patterns, the setting of the site is strongly influenced by its proximity to Head Dyke Lane. Whilst Head Dyke Lane forms the boundary of the two LCC landscape types there is an inevitable blurring as is typical in all transitional zones. This is further illustrated by specific features of the landscape surrounding the site.

These can be seen by the location of the site on a dead-end track as being typical of the mossland landscape, however the proximity of the site to the highway and Fylde Plain mean that there is an absence of key features such as distant views more typical of the open mossland landscapes.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 12

19/01/2021

The 20th century dwellings which predominate in the surrounding landscape are identified features in both landscape types. Once again this is a resultant influence of the proximity to a main transport route, this has lead to 20th century infilling along the highway edge with dwellings of various ages and architectural styles. The proliferation of 20th century dwellings and absence of significant volumes of traditional or vernacular styles reduces perceived feelings of an isolated or purely agricultural landscape. This is further reinforced by the presence of the commercial and leisure which is distributed along the edges of the A588 highway.

When approaching the site from the South along the bridleway it is experienced in the context of the 20th century dwellings and commercial / agricultural buildings which form a backdrop to the site. Similarly when viewed from the North and the approach along the access track / bridleway, the dwellings, structures and activity along the highway are experienced along with modern building set back from the highway at Squires Gate to the East.

The current site does not make a positive contribution to the character of either the wider surrounding landscape or the immediate surroundings of the site. The presence of a dwelling of non-traditional construction combined with 20th century outbuildings and barn do not create any characteristics associated with traditional agricultural activity. This is further reinforced by the paraphernalia associated with equestrian activity and residential gardens / grounds. The site is not significant within the overall context of the surrounding landscape, it is not experienced from a wide number of locations and views of it are constrained by vegetation and seen in the context of existing structures along the highway edge. Views of the site are limited to a radius of within 400m of the site boundary. It does not sit within larger expansive landscapes with the vegetation to the South of the site enclosing it and separating it from the wider mossland landscapes to the South and Southeast.

The proposed development would not represent an increase in the built form within the site over that which is currently experienced. The location of the proposed dwelling combined with additional landscaping would have no significant adverse impacts upon the character of the site or on the surrounding landscape character types.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 13

19/01/2021

7. Conclusion

The current site is comprised of a residential dwelling several single storey outbuildings and a two storey barn, it is set within maintained grounds. Visibility of the existing site is limited to a number of publicly accessible receptor locations. These are situated on two main highways, and two bridleways. Except for locations immediately adjacent to the Western and Southern boundary of the site all locations have glimpsed to partial views of the site. All identified receptor locations are within 400m of the site with the majority being at less than 400 m from the site boundary.

All surveyed receptor locations are transient and currently experience the dwelling and the two storey sheet clad barn. The current site does not present a traditional / vernacular appearance when viewed from these receptor locations with the profile / corrugated sheet clad barn being the most visually prominent aspect.

The proposed dwelling is located in the Southern section of the site with a portion of its footprint occupying the location of the existing barn. The supplied information indicates that the dwelling is of a smaller footprint and overall volume than the current buildings within the site. We note that it would consolidate the built form into one structure as opposed to the multiple structures which are currently distributed throughout the site. The barn is currently visible outside of the site boundaries when viewed through the gap in the existing vegetation.

As the current site has an identifiable residential character and the dwelling and barn are visible, the replacement of these structures with a single dwelling would not represent a significant change from the current site. The dwelling is detached and two storey in height, its location is such that it would largely be perceived as a continuation of the current site when viewed from the public highways. Vehicle movement, lighting and activity associated with a dwelling are already present within the site. We did not that the extant class Q consent for two additional dwellings based on existing structures would result in a significant increase in vehicle movements and ancillary activity over the current site. We would anticipate that this would be of a significantly greater magnitude than the proposed single dwelling.

In combination with additional landscaping / screening the overall visual impact for receptors to the North and West would be no greater than minor adverse during construction reducing to none at 15 years post development with maturing planting. Impacts during construction would be of a slightly greater magnitude within 80m of the site boundary but may also be reduced through additional landscaping.

The landscape character impacts are similar in magnitude to the visual impacts of the proposal, the current site does not make a significant or positive contribution

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 14

19/01/2021 to the character of the surrounding landscape. The relatively contained nature of the current site combined with the absence of positive landscape and visual contributions from the existing buildings is such that it does not add to the character of the surrounding landscape.

The surrounding landscape contains a significant number of 20th century dwellings in a variety of styles, many of these dwellings have associated outbuildings of similarly modern appearance. As detailed in this document, the frequency of dwellings and the presence of commercial and leisure activity along the A588 to the North of the site serves to reduce perceived isolated or rural character. This is further reinforced by an absence of vernacular buildings where agricultural activity is present with larger sheet clad frame buildings being most visible in the surrounding landscape.

The site is closely allied to the pattern of sites which occur along the Southern edge of the A588 to the East. These are represented by farms or former farms and individual dwellings or groups of dwellings and buildings located on ‘dead end’ tracks and lanes. Where visible and glimpsed or partially visible from the highway, these buildings are often of modern appearance. The existing and proposed site would be experienced in this context.

Landscape character impacts from the proposed development would not be of a significant magnitude. Similarly to visual impact they would be localized in extent, impacts would be highest during construction at a level of negligible adverse for the surrounding landscape but reduce to no significant change at 15 years post construction.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 15

Appendix 1: Receptor Locations Ashleigh Farm

B A

250 m

Receptor Locations Appendix 2: Receptor Images separate document Ashleigh Farm– Appendix 3, Visual Effects table

Visual Effects Location Receptor Sensitivity of Receptor Magnitude of Visual Effects Comments Combined Combined Combined Significance at Significance at Significance at Development Year 1 Year 15 stage Susceptibility to Value Distance from Type of View Permanence of Scale of Visual Major Major Major Change site boundary View effect during life Moderate Moderate Moderate approx. of development Minor Minor Minor High National Full High Negligible Negligible Negligible Medium Regional Partial Medium None None None Low Local Glimpse Low None Adverse Adverse Adverse Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial A1 – A5 Public Medium to Low Local 195 – 390 m None to Transient Nil to Low The proposed development site varies Minor Negligible None Highway Head Partial Permanent from partially visible to entirely adverse adverse Dyke Lane obscured by intervening vegetation and to to structures. When approaching from the None None direction of Pilling the site is glimpsed across the fields adjacent to the highway. The existing barn and outbuildings are visible and form an identifiable grouping. .When experienced by transient receptors the site is not visually significant due to the surrounding vegetation within the site. The perception of the site is also influenced by the presence of existing dwellings and buildings along the highway edge and within the backdrop of the landscape to the West of the site. These structures are of mixed ages and styles with 20th century influences being significant within the landscape. The proposed development would not represent a significant change from the current site when viewed from these receptor locations. Some degree of perceived change would be presented during construction but this would dimmish post construction. With additional landscaping the limited impacts of the proposed dwelling could be mitigated. We cannot directly assess permanent receptors (private dwellings) however, given the distance to site, orientation of dwellings and limited change from the structures within the existing site, the anticipated magnitude of impacts would not be greater than for transient receptors Ashleigh Farm– Appendix 3, Visual Effects table

B1 – B4 Public Medium to Low Local 186 – 300 m None to Transient / Low The proposed development site varies Minor Negligible None Highway Head Partial Permanent from partially visible to entirely adverse adverse Dyke Lane obscured by intervening vegetation and to to structures. When approaching from the None None direction of Preesall the site is glimpsed across the fields adjacent to the highway. The existing dwelling, barn and outbuildings are visible and form an identifiable grouping. .When experienced by transient receptors the site is not visually significant due to the surrounding vegetation within the site. The perception of the site is also influenced by the presence of existing dwellings and buildings along the highway edge. These structures are of mixed ages and styles with 20th century influences being significant within the landscape. The proposed development would not represent a significant change from the current site when viewed from these receptor locations. Some degree of perceived change would be presented during construction but this would dimmish post construction. With additional landscaping the limited impacts of the proposed dwelling could be mitigated. We cannot directly assess permanent receptors (private dwellings) however, given the distance to site, orientation of dwellings and limited change from the structures within the existing site, the anticipated magnitude of impacts would not be greater than for transient receptors Ashleigh Farm– Appendix 3, Visual Effects table

Visual Effects Location Receptor Sensitivity of Receptor Magnitude of Visual Effects Comments Combined Combined Combined Significance at Significance at Significance at Development Year 1 Year 15 stage Susceptibility to Value Distance from Type of View Permanence of Scale of Visual Major Major Major Change site boundary View effect during life Moderate Moderate Moderate approx. of development Minor Minor Minor High National Full High Negligible Negligible Negligible Medium Regional Partial Medium None None None Low Local Glimpse Low None Adverse Adverse Adverse Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial C1 – C2 Public Medium to Local 350 - 378m Partial to Transient / Low The existing dwelling is partially visible Minor Negligible None Highway Low Glimpse Permanent but the barn is more visually prominent adverse adverse Burned House due to the absence of boundary to to Lane vegetation within the site. Existing 20th None None century outbuildings at Oakdene and peripherally at Head Dyke Farm are experienced to the foreground. The proposed dwelling would be located such that it would be within the area currently occupied by the barn. The relative orientation of the proposed dwelling and limited number of openings on the Western elevation combined with the distance from site and visibility of the existing barn will reduce the magnitude of impact by limiting perceived change. Additional planting to the West of the dwelling would further reduce impacts from a level of negligible adverse to none at 15 years post development D1 – D4 Public Medium Local 10 – 184 m Partial to Transient Low The site is experienced by users of the Minor Minor adverse None Bridleway LCC Glimpse bridleway approaching from Head Dyke adverse to ref 2-3-BW-29 Lane. Users of the bridleway currently to Negligible view the existing dwelling to the Negligible adverse foreground and sheet / profile clad barn adverse and outbuilding to the rear. These create a perception of a residential site with a significant volume of structures / buildings; this is further reinforced by maintained garden hedges and associated paraphernalia (vehicles etc.). The Proposed dwelling is et further to the South than the existing dwelling and several the outbuildings. It would not represent a significant change from the current site for these locations Ashleigh Farm– Appendix 3, Visual Effects table

Visual Effects Location Receptor Sensitivity of Receptor Magnitude of Visual Effects Comments Combined Combined Combined Significance Significance at Significance at at Year 1 Year 15 Development stage Susceptibility to Value Distance from Type of View Permanence of Scale of Visual Major Major Major Change site boundary View effect during life Moderate Moderate Moderate approx. of development Minor Minor Minor High National Full High Negligible Negligible Negligible Medium Regional Partial Medium None None None Low Local Glimpse Low None Adverse Adverse Adverse Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial E1 – E10 Public Medium Local 4 – 80 m Full to Partial Transient Medium The bridleway is located directly adjacent Moderate Minor adverse Negligible Bridleway LCC to the Western boundary of the site. adverse adverse to ref 2-3-BW-29 Users of the bridleway currently to None experience the barn, outbuildings and Minor associated equestrian activity. Impacts of adverse development would be greatest at the time of construction and most notable for the section of bridleway directly adjacent to the existing barn location and to the South of the site. The perceived character of the existing site combined with additional landscape planting would lead to a rapid reduction of impacts from the proposed development post construction. Allied to this is the perceived character of the surrounding landscape which forms the backdrop to the site and is experience with it. As illustrated in image E9, a significant number of 20th century dwellings, buildings and structures are experienced in concert with the existing site F1 – F6 Public Medium Local 80 – 160 m Partial to Transient Low These receptors are indicative of Minor Negligible None Bridleway LCC Glimpse locations along the public bridleway to adverse adverse ref 2-3-BW-30 the Southwest of the site. Visibility of the to to site is partially obscured by the existing Negligible None vegetation. Views of the existing barn are adverse gained nearer to the site but reduce towards the highway. As shown in F1 and F2, similarly to the previous locations, receptors experience a significant number of dwellings to the background and periphery of views when approaching / departing the site. These dwellings / structures are of differing styles with a considerable volume of 20th century buildings visible Ashleigh Farm– Appendix 4, Landscape Baseline Effects table

Landscape Baseline Effects Landscape Sensitivity of Landscape Magnitude of Landscape Comments Combined Combined Combined Type and Effects significance of significance of significance of reference Effects at Effects at Year Effects at Year

Development 1 15 Stage Susceptibility to Value Scale or size of Are effects Major Major Major change degree of reversible Moderate Moderate Moderate change at stages Minor Minor Minor High High of development Negligible Negligible Negligible Medium Medium None None None Low Low High NA Medium Yes Adverse Adverse Adverse Low No Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial Negligible National Landscape Character NCA 32 Medium Medium Nil NA National landscape character which encompasses the site location. The scale of the site None None None Lancashire and and its location in relation the overall size of the NCA is so small as to have no impact upon Amounderness the NCA Plain Local Landscape Character LCC Coastal Medium Medium Negligible Yes The site is situated in a transitional zone with landscape of this character to the North – Negligible Negligible None Plain The coastal plain around Pilling is an intensely farmed, settled landscape with a post adverse adverse 15 f Knott End medieval enclosure pattern. There are many hedgerows, some ancient in origin, and trees / Pilling shelter scattered farmsteads. The farmsteads and villages are linked by a network of raised lanes and stone bridges connect farms to roads. A large amount of infill development at Stake Pool, Pilling and Knott End-on-Sea contributes an array of more modern building styles and materials. Pumped drainage continues to allow the land to support some arable crops... Extract from LCC Character Assessment. LCC Mosslands Medium Medium Negligible Yes The site is situated at the Northern edge / transitional zone of this character – the Negligible Negligible None 16a North reclaimed mosses are devoid of development, but the low islands surrounding the mosses adverse adverse Fylde Mosses support a network of minor lanes and modern houses. Dead end raised tracks run from the farmsteads into the mosses, where the dominant land use is improved pasture for dairy herds. The principal building material is red brick and modern styles and materials are common. The fields are large and some shelter belts of Scot’s pine and beech together with occasional birch copses on dried out peat, give a sense of a well wooded horizon. Raised roads are hedged and bordered by ditches. Vertical elements such as telegraph poles and pylons are prominent in this landscape and there are distant views to Blackpool Tower, the Pleasure Beach rides and industrial development on the outskirts of Blackpool. Geese and over-wintering birds use pastures for winter feeding... Extract from LCC Character Assessment.. The location of the site, adjacent to Head Dyke Lane has the effect of placing it more closely allied to the 15f landscape type to the North of the highway. This is typical of transitional zones where some elements of both character types may be present. Head Dyke Lane is a main route through the enclosing landscape, this has resulted in more significant volumes of development and visible human activity than within the more sparsely populated, farmed landscape to the South. This can be seen both in the number and style of dwellings in the landscape immediately surrounding the site and in the volume of commercial and residential activity along the length of Head Dyke Lane from Stake Pool Westwards. Immediately to the North of the site is Head Dyke Garage with Midwood Caravan Parks and roadside signage for commercial premises being experience Ashleigh Farm– Appendix 4, Landscape Baseline Effects table

to the East along Head Dyke Lane. Agricultural activity is visible through collections of modern buildings and structures either adjacent to or visible from the highway, these are of 20th century sheet clad construction with an absence of earlier vernacular styles. Individual dwellings and clusters of dwellings are located immediately adjacent to the highway and set back from it down either individual or shared access routes. A cluster of dwelling sis located at the junction of Head Dyke Lane and Burned House Lane with further dwellings extending along the highway to the North and West of the site. These dwellings are not of a uniform style or age with a predominance of 20th century detached and semi-detached houses. Many of the dwellings have associated outbuildings with a number of these being modern profile sheet clad structures. Vegetation I of mixed character with a combination of field boundary hedges and small groups of native trees overlaid by identifiably non-native screening / shelter groups and garden / amenity types. All of the above factors combine to create a landscape character which is strongly influenced by existing structures / activity with a identifiable residential element in addition to occasional modern agricultural structures and commercial / leisure activity. Landscape Designations Wyre Estuary High High NA NA Outside SSSI, no impact upon it, located 1km from site boundary None None None SSSI Site Site Low Low High – Yes The site is currently in mixed residential / equestrian use with a single storey dwelling, a Minor adverse None None to construction two storey barn and a number of single storey stable and outbuildings. The site has an Negligible Medium – Year identifiably residential character when approaching from Head Dyke Lane due to the beneficial 1 visibility of the existing dwelling and features such as maintained hedges, garden furniture Low – Year 15 etc. The proposed dwelling will represent a continuation of the current residential nature of the site but the dwelling will be a single structure as opposed to the multiple structures which are currently distributed through the site. It will not therefore be an increase in built structures within the site but a reduction. The position of the dwelling within the site combined with additional landscape planting would reduce the impact of built mass particularly when viewed from the Head Dyke Lane approach. Given the existing visibility of buildings and mass of the overall built forms including the barn the proposed dwelling would not represent a significant adverse change to the character of the site. If combined with additional landscaping including boundary planting, the development could result in a slight reduction of impacts on the immediate surrounding landscape over that exerted by the current site with less area occupied by the footprint of the dwelling, less built volume and an increase in vegetation. We also note that the extant class Q consent for the conversion of two of the dwellings within the site would result in three dwellings with a consequent increase in activity / number of vehicles / residential paraphernalia from the existing site.

Soft Landscaping - Ashleigh Farm

Planting and Aftercare Planting and Aftercare

a. Shrub planting Planting areas b. Tree planting 1. When inspected visually, plants shall be free from pests and diseases, damage and signs of nutrient deficiency and toxicity. a. Hedge planting Group 1. Sizes/planting: Standards in the size range 8 -10 cm and 10-12 cm girth. Ag 2. Plants will have adequate root systems and flowering plants shall have a reasonable expectation that they will give a good flower display the sea- Native hedge – minimum plant size 2+1yr bare rooted age range son following their planting out into open ground. 2. All tree stock should be to the specifications detailed in BS3936-1 Nursery Stock Planted in 2 x staggered rows at a rate of 6 plants per metre. 3. All shrubs, hedging plants, climbers, herbaceous plants and bulbs should comply with BS 3936 (Appendix B). 3. All trees and shrubs shall conform to the British Standard for Nursery Stock – BS 3936, parts 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5, as published by the BSI. Estimated metreage : 160 m (new hedge) Tree Planting 4. Planting will be avoided in frozen ground conditions and waterlogged soil. 4. They shall be nursery grown,''bare root'', “root-balled”, or “container grown”, unless otherwise specified. No plant shall have a "man made" ball. Native Hedge mix; 70% Hawthorn (40-60cm tall, two years old), 20% Blackthorn and a 10% mix of Crab Apple, Species / size 5. All plants will be firmed and watered if they are planted in dry weather. 5. Bare root shrubs or trees may be used where specifically indicated on plans. Dog Rose, Field Maple, Guelder Rose and Hazel.

Ag: Alnus glutinosa (Alder) : 10 - 12 cm bare root x 6 6. Planting holes should be about 150mm wider than the root spread. 6. All deciduous street trees or trees adjacent to footpaths shall be free of branches to 2m above ground unless specified. The ground should be prepared by the screefing back of any vegetation prior to planting. Planting within the the site should be within topsoil to a made up depth of 300 mm. All plants should be protected by appropriate guards i.e Planetec shrub guards staked with 2 x bamboo canes or Tubex Ac: Acer campestre (Field Maple): 10 - 12 cm bare root x 3 7. The shrubs should be set in the holes so that the soil level, after settlement, will be at the original root collar level on the stem of the shrub. 7. Trees with bark included within major branch unions will not be accepted. 0.6m Easywrap guards staked with 1x bamboo cane. Plants should be planted at a rate of 6 plants per metre in 2 8. The holes should be backfilled to half their depth then firmed by treading before the remainder of the topsoil is returned and firmed again. 8. Roots of field-grown trees must be intact and protected from desiccation with plastic wrap, they must be planted as soon as practicable following staggered rows Me: Malus Evereste (Crab Apple): 10 - 12 cm root ball x 3 delivery to site.

Bp: Betula pendula (Silver Birch): 8 - 10 cm bare root x 5 9. Container grown trees must have the container on the root ball or the root ball must be appropriately protected from desiccation. b. Tree planting Groups and individuals This planting is intended to enhance screening and privacy within the proposed development and to provide amenity Psy: Pinus sylvestris (Scots Pine): 125-150 cm root ball x 3 10. Trees with root balls that have bound or girdled roots are not acceptable and should be rejected. value both within the development and wider surroundings. To achieve this balance it is intended to combine the plant- 11. The trees within the boundary areas and magrins of the site should be protected by staking to windward with suitable stakes and ties at no more ing of both groups of trees and individual amenity / landscape trees. Tree species are biased towards native species Al: Amelanchier lamarkii (Mespli): 8 - 10 cm root ball x 1 than 1/3 height to encourage root development. Trees should be planted in the recommended manner in respect of planting hole size in relation to and trees which occur within the surrounding landscape. Non-native garden trees are confined to the centre of the site bare root / root ball size and be in-filled with quality topsoil. See planting diagram on this plan. and the immediate surroundings of the dwelling. Pa: Prunus avium 'Plena' (Cherry): 8 - 10 cm root ball x 2 Tree types: Species selection. As detailed on planting plan Qp: Quercus petraea (Sessile Oak): 10-12 cm bare root x 2 Watering - All Tree and Shrub Planting: Sizes/planting: Standards in the size range 8 - 10 cm and 10 - 12 cm girth bare root and root balled stock dependent Watering should be to the saturation of the ground to 'field capacity' at planting and regular watering thereafter during the establishment period, year upon location and species. SxC: Salix X chryschoma (Weeping Willow): 10 -12 cm bare root x 1 1 and 2. Additional watering should be applied in prolonged periods of dry weather during the initial two growing seasons. This watering should be to soil saturation (field capacity) during periods of dry weather in spring and summer months c. Shrub planting

Note. dry periods to be regarded as a maximum of 5 days without rain during years 1and 2 post planting. This planting is intended to provide visual amenity and screening throughout the gardens of the dwelling. Additional shrub planting is proposed around the Western boundary. This planting is located adjacent to the site entrance and existing tree group, it is intended to provide additional screening and enhance the tree planting and existing trees.

Sizes: 3L pots. Shrub types: Species selection. As detailed on plan Native hedge - see Shrub Planting - individual shrubs planting notes Planting densities: Planting centres of 1200mm = 0.69/m2 for larger varieties Species / size d. Garden Turf Sn Sambucus nigra ‘Black Lace’(Black Elderberry) : 3L as plan If turf is required within the immediate surroundings of the dwelling then it should be as follows Pt Pittosporum tenuifolium : 3L as plan Co Co Bt Sn Bt Bn Co Em Bn Sn Recommended turf specifications: Me Bt Bt Sn Em Sa Pa Ha Hebe albicans (Hebe) : 3L as plan Co Ia Ca Existing lawns Ia overseeded as required Garden Areas: Co Cornus alba Elegantisima (Dogwood) : 3L as plan Qp - BS Hard Wearing Co Sp An appropriate ‘hard wearing’ turf typified by a mixture of Dwarf perennial ryegrass, slender creeping red fescue, Ma Mahonia aquifolium : 3L as plan Co smooth stalked meadow grass, chewings fescue. Co Pa Em Escalonia macrantha : 3L as plan Turf to comply with the TGA (Turfgrass Growers Association) Standard and BS 3969. Co The turf soil should be of a sandy loam nature with no stones. Pd Bt Berberis thunbergii atropurpurea: 3L as plan Co Em Ma The grass will be dense, of uniform green colour, free of broadleaved weeds Ag Co and ot visibly affected by pest or disease. Pt Shade tolerant Pt Bt Ia Ilex aquifolium: 2L as plan meadow with under- Sxc Ag Pt Pt Ha planting mixture - Existing vegetation and stones should be removed and a light tilth prepared. Pt Vt Ca Corylus avellana: 2L as plan BS7M Qp Pt Me STORAGE Pd Philadephus Belle Etoile: 3L Turf is liable to deteriorate rapidly and should be laid within 24 hours of receipt. Ac Native hedge - see Sn Pt planting notes LAYING Sp Spirea nipponica 'Snowmound': 3L Pt Turfing shall comply with BS 3969 and be carried out when the weather and soil conditions are suitable. Pf Turfing should not be carried out in exceptionally dry or frosty weather or when the ground is waterlogged. Pt 3x He 3x Pt Pf Pf Bp Pf Pt Me Pf Pt Pf AFTERCARE Em Allowance should be made to keep the turf watered during dry periods encountered throughout the establishment period Me Me Perennial planting areas - as detailed on plan e. Grass seeding area - lawns and over-seeding of retained lawns as required Perennial species list: All 2L pots Co This area of grass planting to be sown from seed directly onto prepared seed beds following grading and levelling of the planting areas shown on plan. Heuchera 'Palace purple' Vt Bt Planting within the site boundary should be within existing topsoil or imported topsoil to a made up depth of 150 mm Miscanthus 'Morning Light' Bp after settling. This topsoil should be to specification BS3882:2007, standard grade Densities: 4 per m2 3x He 2x Pt Al An appropriate resilient hard wearing family lawn mixture. A suitable seed would be BS Quality Hard Wearing Lawn Seed) or similar. Al Sa 80% amenity perennial ryegrass, 15% strong creeping red fescue and 5% smooth-stalked meadow grass 5x Pt 2x He 1x Em Bt Sowing rate 50 gms/m2. 1x Sn 2 x 3x Sp Sa Perennial planting Ag Miscanthus HeucheraIa AFTERCARE Tree planting, site areas - conventional short stake method Miscanthus Heuchera Psy Allowance should be made to keep the sown areas watered during dry periods encountered throughout the establishment period Ia 2 2 Ha f. Grass seeding area - Western boundary 145 m and South West corner 150m Ma Ha Ac Wild Grass areas BS7M: Hedgerow & Light Shade Wildflower Seeds Bt NativeHa hedge - see plantingHa notes This area of grass /wildflower (80/20) planting to be sown from seed directly onto appropriately levelled, firmed and prepared seed beds. BS7M: Hedgerow & Light Shade Wildflower Seed or similar: Boston Seeds Ha Ma

Ha Angelica, Wild Angelica sylvestris 1% Jul - Aug 100 - 200cm Perennial Bedstraw, Hedge Galium mollugo 1.8% Jun - Oct 10 - 50cm Perennial Suitable tree ties at no Ha Bt more than 30 cm height Buttercup, Meadow Ranunculus acris 1% May - Jun 30 - 100cm Perennial Ha on stem. Check and Campion, Red Silene dioica 1.4% Apr - Sep 60 - 90cm Perennial adjust post planting Lawn from either turf Campion, White Silene alba 0.6% May - Oct 50 - 100cm Perennial Ia Tree to be planted or seed - BS Hard Cowslip Primula veris 0.2% Apr - May 15 - 30cm Perennial at nursery / water Bp Daisy, Ox-eye Leucanthemum vulgare 0.6% May - Sep 20 - 100cm Perennial Tree stakes either Wearing Ia mark depth Ag Foxglove, Wild Digitalis purpurea 0.4% Jun - Aug 50 - 100cm Biennial single or double of Hedge Parsley, Upright Torilis japonica 1.4% Jul - Aug 30 - 80cm Annual appropriate Bt Knapweed, Common Centaurea nigra 1.8% Jun - Sep 30 - 80cm Perennial thickness and Co Sn Co Knapweed, Greater Centaurea scabiosa 1% Jun - Sep 50 - 90cm Perennial depth for tree Bn Em Em Co Mullein, Dark Verbascum nigrum 0.4% Jun - Sep 15 - 45cm Perennial Co Bt Bt Em Sn Mullein, Great Verbascum thapsus 0.4% Jul - Sep 100 - 180cm Biennial Sn Em Co Bt Sn Em Co Co Musk Mallow Malva moschata 0.8% May - Sep 20 - 150cm Perennial Mustard, Garlic Alliaria petiolata 1.4% Apr - Jul 40 - 90cm Biennial Co Self-heal Prunella vulgaris 0.8% Jun - Sep 15 - 30cm Perennial Planting pit to be St John's-wort, Common Hypericum perforatum 0.4% Jun - Sep 30 - 90cm Perennial Teasel Dipsacus fullonum 1% Jul - Aug 100 - 200cm Biennial infilled with firmed Planting pit dug to topsoil, if imported to Vetch, Common Vicia sativa 1.2% Jun - Sep 25 - 50cm Perennial minimum of 2 x size of Vetch, Tufted Vicia cracca 0.4% Jun - Sep 100 - 150cm Perennial the site this topsoil root ball / bare roots should be to Woundwort, Hedge Stachys sylvatica 1.4% Jun - Sep 50 - 100cm Perennial specification Yarrow Achillea millefolium 0.6% Jun - Oct 20 - 100cm Perennial BS3882:2007, Shade tolerant Bent, Common Agrostis castellana 4% 50 - 100cm Grass standard grade meadow with under- Fescue, Chewings Festuca rubra, commutata 21.6% 30 - 70cm Grass planting mixture - Fescue, Slender Creeping Red Festuca rubra, litoralis 32% 10 - 20cm Grass BS7M Meadow Grass, Wood Poa nemoralis 8% 10 - 30cm Grass Sweet Vernal-grass Anthoxanthum odoratum 2.4% 30 - 60cm Grass Tufted Hair-grass Deschampsia cespitosa 12% 30 - 120cm Grass

Sowing rate 5 gms/m2.

g. Pernnial Planting

This planting is intended to provide visual amenity in the the front garden beds adjacent to the Northern elevation of the dwelling frontage.

Where two or more species are specified in a planting bed they are intended to be planted in equal proportions. Soft Landscaping - 10 year post planting schedule: Briar Lea – Maintenance Plan planting proposals Sizes: 2L pots. Shrub types: Species selection. As detailed on plan OPERATION ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FREQUENCY & TIMING 2 BS7M Shade grass areas Planting densities: 4 per m Project - Ashleigh Farm Inspection Inspection of condition of trees while carrying 2 per year approximately All year round out other operations Annual maintenance Head Dyke Lane, Preesall Checking and adjusting stakes, ties and guys Inspection and adjustment to allow for tree 2 per year April and October growth. Inspection of stakes, ties and guy, with Autumn Sown (First year) Dwelling repair or replacement if defective March Cut to 40-70mm if there is sufficient material and bulbs have flowered (sward above 100mm). May Cut to 40-70mm. Weed control in tree planting areas Weed control carried out around trees within 2 per year April and October August/September Cut to 40mm after flowering. in all cases remove clippings. planted areas. Hand-weed preferable within 0.5 Date - 18/01/2021 radius of tree trunks. Maintenance thereafter Application of slow-release fertiliser Only required if plant growth is poor 1 per year April or May April Cut to 40-70mm. August/September Cut to 40mm after flowering. in all cases remove clippings. Yew Tree and Garden Pruning for safety considerations To remove encroachment onto paths and roads; 1 per year or more frequently As required for Scale 1:250 to maintain sightlines and effectiveness of lights; tree species Yew Tree House Spring sown (First year) Hale includes crown lifting 6 weeks after sowing Cut to 40-70mm if there is sufficient material (sward above 100mm). Pruning for plant health and structure Includes removal of dead wood and crossing 1 per year As required for tree species Version - 1 Milnthorpe May Cut to 40-70mm if there is sufficient material (sward above 100mm). Cumbria stems to create sound structure. Removal of August/September Cut to 40mm after flowering. in all cases remove clippings. extraneous growth from trunks/roots Created - A.W. LA7 7BJ Pest and disease control Reporting of infestation with pests or signs of 1 every 3 years or less frequently As determined Maintenance thereafter May Cut to 40-70mm. disease, diagnosis and treatment e.g., application by problem 015395 63527/07813 897631 August/September Cut to 40mm after flowering. in all cases remove clippings. of appropriate pesticide Reference - [email protected] Replacement of failed trees Remedy of problem and replacement with November – December appropriate planting 1 per year File amends - Watering Post planting watering. As determined by weather conditions 19/01/2021

8. Methodology

a. The Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment have jointly published Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Assessment Third Edition (2013) that gives guidance on carrying out a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA), either as a standalone appraisal or part of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). This methodology takes on board the above guidance.

b. When assessing character within an urban context, this methodology can be applied to Townscape Assessments and how the development will affect the elements that make up the townscape and its distinctive character.

c. The main stages of the LVIA process are outlined below. This process will identify and assess the potential effects of a development on the landscape resource and the visual environment.

1. Baseline study

Landscape

• Define the scope of the assessment.

• Outline the planning policy context, including any landscape designations.

• Establish the landscape baseline through a site visit and an assessment of published Landscape Character Assessments to identify the value of the landscape resource (receptor), at community, local, national or international levels where appropriate.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 16

19/01/2021

Visual

• Define the scope of the assessment.

• Identify the extent of visual receptors within the study area, with the use of Zones of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) where appropriate, and establish the number and sensitivity of the representative viewpoint and/or groups of people (receptors) within the study area whose views may be altered as a result of the proposals.

Project description

The baseline study highlights clear opportunities and constraints for the integration of the proposals into the receiving environment. The aspects of the scheme at each phase that will potentially give rise to effects on the landscape and visual amenity will need identifying. At this time, the proposals can be modified to ensure that further mitigation measures are incorporated into the design as a response to the local landscape and visual environment.

Description of Effects

The level of effect on both landscape and visual receptors should be identified in respect of the different components of the proposed development. In order to assess the significance of the effect on the receiving environment, it is necessary to consider the magnitude, i.e. the degree of change, together with the sensitivity of the receptor.

This will identify whether the effects are:

Adverse or Beneficial - beneficial effects would typically occur where a development could positively contribute to the landscape character or view.

Neutral effects would include changes that neither add nor detract from the quality and character of an area or view. Adverse effects would typically occur where there is loss of landscape elements, or the proposal detracts from the landscape quality and character of an area or view.

Direct or Indirect – A direct effect will be one where a development will affect a view or the character of an area, either beneficially or adversely. An indirect effect will occur as a result of associated development i.e. a development may result in an increase of traffic on a particular route.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 17

19/01/2021

Short, Medium or Long Term – this relates to the expected duration and magnitude of a development. Within this assessment the potential effects are assessed during the Construction Phase, then at Years 1 and 10, following completion of the development.

Reversible or Irreversible – can the resulting effect of a development be mitigated or not, and whether the result of the mitigation is beneficial or adverse.

Significance of Effects (EIA only)

A final judgment on whether the effect is likely to be significant, as required by the Regulations. The summary should draw out the key issues and outline the scope for reducing any negative/ adverse effects. Mitigation measures need to be identified that may reduce the final judgement on the significance of any residual negative effects in the long term.

Assessing the significance of effects

Landscape Sensitivity

1.4. The sensitivity of a particular landscape in relation to new development is categorised as very high, high, medium, low or negligible. This takes into account the susceptibility of the receptor to the type of development proposed and the value attributed to the existing landscape. The following table explains each threshold and the factors that make up the degree of sensitivity.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 18

19/01/2021

Table 1: Landscape Sensitivity Thresholds

Sensitivity Definition

Very High Landscape resource where there is a very high susceptibility to change. Landscapes would be considered of high value, have a high degree of intimacy, strong landscape structure, a high sense of intactness and contain features worthy of protection. Townscapes may include a high proportion of historic assets. Typical examples may be Nationally designated e.g. World Heritage Sites, National Parks, Heritage Coasts, AONB’s etc.

High Landscape Resource where there is a high susceptibility to change. Landscapes would be considered of high value, have a high degree of intimacy, strong landscape structure, relatively intact and contain features worthy of protection. Townscapes may include a high proportion of historic assets. Typical examples may be of Regional or County importance e.g. within the setting of National Parks, AONB’s, Conservation Areas etc

Medium Landscape resource where there is a medium susceptibility to change. Landscapes would be medium scale, good landscape structure, with some detracting features or evidence of recent change. Townscapes may include a proportion of historic assets or of cultural value locally. Typical examples may be designated for their value at District level.

Low Landscape resource where there is a low susceptibility to change. Typical landscapes would be of local landscape interest, and contain evidence of previous landscape change.

Negligible Landscape resource where there is little or no susceptibility to change. Typical landscapes are likely to be degraded, of weak landscape structure, intensive land uses, and require landscape restoration.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 19

19/01/2021

Visual Sensitivity

1.5. The sensitivity of the visual receptor will be assessed against the magnitude of visual change, and is categorised as very high, high, medium, low or negligible. Factors affecting the visual sensitivity will be assessed on whether there will be a loss of views of visual amenity.

Table 2: Visual Sensitivity Thresholds

Sensitivity Definition

Very High Viewers on public rights of way whose prime focus is on the quality of the landscape around, and are often very aware of its value. Examples include viewers within nationally designated landscapes such as National Parks or AONB’s.

High Viewers on public rights of way whose attention may be focused on the landscape, or occupiers of residential properties with primary views affected by the development. Examples include viewers within regional/local landscape designations, users of National Trails, Long Distance Routes or Sustrans cycle routes, or the setting of a listed building.

Medium Viewers engaged in outdoor recreation other than appreciation of the landscape, often within moderate quality landscapes. Examples include outdoor sport activities, outdoor tourist attractions, and occupiers of properties with oblique views affected by the development.

Low Viewers passing through or past the area and not necessarily visiting for the appreciation of the landscape. Examples include rail passengers and road users.

Negligible Viewers whose attention is focused on their work or activity, and not susceptible to changes in the surrounding landscape.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 20

19/01/2021

Effect Magnitude

1.6. The magnitude of change relates to the degree in which proposed development alters the fabric of the landscape character or view. This change is categorised as very high, high, medium, low, or negligible.

Table 3: Magnitude of Change

Magnitude Effect Definition

Very High Change resulting in a significant degree of deterioration or improvement, or introduction of dominant new elements that are considered to make a major alteration to a landscape or view.

High Change resulting in a high degree of deterioration or improvement, or introduction of recognisable new components that may be prominent within a landscape or view.

Medium Change resulting in a moderate degree of deterioration or improvement, or constitutes a noticeable change within a landscape or view.

Low Change resulting in a low degree of deterioration or improvement to a landscape or view, or constitutes only a minor component within a landscape or view.

Negligible Change resulting in a barely perceptible degree of deterioration or improvement to a landscape or view.

No Change It is also possible for a landscape or view to experience no change due to being totally compatible with the local character or not visible due to intervening structures or vegetation.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 21

19/01/2021

Significance Threshold

1.7. The magnitude of change is then considered against the sensitivity of the landscape resource as a receptor or the existing character of the panorama / view. In formulating the significance of effect, reasoned professional judgement is required which is explained within the assessment. This is carried out both in terms of the predicted effects on landscape character or on visual amenities. The significance thresholds are predicted as Substantial, Major, Moderate, Minor, Negligible and None, and can be either beneficial or adverse. Unless otherwise stated, all effects are predicted in the winter months. The extent of mitigation measures should be clearly stated, and in the case of planting proposals, the contribution to reducing adverse effects should be demonstrated at different stages (construction stage, operational stage year 0, and year 10).

Table 4: Significance of Effect

Significance Threshold Definition

Substantial A very high magnitude of change that materially affects a landscape or view of national / international importance that has little or no susceptibility to change.

Major A high magnitude of change that materially affects a landscape or view that has limited susceptibility to change. Positive effects will typically occur in a damaged landscape or view.

Moderate A medium magnitude of change that materially affects a landscape or view that may have the ability to accommodate change. Positive effects will typically occur in a lower quality landscape or view.

Minor A low magnitude of change that materially affects a landscape or view that has the ability to accommodate change. Positive effects will typically occur in a lower quality landscape or view.

Negligible A negligible magnitude of change that has little effect on a landscape or view that has the ability to accommodate change.

None It is also possible for a magnitude of change to occur that results in a neutral effect significance due to the change being compatible with local character or not visible.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 22

19/01/2021

1.8. The significance of the effect is measured on the ability of a landscape or view to accommodate the change. In assessing the significance of effects, the following matrix will be used to determine the significance thresholds, through determining the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of change.

Table 5: Measuring Significance of Effect

Sensitivity of Receptors

Very High High Medium Low Negligible

Very Major/ Moderate/ Substantial Major Moderate High Moderate Minor

Change Major/ Moderate/ High Major Moderate Minor

Moderate Minor

Major/ Moderate/ Minor/ Medium Moderate Minor

Moderate Minor Negligible Magnitude of of Magnitude Moderate/ Minor/ Low Moderate Minor Negligible Minor Negligible

Moderate/ Minor/ Negligible Minor Negligible Negligible Minor Negligible

1.9. It should be noted that where there is no perceptible change in terms of the effect magnitude regardless of the sensitivity of the receptor, the significance of the effect on a landscape or view will be none.

1.10. Landscape and visual effects that are Substantial, Major or Major/Moderate are considered to be significant.

1.11. A final written statement summarising the significant effects is provided, supported by the tables and matrices. This conclusion relies on professional judgement that is reasonable, based on clear and transparent methods, suitable training and experience, and a detached and dispassionate view of the development in the final assessment.

Ref: Ashleigh Farm Dwelling_LVIA 19/01/2021 Page 23