A27 Bypass Environmental Assessment Report

Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual

30 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table of Contents

7 Landscape and Visual 7-1

7.1 Introduction 7-1 7.2 Legislative and policy framework 7-2 7.3 Assessment methodology 7-9 7.4 Assessment assumptions and limitations 7-19 7.5 Study Area 7-23 7.6 Baseline conditions 7-25 7.7 Potential impacts 7-64 7.8 Design, mitigation and enhancement measures 7-67 7.9 Assessment of likely significant effects 7-70

LIST OF TABLES Table 7-1 - Legislation, regulatory and policy framework applicable to the landscape and visual assessment 7-2 Table 7-2 - Landscape sensitivity and typical examples 7-11 Table 7-3 - Visual sensitivity and typical descriptors 7-12 Table 7-4 - Magnitude of impact and typical descriptors for landscape receptors 7-13 Table 7-5 - Magnitude of impact and typical descriptors for visual receptors 7-14 Table 7-6 - Arriving at the significance of effect categories for landscape and visual receptors 7-15 Table 7-7 - Significance of effect 7-16 Table 7-8 - Assessment assumptions and limitations for landscape and visual assessment 7- 19 Table 7-9 - Visual Receptors and their representative viewpoints 7-48 Table 7-10 - Sensitivity of identified receptors for landscape and visual assessment 7-61 Table 7-11 - Construction phase potential impacts for landscape and visual receptors 7-65 Table 7-12 - Operational phase potential impacts for landscape and visual receptors 7-67 Table 7-13 - Likely landscape effects: construction phase 7-80 Table 7-14 - Likely landscape effects: operational phase, Year 1 and Year 15 7-82 Table 7-15 - Construction phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 1V5 7-85 Table 7-16 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint viewpoints from Option 1V5 7-89 Table 7-17 - Construction phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 1V9 7-92 Table 7-18 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 1V9 7-96 Table 7-19 - Construction phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 3V1 7-99 Table 7-20 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 3V1 7-104

August 2019 Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-21 - Construction phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 4/5AV1 7- 107 Table 7-22 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 4/5AV1 7- 113 Table 7-23 - Construction phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 4/5AV2 117 Table 7-24 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors as a result of Option 4/5AV2 7-121 Table 7-25 - Construction phase likely effects for viewpoint receptors from Option 5BV1 7- 125 Table 7-26 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors as a result of Option 5BV1 7-130 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 7-1 – Landscape Context Figure 7-2 – Landscape Character Areas Figure 7-3 – ZVI – Option 1V5 Figure 7-4 – ZVI – Option 1V9 Figure 7-5 – ZVI – Option 3V1 Figure 7-6 – ZVI – Option 4/5AV1 Figure 7-7 – ZVI – Option 4/5AV2 Figure 7-8 – ZVI – Option 5BV1 Figure 7-9 – Representative Viewpoints Location Plan 1 of 2 Figure 7-10 – Representative Viewpoints Location Plan 2 of 2 Figures 7-11 to 7-69 – Representative Viewpoint Photographs LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 7-1 – Landscape effects schedule Appendix 7-2 – Visual effects schedule Appendix 7-3 – Arboriculture Report

August 2019 Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Acronyms

ACRONYMS DEFINITION GLVIA Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment NCA National Character Area LCA Landscape Character Area ZVI Zone of Visual Influence AOD Above Ordnance Datum

August 2019 Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Glossary

TERM DEFINITION Guidelines for Landscape Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and Visual Impact (LVIA) is a tool used to identify and assess Assessment (GLVIA) the significance of and the effects of change resulting from development on both the landscape as an environmental resource in its own right and on people’s views and visual amenity. National Character Area Broad landscape areas exhibiting unique (NCA) combinations of landscape, biodiversity, geodiversity, history, cultural and economic activity. is divided into 159 NCAs, as defined by Natural England Landscape Character Areas of distinct landscape character, Area (LCA) usually at the local scale. Zone of Visual Influence The extent of the area over which the (ZVI) Scheme may theoretically be visible. Light imaging, Detection Digital surface modelling software to help and Ranging (LiDAR) inform the extent of the ZVI. Area of Outstanding An area of countryside in England, Wales or Natural Beauty (AONB) Northern Ireland which has been designated for conservation due to its significant landscape value. Areas are designated in recognition of their national importance European Landscape The ELC promotes the protection, Convention (ELC) management and planning of European landscapes; raises awareness of the value of a living landscape; and organises European co-operation on landscape issues. It is the first international treaty to be exclusively concerned with all dimensions of European landscape International Union for Provides definitions and guidelines for Conservation of Nature categories of protected landscapes, (IUCN) including National Parks. National Park covering an area of 1,627 square Park (SDNP) kilometres (628 sq mi) in southern England. It stretches for 140 kilometres (87 mi) from Winchester in the west to in the east, through the counties of ,

August 2019 Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

TERM DEFINITION and . The national park covers the chalk hills of the South Downs and a substantial part of a separate physiographic region, the western Weald, with its heavily wooded sandstone and clay hills and vales. The South Downs Way spans the entire length of the park and is the only National Trail that lies wholly within a national park.. South Downs National The South Downs National Park Authority is Park Authority (SDNPA) the statutory planning authority for the National Park area. International Dark Sky The IDA works to protect the night skies for Association (IDA) present and future generations International Dark Sky An IDA International Dark Sky Reserve is a reserve public or private land possessing an exceptional or distinguished quality of starry nights and nocturnal environment that is specifically protected for its scientific, natural, educational, cultural, heritage and/or public enjoyment. Reserves consist of a core area meeting minimum criteria for sky quality and natural darkness, and a peripheral area that supports dark sky preservation in the core. The SDNP received Bronze level status in 2016. Dark skies are a recognised Special Quality of the SDNP. Ordnance Datum (OD) Vertical datum used by an ordnance survey as the basis for deriving altitudes on maps. A spot height may be expressed as AOD for ‘Above Ordnance Datum’ to identify altitude above the OD.

August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7 Landscape and Visual

7.1 Introduction

7.1.1.1 This chapter provides the baseline and assessment of the potential impacts associated with landscape and visual impacts arising from the Scheme. This chapter has been completed in accordance with IAN 135/10 (this supersedes DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 51). The potential impacts typical of this type of project and which are considered in this chapter are: ▪ Construction phase:

- Temporary and permanent impacts of the construction of the Scheme on the landscape and visual resource, such as the removal of existing vegetation and earthworks - Impacts of the construction process itself, such as additional traffic movement, temporary lighting, signage and the presence of temporary work compounds. ▪ Operational phase:

- Permanent change to the landscape and visual resource resulting from the presence of the Scheme - Impacts of mitigation and enhancement measures in offsetting adverse impacts of the Scheme - Perceptual impacts of moving traffic caused by high sided vehicles, light coloured vehicles, glinting effects of sunlight on vehicles as well as the impact of additional junction lighting at Crossbush and the Ford . 7.1.1.2 This chapter should be read in conjunction with: ▪ Chapter 6: Cultural Heritage ▪ Chapter 8: Biodiversity ▪ Chapter 11: Noise and Vibration.

1 Highways Agency, Design Manual for and Bridges HA208/07, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 5 (August 2007)

Page 7-1 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.2 Legislative and policy framework

7.2.1.1 The broad legislative and policy framework relevant to environmental assessment of the Scheme is set out in Chapter 1: Introduction of this EAR. Table 7-1 summarises the legislation, regulatory and policy framework applicable to the landscape and visual assessment.

Table 7-1 - Legislation, regulatory and policy framework applicable to the landscape and visual assessment Name Summary Directives/Legislation The European The European Landscape Convention (ELC) was Landscape ratified in the UK on 21 November 2006 and Convention (ELC) became binding on 1 March 2007. It provides a 2007 basis for closer co-operation on landscape issues across Europe. The Convention highlights the need to recognise landscape in law and encourages the integration of landscape into all relevant areas of policy, including cultural, economic and social policies. The ELC applies to natural, rural, urban and peri-urban areas including land, inland water and marine areas. Its purpose is to promote landscape protection, management and planning in relation to all landscapes regardless of whether their quality and condition is considered outstanding, ordinary or degraded. National Parks The National Parks and Access to the Countryside and Access to Act 1949 provided the framework for the creation of the Countryside National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Act 1949 Beauty (AONBs). Section 11A outlines the duties of certain bodies and persons, including , to have regard to the purposes for which National Parks are designated, including social and economic well-being of communities, but shall attach greater weight to conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the area, which in this case, is the South Downs National Park (SDNP). Environment Act The SDNP has been designated under the 1995 Environment Act 1995 for its outstanding landscapes and its rich variety of landscape character that extends across a broad swathe of downlands between Winchester and Eastbourne. Under the Act the body responsible for the

Page 7-2 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Name Summary management of the landscape is the National Park Authority. The National Park Authority is required to ensure the conservation and enhancement of the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the National Park; and the promotion of opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the National Park's special qualities by the public. Countryside and Areas of Open Access land, designated under the Rights of Way Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, are locally Act 2000 designated areas that allow certain access rights, such as the right to roam (without use of paths) or to collect wood. They provide areas for walking/running and compensation land may be required for land lost to development. Section 85 outlines the general duties of public bodies to have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of areas of outstanding natural beauty. Natural The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Environment and Act 2006, established the role of Natural England as Rural an advisor on aspects of the landscape including Communities Act relating to National Parks and requires that the 2006 natural beauty of an area is to be considered irrespective of designations. In developing proposals due consideration should be given to the landscape. If appropriate, greater weight is to be given to the importance of the natural beauty of the landscape and to avoid unnecessary and unacceptable harm to the qualities of the landscape. National Policy National Policy The National Policy Statement for National Networks Statement for (NN NPS) (paragraphs 5.149 – 5.161) provides National landscape guidance for development within Networks2 nationally designated areas (such as a National Park) and requires great weight to be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty, noting a strong presumption against any significant road widening within such areas. Impacts on nationally

2 Department for Transport, National Policy Statement for National Networks (December 2014)

Page 7-3 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Name Summary designated areas must be considered, even when the Scheme falls outside their boundaries. Paragraph 5.154 states: “The aim should be to avoid compromising the purposes of designation and such projects should be designed sensitively given the various siting, operational and other relevant constraints". If undertaking works in relation to, or so as to affect land in a National Park or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the project would need to comply with the respective duties in Section 11A of the National Parks and Access to Countryside Act 1949 and Section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of way Act 2000. National Policy The National Policy Planning Framework (NPPF) Planning (paragraph 170) requires the planning system to Framework3 2019 protect and enhance valued landscapes, and at paragraph 180 notes the importance of tranquillity. It states that planning policies and decisions should "identify and protect tranquil areas which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason”. At paragraph 172, the NPPF refers to valued landscapes and in particular those protected by designations such as National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It attaches great importance to the design of the built environment and the need for good design which should contribute positively to making better places for people. Local Policy Arun District The Arun District Local Plan 2011 – 31 replaced the Local Plan 2011- 2003 Arun District Local Plan. The relevant Local 314 Plan policies include:

3 Department for Communities and Local Government, Revised National Planning Policy Framework (Feb 2019) 4 Arun District Council, The Arun Local Plan 2011-2031 (2018) https://www.arun.gov.uk/adopted- local-plan [Accessed April 2019]

Page 7-4 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Name Summary ▪ Policy LAN DM1: Protection of Landscape Character whereby developments shall only be permitted where they will not have a demonstrable visual impact on either the landscape character of Arun or the setting of and views into and out of the South Downs National Park ▪ Policy LAN DM2: The setting of Arundel. Any development including the A27 Arundel Bypass will be of a high design standard that reflects the quality of the landscape and the setting of Arundel ▪ Policy QE SP1: Quality of the Environment. Requires developments to contribute positively to the quality of the environment and does not have a significantly adverse impact on residential amenity, the natural environment or leisure and recreational activities. West Sussex The West Sussex Structure Plan 2001-2016 Structure Plan provides a broad planning framework for the West 2001-20165 (saved Sussex area. Although it does not hold any formal policies) status in the current planning system it remains a strategic policy statement for future development and land use planning. The document acknowledges the exceptional character of West Sussex and contains a number of 'saved' strategic policies that provide for: ▪ Protecting and reinforcing the distinctiveness of the main National Character Areas (NCAs) ▪ Safeguarding the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty ▪ Protecting woodlands and forests ▪ Protecting rivers, waterways and the coast ▪ Retaining the separate identity of towns and villages. South Downs The South Downs National Park Authority submitted Local Plan its Local Plan in April 2018. The final Inspectors Report has been received and concluded that the Local Plan is sound, subject to a number of main

5West Sussex County Council, West Sussex Structure Plan 2001-16 (Feb 2005) https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/media/7125/structure_plan_05.pdf

Page 7-5 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Name Summary Adopted 2 July modifications. The National Park Authority 2019 (2014 – 33)6 considered and adopted the Local Plan together with the Inspector’s recommended main modifications on 2 July 2019. The adopted Local Plan replaces all existing planning policies across the National Park. Relevant policies include: ▪ Strategic Policy SD4: Landscape Character aims to protect local landscape distinctiveness ▪ Strategic Policy SD5: Design seeks to achieve good design ▪ Strategic Policy SD8: Dark Night Skies seeks to maintain and protect the SDNPs dark night skies. The South Downs The South Downs Partnership Management Plan, Partnership 2014-2019 provides the starting point for the Management development of Local Plans. Relevant policies Plan, 2014-20197 include: ▪ General Policy 1: to conserve and enhance the Priority Action natural beauty and special qualities of the Plan, 2019-2024 landscape and its setting, in ways that allow it to continue to evolve and become more resilient to the impacts of climate change and other pressures ▪ General Policy 3: to protect and enhance tranquillity and dark night skies ▪ General Policy 40: which seeks to manage the highway network and its infrastructure to integrate it more effectively into the landscape and reduce the impact of traffic on communities and visitors. Since the plan was developed, fresh challenges have emerged, alongside new ideas on how to manage protected landscapes. SDNP along with its partners are working to review the Plan and to produce a new Priority Action Plan 2019-2024. It will be ready to share in Autumn 2019.

6 South Downs National Park Authority, South Downs Local Plan: Adopted 2 July 2019 (2014 – 33) https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/south-downs-local-plan_2019/local-plan/ [Accessed July 2019] 7 South Downs National Park Authority (2013). Partnership Management Plan 2014 -2019. Available at https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/SDNP-Partnership- Management-Plan-2014-19.pdf [Accessed April 2019]

Page 7-6 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Name Summary Guidance Interim Advice This Interim Advice Note provides guidance on the Note 135/108 assessment of landscape and visual effects of (November 2010) highway projects and replaces the existing guidance in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11, Section 3, Part 5. Design Manual This design manual provides guidance on the for Roads and assessment of impacts that road projects may have Bridges Volume on the landscape and visual resource and the 119 (1993) overall principles and techniques for environmental assessment of road projects. Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment guidance Landscape and for landscape architects, and others, with substantial Visual Impact sections detailing approach to scope, definition, Assessment 10 context, principles, processes, presentation and other topics, on a discipline specific basis. South Downs This SDNP Viewshed Characterisation and Analysis National Park provides a Characterisation and Analysis Study of Viewshed important views, comprising a mapping and analysis Characterisation of views to, from and within the National Park. The and Analysis study forms part of the evidence to guide both future (2015)11 planning and development management decisions by the SDNP and its partner authorities. South Downs The SDNP Green Infrastructure Framework National Park provides a ‘roadmap’ for green infrastructure Green planning for the SDNP and the wider region, to Infrastructure ensure that economic growth and development is Framework achieved sustainably through planning positively for (2016)12 the creation, protection, enhancement and

8 Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 135/10 Landscape And Visual Effects Assessment (2010). Available at http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/ha/standards/ians/pdfs/ian135.pdf 9 Highways Agency, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 5, Landscape Effects (June 1993) 10 Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Routledge 11 Land Use Consultants, South Downs National Park: View Characterisation and Analysis (2015). Available at https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Viewshed-Study- Report.pdf [Accessed February 2019] 12 South Downs National Park Authority, South Downs Green Infrastructure Framework (2016). Available at: https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/South-Downs-Green- Infrastructure-Framework-March-2016.pdf [Accessed February 2019]

Page 7-7 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Name Summary management of networks of biodiversity and green infrastructure. South Downs The South Downs National Park Tranquillity Study National Park 2017 - tranquillity mapping project is evidence- Tranquillity Study based work in relation to tranquillity, the uses of 201713 which include the protection and enhancement of areas of high tranquillity within the SDNP. South Downs The South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Integrated Assessment provides a landscape assessment of Landscape the SDNP by character types and site-specific Character analysis of the National Park as a whole. Assessment (2011)14 Landscape A landscape assessment of the West Sussex area Character was undertaken in 2003 but remains unpublished. Assessment of However, land management guidelines were West Sussex produced for each of the 42 unique character areas Landscape 200315 identified within the assessment and provide advice for the future management of the West Sussex landscape. A Strategy for the The document, ‘A Strategy for the West Sussex West Sussex Landscape’, provides a strategic vision document to Landscape, provide a framework for guiding coordinated action October 200516 in West Sussex going forwards. The purpose of the Strategy is to protect and enhance the landscape of West Sussex as an asset for future generations.

13 South Downs National Park Authority (2017), Tranquillity Study. Available at https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/13-04-17-South-Downs-National- Park-Tranquillity-Study.pdf [Accessed April 2019] 14 Land Use Consultants, South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment (Updated) 2011. Available at: https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ILCA-Technical- Document.pdf [Accessed May 2019] 15 West Sussex County Council Landscape Character Assessment of West Sussex (2003). Available at: https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/media/1771/landscape_strategy.pdf [Accessed May 2019] 16 West Sussex County Council A Strategy for the West Sussex Landscape (2005). Available at: https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/land-waste-and-housing/landscape-and-environment/landscape- character-assessment-of-west-sussex/ [Accessed May 2019]

Page 7-8 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.3 Assessment methodology

7.3.1 Overview of assessment methodology

7.3.1.1 The Landscape and Visual Assessment has been prepared with reference to relevant policy and guidance outlined in Section 7.2. The methodology used for this assessment is set out below, and is the same for both construction and operational phases of the Scheme. 7.3.1.2 An assessment of likely landscape and visual impacts associated with the Scheme has been undertaken using DMRB guidance outlined within IAN 135/10, which supersedes the earlier DMRB chapter in Volume 11, Section 3, Part 517. The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Assessment (GLVIA)18 was also utilised, where the latter places greater emphasis on professional judgement in the explanation and justification for assessment criteria and conclusions. 7.3.1.3 Given the relatively early stage in design PCF Stage 2 (Option Selection), there is insufficient detail to undertake all elements of a Detailed Assessment due to the scale and nature of the Scheme. However, given that there is the potential for significant landscape and visual effects to occur as a result of the Scheme, the methodology for a Detailed Assessment has been broadly followed. A comprehensive Detailed Assessment would be required in PCF Stage 3 (Preliminary Design). 7.3.1.4 This chapter presents an assessment of the potential impacts of the Scheme options on both landscape and visual amenity. Whilst similar in approach, each subject matter has its own set of assessment criteria. 7.3.1.5 There are four stages when carrying out assessment of effects on landscape character and visual amenity (at both construction and operation), namely: ▪ Assessment of the existing situation (environmental baseline). This includes analysing the existing landscape and visual context of the receiving environment within the defined Study Area ▪ Identification of likely impacts associated with the Scheme. This involves assigning receptor sensitivity, magnitude of impact and significance of effect to identified changes associated with landscape character and visual amenity during the construction and operational phases

17 Highways Agency, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 5, Landscape Effects (June 1993) 18 Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Routledge

Page 7-9 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

▪ Identification of mitigation measures where the assessment identifies potentially significant effects on landscape character or on the views of the receiving local area ▪ Description of residual effects (incorporating mitigation and their associated significance of effect) resulting from the Scheme. 7.3.2 Future baseline prediction methods

7.3.2.1 Following a review of committed developments, local policy and professional judgement, it is considered unlikely that there would be significant changes to the baseline environment by the date of opening (operation Year 1). 7.3.2.2 As a result, the future baseline and do-minimum scenario (no Scheme) are not anticipated to differ significantly from the current baseline and so the operational effects within this Chapter have been assessed against the current baseline. 7.3.3 Significance criteria

Sensitivity of landscape receptors 7.3.3.1 Landscape is defined as an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors19. It has been analysed based on baseline information (as outlined in Section 7.5 and 7.6) including information gathered during site visits and fieldwork. 7.3.3.2 Professional judgement has been used to describe and evaluate the quality and value of the landscapes affected, and their capacity to accommodate change arising from the Scheme. The ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment’ states: “The determination of the sensitivity of the landscape resource is based upon an evaluation of each key element or characteristic of the landscape likely to be affected. The evaluation will reflect such factors as its quality, value, contribution to landscape character, and the degree to which the particular element or characteristic can be replaced or substituted.”20 7.3.3.3 The outputs from the landscape character assessment (i.e. landscape characteristics, their condition and overall value) are then considered in relation to the nature of the Scheme and type of change proposed to

19 Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Routledge. Paragraph 2.2 20 Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Routledge

Page 7-10 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

understand the capacity of the landscape to accommodate change in order to identify the landscape sensitivity. 7.3.3.4 Although there is common ground between the aspects of landscape value and capacity to accommodate change, the relationship between them is not always direct. A highly valued area should not, by definition, infer that it has little or no capacity to accommodate future change. Similarly, an area expressing low value does not automatically have a higher capacity to accommodate development. As noted in GLVIA21 there can be complex relationships between the value attributed to a landscape and its capacity to accommodate change, which can be particularly important when considering change in, or close to, designated landscapes.

7.3.3.5 However, IAN 135/1022 provides typical examples where value and capacity are directly related, as shown below in Table 7-2. For the purposes of this assessment, where value and capacity are not directly aligned, this will be clearly outlined and the resulting sensitivity clearly justified, particularly where it may appear to be not fully aligned with the typical examples shown in Table 7-2 below, taken from IAN 135/10 Annex 1 Table 2.

Table 7-2 - Landscape sensitivity and typical examples23 Sensitivity Typical Descriptors: Landscape Receptors High Landscapes which by nature of their character would be unable to accommodate change of the type proposed. Typically, these would be: ▪ Of high quality with distinctive elements and features making a positive contribution to character and sense of place ▪ Likely to be designated, but the aspects which underpin such value may also be present outside designated areas, especially at the local scale ▪ Areas of special recognised value through use, perception or historic and cultural associations ▪ Likely to contain features and elements that are rare and could not be replaced. Moderate Landscapes which by nature of their character would be able to partly accommodate change of the type proposed. Typically, these would be:

21 Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Routledge 22 Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 135/10 Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment (2010) 23 Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 135/10 Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment (2010)

Page 7-11 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Sensitivity Typical Descriptors: Landscape Receptors ▪ Comprised of commonplace elements and features creating generally unremarkable character but with some sense of place ▪ Locally designated, or their value may be expressed through non-statutory local publications containing some features of value through use, perception or historic and cultural associations ▪ Likely to contain some features and elements that could not be replaced. Low Landscapes which by nature of their character would be able to accommodate change of the type proposed. Typically, these would be: ▪ Comprised of some features and elements that are discordant, derelict or in decline, resulting in indistinct character with little or no sense of place ▪ Not designated ▪ Containing few, if any, features of value through use, perception or historic and cultural associations ▪ Likely to contain few, if any, features and elements that could not be replaced.

Sensitivity of visual receptors 7.3.3.6 Visual amenity is defined as the ‘pleasantness of the view’ or outlook of an identified receptor or group of receptors. Sensitivity of visual receptors is dependent on the location and context of the view; the expectation, occupation or activity of the visual receptor; and the importance of the view, which may be determined by its designation, such as a National Park, its popularity, the number of people affected, and whether it is a tourist attraction or has literary or artistic references. 7.3.3.7 The sensitivity of visual receptors will be assigned as shown in Table 7-3 below, taken from IAN 135/1024 Annex 2 Table 1.

Table 7-3 - Visual sensitivity and typical descriptors25 Sensitivity Typical Descriptors: Visual Receptors High ▪ Residential properties ▪ Users of Public Rights of Way or other recreational trails such as National Trails, footpaths and bridleways

24 Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 135/10 Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment (2010) 25 Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 135/10 Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment (2010)

Page 7-12 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Sensitivity Typical Descriptors: Visual Receptors ▪ Users of recreational facilities where the purpose of that recreation is enjoyment of the countryside, such as Country Parks, National Trust or other access land. Moderate ▪ Outdoor workers ▪ Users of scenic roads, railways or waterways or users of designated tourist routes ▪ Schools and other institutional buildings, and their outdoor areas. Low ▪ Indoor workers ▪ Users of main roads such as trunk roads, or passengers in public transport on main arterial routes ▪ Users of recreational facilities where the purpose of that recreation is not related to the view, such as sports facilities.

Magnitude of impact on landscape receptors 7.3.3.8 The magnitude of impact was assigned as described in Table 7-4 for landscape receptors, as outlined in IAN 135/1026 Annex 1, Table 3.

Table 7-4 - Magnitude of impact and typical descriptors for landscape receptors27 Magnitude Typical Criteria Descriptors of Impact Major Total loss or large-scale damage to existing character or Adverse distinctive features and elements, and/or the addition of new but uncharacteristic conspicuous features and elements. Moderate Partial loss or noticeable damage to existing character or Adverse distinctive features and elements, and/or the addition of new but uncharacteristic noticeable features and elements. Minor Slight loss or damage to existing character or features and Adverse elements, and/or the addition of new but uncharacteristic features and elements. Negligible Barely noticeable loss or damage to existing character or Adverse features and elements, and/or the addition of new but uncharacteristic features and elements.

26 Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 135/10 Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment (2010) 27 Highways Agency, Assessment and Management of Environmental Effects HA 205/08, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11, Section 2, Part 5 (August 2008)

Page 7-13 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Magnitude Typical Criteria Descriptors of Impact No No noticeable loss, damage or alteration to character or change features or elements. Negligible Barely noticeable improvement of character by the Beneficial restoration of existing features and elements, and/or the removal of uncharacteristic features and elements, or by the addition of new characteristic elements. Minor Slight improvement of character by the restoration of Beneficial existing features and elements, and/or the removal of uncharacteristic features and elements, or by the addition of new characteristic elements. Moderate Partial or noticeable improvement of character by the Beneficial restoration of existing features and elements, and/or the removal of uncharacteristic and noticeable features and elements, or by the addition of new characteristic features. Major Large scale improvement of character by the restoration of Beneficial features and elements, and/or the removal of uncharacteristic and conspicuous features and elements, or by the addition of new distinctive features. Magnitude of impact on visual receptors 7.3.3.9 The magnitude of impact will be assigned as described in Table 7-5 and as outlined in IAN 135/1028 Annex 2, Table 2 (which provides typical descriptors for adverse impacts only, as replicated in the following table).

Table 7-5 - Magnitude of impact and typical descriptors for visual receptors29 Magnitude of Typical Criteria Descriptors Impact Major The Scheme, or a part of it, would become the dominant feature or focal point of the view. Moderate The Scheme, or a part of it, would form a noticeable feature or element of the view which is readily apparent to the receptor. Minor The Scheme, or a part of it, would be perceptible but not alter the overall balance of features and elements that comprise the existing view.

28 Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 135/10 Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment (2010) 29 Highways Agency, Assessment and Management of Environmental Effects HA 205/08, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11, Section 2, Part 5 (August 2008)

Page 7-14 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Magnitude of Typical Criteria Descriptors Impact Negligible Only a very small part of the Scheme would be discernible, or it is at such a distance that it would form a barely noticeable feature or element of the view. No Change No part of the Scheme, or work or activity associated with it, is discernible.

Significance of effect on Landscape and Visual Receptors 7.3.3.10 The significance of effect for both landscape and visual receptors will be determined by combining the magnitude of impact with the sensitivity of the receptor as presented in Table 7-6 and as outlined in IAN 135/1030 Annex 1, Table 3 and Annex 2, Table 3.

Table 7-6 - Arriving at the significance of effect categories31 for landscape and visual receptors Magnitude of impact (Degree of change) No Negligible Minor Moderate Major change High Neutral Slight Slight / Moderate / Large / Moderate Large Very

Large Moderate Neutral Neutral / Slight Moderate Moder Slight ate / Large Sensitivity Low Neutral Neutral / Neutral / Slight Slight / Slight Slight Moder ate 7.3.3.11 The significance of effect for both landscape and visual receptors will be described as outlined in IAN 135/1032 Annex 1, Table 4 and Annex 2, Table 4, with typical descriptors summarised in Table 7-7 below.

30 Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 135/10 Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment (2010) 31 Highways Agency, Assessment and Management of Environmental Effects HA 205/08, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11, Section 2, Part 5 (August 2008) 32 Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 135/10 Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment (2010)

Page 7-15 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-7 - Significance of effect33 Significance Typical Descriptors: Typical Descriptors: category Landscape Receptors Visual Receptors Very Large The Scheme would: The Scheme would Beneficial ▪ Greatly enhance the create an iconic new character (including quality feature that would greatly and value) of the landscape enhance the view. ▪ Create an iconic high-quality feature and/or series of elements ▪ Enable a sense of place to be created or greatly enhanced. Large The Scheme would: The Scheme would lead Beneficial ▪ Enhance the character to a major improvement (including quality and value) in a view from a highly of the landscape sensitive receptor. ▪ Enable the restoration of characteristic features and elements lost as a result of changes from inappropriate management or development ▪ Enable a sense of place to be enhanced. Moderate The Scheme would: The Scheme would Beneficial ▪ Improve the character cause obvious (including quality and value) improvement to a view of the landscape from a moderately ▪ Enable the restoration of sensitive receptor, or characteristic features and perceptible improvement elements partially lost or to a view from a more diminished as a result of sensitive receptor. changes from inappropriate management or development ▪ Enable a sense of place to be restored.

33 Highways Agency, Assessment and Management of Environmental Effects HA 205/08, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11, Section 2, Part 5 (August 2008)

Page 7-16 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Significance Typical Descriptors: Typical Descriptors: category Landscape Receptors Visual Receptors Slight The Scheme would: The Scheme would Beneficial ▪ Complement the character cause limited (including quality and value) improvement to a view of the landscape from a receptor of ▪ Maintain or enhance medium sensitivity or characteristic features and would cause greater elements improvement to a view ▪ Enable some sense of place from a receptor of low to be restored. sensitivity. Neutral The Scheme would: The Scheme would not ▪ Maintain the character cause perceptible (including quality and value) changes in the view. of the landscape ▪ Blend in with characteristic features and elements ▪ Enable a sense of place to be retained. Slight The Scheme would: The Scheme would Adverse ▪ Not quite fit the character cause limited (including quality and value) deterioration to a view of the landscape from a receptor of ▪ Be at variance with medium sensitivity or characteristic features and cause greater elements deterioration to a view ▪ Detract from a sense of from a receptor of low place. sensitivity. Moderate The Scheme would: The Scheme would Adverse ▪ Conflict with the character cause obvious (including quality and value) deterioration to a view of the landscape from a moderately ▪ Have an adverse impact on sensitive receptor or characteristic features or perceptible damage to a elements view from a more ▪ Diminish a sense of place. sensitive receptor.

Page 7-17 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Significance Typical Descriptors: Typical Descriptors: category Landscape Receptors Visual Receptors Large The Scheme would: The Scheme would Adverse ▪ Be at considerable variance cause major deterioration with the character (including to a view from a highly quality and value) of the sensitive receptor and landscape would constitute a major ▪ Degrade or diminish the discordant element in the integrity of a range of view. characteristic features and elements ▪ Damage a sense of place. Very Large The Scheme would: The Scheme would Adverse ▪ Be at complete variance cause the loss of views with the character (including from a highly sensitive quality and value) of the receptor and would landscape constitute a dominant ▪ Cause the integrity of discordant feature in the characteristic features and view. elements to be lost ▪ Cause a sense of place to be lost. 7.3.4 Temporal scope

7.3.4.1 Over time, views within the landscape change due to seasonal variation, changes in light level, human intervention and variation between night and day. When considering the impacts of the Scheme (magnitude of change) upon the perception of landscape character and respective views, the following scenarios have been assessed: ▪ Construction phase (2023-2026) – during the construction period, assuming a maximum perceived change situation (when construction activity is at its peak) ▪ Winter (year 1 of opening) – a winter’s day in the year that the scheme will open or be fully operational (with noise /visual screens and mounds in place but before any planted mitigation has begun to take effect) ▪ Summer (year 15) – a summer’s day in the fifteenth year after opening (i.e. when the planted mitigation measures can be assumed to be substantially effective). 7.3.4.2 The analysis assumes that the visual context applicable at the year of opening is that which will be experienced during winter months when the

Page 7-18 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

degree of visual exposure is potentially greatest due to a lack of foliage within the wider landscape and prior to the establishment of mitigation planting. The analysis at fifteen years into operation demonstrates the effectiveness following maturation of any mitigation planting proposals for the Scheme.

7.4 Assessment assumptions and limitations

7.4.1.1 The assumptions and limitations which apply to this assessment are outlined in Table 7-8. For each assumption or limitation an explanation of the possible result of the assumption has been provided as well as a description of any corrective actions that have been taken to address any limitations.

Table 7-8 - Assessment assumptions and limitations for landscape and visual assessment Assumption Result of Correction for Assumption or or Limitation Assumption or Limitation Limitation Desk Study- Landscape and Visual Understanding There will be many It is not possible to record every of the spatial locations within the view within the ZVI, but generally context has ZVI that have views visibility of the Scheme reduces been gained of the Scheme, but with distance. As such, not all through which have not potential views from within the review of OS been captured ZVI were considered for the and Google within the visual visual assessment but this is the Earth mapping assessment section standard approach for and the of this chapter. This assessment of visual effects. The production of includes views from ZVI provides a starting point digital Zone of private land or which was subsequently verified Visual within properties; in the field (to take account of Influence (ZVI) views filtered by screening by intervening features maps. There intervening such as vegetation and built are limitations screening; or form). To enable an assessment in their use, consideration of the of effects on visual amenity a such as views orientation of the series of representative outside the view (such as when viewpoints from within the ZVI ZVI. travelling in a were identified and agreed with vehicle). South Downs National Park Authority and West Sussex County Council (in consultation with Arun District Council) for the visual assessment section.

Page 7-19 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Assumption Result of Correction for Assumption or or Limitation Assumption or Limitation Limitation Digital ZVIs do There may be Potential discrepancies are not take full roads, tracks, and checked for during on–site account of all footpaths in the surveys. To ensure the digital the potential wider setting which, ZVIs are as accurate as possible, screening although shown as the initial plotting and digital ZVIs effects of falling within the were ground-truthed and checked buildings, ZVI, are heavily on site and modified accordingly, localised screened or filtered in order to take account of landform by buildings, walls, screening and local topographical variations, and or vegetation which variations. The more detailed vegetation. restrict viewing 2km digital ZVIs provided a opportunities; The further refinement of the initial ZVIs therefore 10km digital ZVIs. provide a starting point in the assessment process and accordingly tend towards giving a ‘maximum visual impression’ or over- estimate of the potential visibility of the Scheme. The site visits Views from private More detailed assessment of and fieldwork properties or land, private receptors (to potentially were where considered, reduce their sensitivity rating) undertaken are predicted only. was not considered necessary at from publicly They are typically this stage. All residential accessible assigned a ‘high’ receptors were therefore roads and sensitivity rating identified as ‘high’ sensitivity. This paths; access which may result in is standard practice for PCF to private land an over- estimate of Stage 2 (Option Selection) and in or properties the resulting landscape and visual was not significance of assessment. obtained. effect on those receptors.

Page 7-20 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Assumption Result of Correction for Assumption or or Limitation Assumption or Limitation Limitation The impact to The effect of This is the design at a point in landscape and assessing the time in the ongoing development visual Scheme drawings and refinement of the design. No receptors has in the absence of correction for this is possible at been construction areas this stage in the design process. assessed in or mitigation/ Whilst indicative landscape accordance compensation land mitigation has been identified with design take areas and using professional judgement, the information details may result in required level and extent may available at the assessment alter following detailed design. the 26 under estimating Some of the Scheme options may February 2019 the full potential require additional mitigation (from ‘Design Fix’, impact of the both a landscape/visual as described proposals. perspective and as a result of in Chapter 2: mitigation requirements of other The Project. technical specialists) such that existing the actual impacts can only be Scheme fully ascertained at PCF Stage 3 drawings (Preliminary Design). Additional which exclude land requirements are implicit in details on mitigation proposal descriptions, construction though these will only be areas (such as developed spatially in plan form site at the next stage of the Scheme. compounds) Further investigation will be or potential required at PCF Stage 3 mitigation/ (Preliminary Design) to establish compensation the full extent of construction land take works and any associated areas. compensation areas for the Scheme in PCF Stage 3 (Preliminary Design).

Page 7-21 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Assumption Result of Correction for Assumption or or Limitation Assumption or Limitation Limitation Detailed All of the potential In the absence of detailed information effects of information, typical activities relating to construction associated with construction construction activities may not activity of this scale have been activity is not be fully considered. identified using professional available at judgement and advice from the this stage of Scheme team. These activities the have been considered for the assessment, construction impacts section of therefore this assessment. construction effects have not been considered in detail at this stage. The level of certainty in the assessment of construction effects is therefore low. Detailed All of the potential Design information available at design effects at operation the 26 February 2019 ‘Design information may not be fully Fix’, as described in Chapter 2: relating to the considered. The Project shows operational Scheme, lighting for the Scheme options including would be restricted to lighting lighting and associated with existing lit signage, is not junctions only. Signage would be available at required on some approaches to this stage of junctions, but location and details the are not yet known. This level of assessment information is typical for PCF process. Stage 2 (Option Selection) and sufficient for the appraisal of the different Scheme options. Further investigation may be required at PCF Stage 3 (Preliminary Design) following detailed design.

Page 7-22 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Assumption Result of Correction for Assumption or or Limitation Assumption or Limitation Limitation Night-time All of the potential Design information available at lighting effects at the 26 February 2019 ‘Design assessments construction and Fix’, as described in Chapter 2: have not been operation may not The Project, shows that artificial undertaken for be fully considered. lighting is only included at this PCF stage existing lit junctions (Ford Road 2 (Option and Crossbush) with short Selection). additional sections between Ford Road roundabout and the Community Hospital. As these sections are already lit, it is considered that no correction is necessary. However, qualitative consideration is given to effects of lighting and traffic headlights on the night time environment. It is considered that this is a suitable approach for comparison of the Scheme options for PCF Stage 2 (Option Selection). Further investigation may be required at PCF Stage 3 (Preliminary Design) following detailed design.

7.5 Study Area

7.5.1 Landscape Study Area

7.5.1.1 The Study Area for the landscape assessment covers the Scheme and the full extent of the wider landscape around it which the Scheme may influence in a significant manner34. This ensures that any potential effects to sensitive landscapes which may be influenced by the Scheme in the wider area, including the South Downs National Park, are reported appropriately. This results in a slightly wider Study Area than for the visual assessment, although the two Study Areas are very similar in extent. The Study Area for the landscape assessment is shown in Figure 7-2.

34 Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Routledge [paragraph 5.2]

Page 7-23 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.5.2 Visual Study Area

7.5.2.1 The Study Area for the visual assessment is initially defined by the extent to which the Scheme may be visible: by definition, visual effects can only occur where at least some part of the development is visible. The first step in identifying the extent of visibility is to identify the ZVI for each Scheme option and then produce a combined ZVI of all 6 Scheme options. The combined ZVI shows the extent of potential visibility and forms the Study Area, as illustrated in Figure 7-9. Zone of visual influence overview 7.5.2.2 The ZVI analysis represents the extent of the area over which the Scheme may theoretically be visible. In line with guidance provided in IAN 135/10, an initial ZVI was undertaken by reviewing current Ordnance Survey mapping for the area to establish where landform, large scale established planting and areas of built development would be likely to define the availability of views. 7.5.2.3 In addition, computer generated digital ZVIs were produced for each Scheme option over an initial 10km radius from the centre line of each Scheme option. The computer-generated ZVI is a ‘bare-ground’ ZVI (taking no account of screening by trees, woodlands, buildings or structures) based on a viewer eye height of 1.6m, as recommended in GLVIA335, and using the Ordnance Survey Terrain 5 digital terrain model. Each Scheme option was modelled at +4m above proposed levels to take account of the typical height of lorries. In addition, a more detailed digital surface model using LiDAR data was produced for a 2km radius from each Scheme option. (LiDAR data is currently only available for sections of the UK and does not cover the 10km radius). Whilst the LiDAR data provides more detailed modelling through inclusion of built form, it still requires verification on the ground. 7.5.3 Summary description of the Study Area

7.5.3.1 The landscape Study Area (which incorporates all of the visual Study Area) is comprised of the settled coastal plain and the rising chalkland of the South Downs. The South Downs is designated as a National Park and covers almost half of the Study Area. A brief overview of the Study Area is described below. 7.5.3.2 The northern extent of the Study Area is within the SDNP, where the horizon is closed in this direction by the high downs and significant blocks of

35 Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Routledge, Section 6.8

Page 7-24 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

woodlands. Rewell Hill, to the north of Arundel, forms part of this south facing series of ridgelines, which have, to varying degrees, expansive views to the south. 7.5.3.3 To the east, the boundary of the Study Area is defined by the hills extending south from Sullington Hill to Blackpatch Hill in the east and Highdown Hill to the south east. 7.5.3.4 The southern boundary of the Study Area extends from Highdown Hill, incorporating the urban edge of Ferring in the east, extending to the west to incorporate and then Yapton to the south west. 7.5.3.5 The western boundary forms a broad arch from Yapton in the south west to Fontwell and Slindon to the west, incorporating several of the smaller settlements to the south west of Arundel. To the east of Slindon the wooded landform rises to Rewell Hill.

7.6 Baseline conditions

7.6.1.1 This section provides an overview of the baseline landscape and visual amenity conditions for the Scheme within the Study Area. 7.6.2 Data sources

7.6.2.1 The baseline conditions described for landscape and visual receptors are derived from the guidance documents listed in Table 7-1 as well as the following sources: ▪ Desk Study Sources:

- Natural England National Character Area Profiles36 - West Sussex Landscape Assessment (see Table 7-1) - Google Earth - 1:25,000 Ordnance Survey Explorer maps to identify landform, drainage, field settlement and transport patterns - West Sussex Public Rights of Way interactive maps (website) - The Government’s Multi Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside website - Natural England’s Ancient Woodland Inventory and Priority Habitat maps

36 Natural England National Character Area Profiles: data for local decision making (2014). Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-character-area-profiles-data- for-local-decision-making [Accessed May 2019]

Page 7-25 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

- The Woodland Trust’s Ancient Tree Hunt map for the UK - Aerial photography. ▪ Field Survey Sources:

- Landscape and visual walkovers conducted in 2017 - Assessment Viewpoint surveys conducted in 2017 - Arboriculture surveys conducted in 2018 and 2019 - Walkover undertaken on 22-23 August 2018 (Arundel, Binsted and Crossbush, including associated viewpoint locations and public paths) - Walkover undertaken on 4-8 February 2019 (public rights of way, lanes and all viewpoint locations within the Study Area) - Walkover undertaken on 18-22 March 2019 (public rights of way, lanes and all viewpoint locations within the Study Area). 7.6.3 Landscape designations

7.6.3.1 Landscape features and designations within the study area are shown on Figure 7-1. Statutory designations 7.6.3.2 The SDNP was designated as a National Park in 2010 in recognition of its exceptional natural beauty, for the opportunities to learn about and appreciate its special qualities, and as a landscape of national importance. The special qualities of the SDNP are defined as37: ▪ Diverse, inspirational landscapes and breath-taking views ▪ A rich variety of wildlife and habitats including rare and internationally important species ▪ Tranquil and unspoilt places ▪ An environment shaped by centuries of farming and embracing new enterprise ▪ Great opportunities for recreational activities and learning experiences ▪ Well-conserved historical features and a rich cultural heritage ▪ Distinctive towns and villages, and communities with real pride in their area.

37 South Downs National Park Authority South Downs Special Qualities (undated), available at http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/SDNP-Special-Qualities.pdf [Accessed May 2019]

Page 7-26 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.6.3.3 The SDNP (as with all UK National Parks) is a Category V protected area as defined by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in the Guidelines of Protected Area Management Categories. The IUCN definition of Protected Areas Category V is defined as: “A protected area where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced an area of distinct character with significant ecological, biological, cultural and scenic value: and where safeguarding the integrity of this interaction is vital to protecting and sustaining the area and its associated nature conservation and other values.” The IUCN definition of Protected Landscape aims to maintain the harmonious balance between people, landscapes and nature for now and for future generations. 7.6.3.4 The SDNP received International Dark Sky Reserve - Bronze level status in 2016. Dark skies are a recognised Special Quality of the SDNP. Approximately 66% of the SDNP within the International Dark Sky Reserve boundary has Bronze Level skies or better with 3% at Silver. Within the SDNP, the International Dark Sky Reserve encompasses the best quality skies but has sufficient physical and policy buffering to protect it from over 90% of current and future threats. It has some impacts from light pollution and other artificial light disturbance. Bronze level skies offer people, plants and animals a respite from an otherwise degraded nocturnal environment. These are areas of public or private land possessing an exceptional or distinguished quality of starry nights and nocturnal environment that is specifically protected for its scientific, natural, educational, cultural, heritage and public enjoyment. 7.6.3.5 The South Downs Local Plan 2019 provides guidance on the policy associated with the International Dark Sky Reserve. 7.6.3.6 Assessment of the impacts of the Scheme on the 7 Special Qualities of the SDNP is provided in Appendix 1-1. For the purposes of this assessment, consideration of the SDNP as a whole would be on too broad a scale to be appropriate for assessment. The overview provided above sets out the context of part of the Study Area relating to the SDNP but will not be considered further as an entity in its own right. Rather, it will be considered at a more local level in relation to local landscape character areas, viewpoints and within Appendix 1-1. 7.6.3.7 Several areas of Open Access Land and Access Land in Woodland Areas, which were designated under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, lie within the Study Area.

Page 7-27 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.6.4 National landscape character

7.6.4.1 In the broader landscape context, Natural England’s National Character Areas divide England into 159 distinct natural areas. Each is defined by a unique combination of landscape, biodiversity, geodiversity, history, and cultural and economic activity. Their boundaries follow natural lines in the landscape rather than administrative boundaries. 7.6.4.2 Within this broad landscape context, the Scheme options are all located within National Character Area 126: South Coast Plain38 but would also be visible from the adjacent National Character Area 125: South Downs39 to the north. 7.6.4.3 The South Coast Plain National Character Area 126 can be broadly summarised as a flat, coastal landscape with an intricately indented shoreline lying between the dip slope of the South Downs and South Hampshire Lowlands and the waters of the English Channel, Solent and part of Water. The area is generally very low lying and heavily defended against flooding and erosion. The coastal plain contains significant urban development, with settlements along the coast dominated by the conurbation, trunk roads, suburban villages and an extensive string of seaside towns between and Southampton. 7.6.4.4 The South Downs National Character Area 125 comprises a ‘whale-backed’ spine of chalk stretching from the Hampshire Downs in the west to the coastal cliffs of Beachy Head in East Sussex. The majority of the South Downs area falls within the SDNP, a recognition of its natural beauty and importance for access and recreation. It is an extremely diverse and complex landscape with considerable local variation representing physical, historical and economic influences; much of it has been formed and maintained by human activity, in particular agriculture and forestry. 7.6.4.5 Due to wide geographical scale and extent of these character areas, and given that all Scheme options are located within a single National Character Area, it would not be possible to differentiate between Scheme options at this scale. National Character Areas give a broad understanding of the context of

38 Natural England NCA Profile: 126: South Coast Plain (NE525) (2014). Available at http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/4923911250640896?category=587130 [Accessed March 2019] 39 Natural England NCA Profile: 125: South Downs (NE432) (2013). Available at http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/7433354?category=587130. [Accessed March 2019]

Page 7-28 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

the landscape character in this part of England, but they are not at an appropriate scale for assessment purposes and will therefore not be considered further. Instead, consideration of a finer grained assessment is required, in accordance with GLIVIA340 and as outlined below. 7.6.5 Local landscape character

7.6.5.1 Given the very broad scale of National Character Areas, more detailed landscape character assessments are needed in order to ascertain the localised landscape character of the Study Area, and these are typically undertaken by Local Authorities. 7.6.5.2 The local landscape character of the Study Area has been previously described in West Sussex County Council’s Landscape Assessment of West Sussex, 200341 and in the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment, 201142. The following Local Character Area descriptions are based on the West Sussex assessment as this covered the full extent of the Study Area. However, the character area descriptions have been updated with reference to information contained in the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment and further refined to focus on the type of development being proposed. 7.6.5.3 Sensitivity, determined through the establishment of landscape value and ability to accommodate change of the type proposed is defined in Table 7-3. 7.6.5.4 Figure 7-2 shows the location of the National and Local Landscape Character Areas. Figure references within the character area descriptions below relate to photographs which illustrate views from within the character areas.

Landscape Character Area 1 - Western Downs43 7.6.5.5 The Western Downs is an extensive area of rolling chalk upland forming part of the wider SDNP, which stretches westwards from the low lying Arun Valley. It is defined to the north by a steep, mostly wooded, escarpment which

40 40 Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Routledge [paragraph 5.14] 41 https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/land-waste-and-housing/landscape-and-environment/landscape- character-assessment-of-west-sussex/ 42 Land Use Consultants, South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment (Updated) 2011. Available at: https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ILCA-Technical- Document.pdf [Accessed May 2019] 43 The relevant character areas within the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 20118 are B1: Goodwood to Arundel Wooded Estate Downland and Q1: South Downs Upper Coastal Plain.

Page 7-29 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

descends from approximately 200m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD) towards the coastal plain in the south. A combination of extensive areas of woodland and wooded estates accounts for the majority of land cover on the ridges, plateaus and valleys that form this intricate landscape. 7.6.5.6 The area is sparsely settled with a limited road network, leaving large expanses of the landscape intact which greatly contributes to the sense of continuity within the landscape throughout this area. The landscape is however widely accessible along the extensive network of public rights of way, including several long distance National Trails, which lace the countryside and provide extensive recreational opportunities. With the exception of areas of higher open ground, such as Bignor Hill, where broader regional views exist, the combination of woodlands and the rolling landscape encloses views and generally limits awareness of the wider area. This, together with the limited development, provides a sense of both remoteness and seclusion across a vast area, and is one of the special qualities of the area and the wider National Park. 7.6.5.7 This landscape holds evidence of the long history of human settlement in the area. These features include ancient monuments such as burial sites, hill forts and roman roads to post medieval windmills, remnant field structures of estate farmland, and historic estate parklands and designed landscapes established in the 18th century. Arundel Park forms the eastern extents of the area, a designated and extensive example of the former parkland extending north from Arundel Castle. 7.6.5.8 This is a remote, tranquil and rich landscape and is an important national resource that contributes to the wider SDNP. It is considered to be a landscape of very attractive quality and national importance, suggesting the highest value. The mix of woodlands and rolling landscape to enclose views contrasts with occasional open areas with long reaching views and results in a landscape with a low capacity to accommodate change; as a result, sensitivity to change in relation to the type of development proposed is considered to be high. Landscape Character Area 2 - Fontwell Upper Coastal Plain 7.6.5.9 The Fontwell Upper Coastal Plain lies between Fontwell and Arundel and is part of broader tract of undulating farmland forming a transition between the coastal plain and the South Downs that extends westwards beyond . The relevant character areas within the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 2018 are B1: Goodwood to Arundel Wooded Estate Downland and Q1: South Downs Upper Coastal Plain. The

Page 7-30 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

landscape has a settled rural character to the west around the settlements of and Fontwell where the landscape is fragmented by urban development and a more developed road network, including the A27 which runs east to west through this landscape. To the east of Yapton Lane however a combination of extensive ancient woodland, historic parkland and intact farmland extends to the edge of the Arun floodplain creating a distinctly more rural and wooded landscape (see Figure 7-17). 7.6.5.10 The extensive woodland, formed primarily by Paine’s Wood, Binsted Wood and Tortington Common, is a major element within this character area which connects with the wider woodland structure in the South Downs in the north (see Figures 7-19 and 7-25). These woods are crossed by public rights of way and small lanes, which creates a sense of separation and remoteness. The A27 forms the boundary in the north, but despite being a busy arterial route, the road is frequently visually contained by the surrounding woodland and roadside vegetation which limits its influence within this character area. However, it remains a detracting visual and audible element as well as being a barrier to movement for users of the many rights of way connecting with the wider landscape. 7.6.5.11 To the south of the woodlands is an established landscape formed of settled farmland that surrounds the small dispersed village of Binsted. This is an attractive rural area which has retained a tranquil and untouched character, despite some modern influences in the form of commercial glasshouses. Binsted Valley, to the east of Binsted Lane, forms a distinctive but discrete topographical feature within the undulating landform. It begins as a narrow wooded rife, a deep drainage line, in the north which broadens out as it approaches the coastal plain in the south. The former estate of Binsted Park is a contained and intimate landscape largely surrounded by mature woodland which, predominantly to the north, is ancient woodland (see Figure 7-18). This secluded area of historic parkland to the south of the extensive woodlands forms part of the southern boundary of the South Downs National Park, and together with the village of Binsted maintains a rural transition to the national park. 7.6.5.12 This is a diverse landscape formed of largely extensive woodland and intimate rural farmland in the east combined with a settled and increasingly developed landscape to the west. It is considered to be a landscape of good quality and high value. Whilst there is extensive woodland cover, the more open areas have, in part, some far-reaching views with considerable inter- visibility with the downland to the north. The extensive woodland cover, where not directly affected by the Scheme options, contrasts with the more open

Page 7-31 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

areas in its capacity to potentially screen inter-visibility. This, in combination with the more developed character of the landscape to the west, suggests a moderate sensitivity to change in relation to the type of proposed development. Landscape Character Area 3 - Chichester To Yapton Coastal Plain 7.6.5.13 The Chichester to Yapton Coastal Plain occupies the south-west of the Study Area from the settlements of Eastergate and Barnham in the west to the Lower Arun Valley floodplain in the east. It is a low lying and flat landscape formed of arable farmland surrounding small settlements and interspersed with isolated farm holdings on a broad framework of lanes. 7.6.5.14 Development at the fringes of the settlements in the Study Area are eroding the definition between the villages that are spread irregularly across the arable farmland. Industrial estates, commercial horticulture, and glasshouses are a common element in the landscape and have created broad tracts of urbanisation across the coastal plain. Large open arable fields, in contrast, occupy the landscape between the settlements creating intermittent abrupt transitions between the built and rural aspects of this character area. 7.6.5.15 Vegetation in this landscape is relatively sparse. Short sections of hedgerow and small blocks of scattered woodland lend a sense of openness across the landscape. As such landmarks like church spires and woodlands in the wider area are prominent visual features. There are also views towards Arundel and the wider South Downs. North of the railway line, running east to west, the vegetated field structure becomes more enclosed and smaller scale as the topography begins to become more varied approaching the upper coastal plain near Binsted. The broadening landform of Binsted Valley forms a linear feature running north to south towards the line of the railway, where it opens up and supports a network of small fields of rough grassland and pasture that introduces a distinct change from the prevailing topography and field patterns. 7.6.5.16 This is a settled rural landscape that has been influenced by both agricultural and urban expansion but still retains large areas of coastal plain farmland. It is considered to be a landscape of ordinary quality and medium value. There is frequent inter-visibility with the downland to the north which, combined with the open characteristics, would suggest a medium capacity to accommodate change. Sensitivity to change in relation to the type of development proposed is therefore considered to be moderate.

Page 7-32 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Landscape Character Area 4 - Lower Arun Valley 7.6.5.17 The Lower Arun Valley is formed of an extensive stretch of drained floodplain surrounding the meandering from the edge of the Chalk Downs at Arundel in the north to the south coast. The relevant character area within the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 201144 is F4: Arun and Lower Rother Floodplains. It is a distinctive open and undeveloped landscape which is framed and emphasised by the surrounding settled farmland and rising South Downs to the north. 7.6.5.18 The River Arun and its raised flood defences are flanked by flat and open fields defined by an intricate network of drainage ditches (innings), which can date from the medieval period, and low broken lines of vegetation with very little breaking the continuity of this landscape (see Figure 7-61). The fields are a mix of meadows, pasture and arable farming, creating a mosaic of field patterns some of which have persisted as a landscape feature since the medieval period. Where fields are under arable production they tend to have been enlarged and introduce larger scale elements into the pattern, particularly in the south, while still maintaining the sense of openness. 7.6.5.19 Within this open landscape the engineered and raised banks of the River Arun form a sinuous linear feature around which the mosaic of field patterns is arranged. In contrast, the straight lines of railway embankments cut across the floodplain introduce visually prominent and regular movement within the otherwise simple and largely static landscape (see Figure 7-59). The A27 also crosses this landscape to the north on the edge of the river valley with Arundel, where it briefly skirts the south of Arundel on low embankment (see Figure 7-53). 7.6.5.20 There is a sense of separation from the surrounding landscapes that is created by the expanse of floodplain, and a feeling of relative isolation that is amplified by the long-range views across the area. Of particular importance are the views in a northerly direction from many positions across the floodplain, taking in the dramatic silhouettes of Arundel Castle and , which rise imposingly from the edge of the South Downs forming an iconic view. Views to the south, from relatively elevated positions on the edges of the valley, can extend as far as the coast in largely uninterrupted views (see Figure 7-56).

44South Downs National Park Authority, South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment (2011). Available at: https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/planning- advice/landscape/ [accessed March 2019]

Page 7-33 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.6.5.21 This is a unique landscape relatively free of development that is important to the setting of both Arundel and the SDNP to the north. It is considered to be a landscape of good quality and high value as a result of this unique relationship with the downland to the north. The absence of significant vegetation, the important views with Arundel and the South Downs results in a landscape with a low capacity to accommodate change. Sensitivity to change in relation to the type of development proposed is therefore considered to be high. Landscape Character Area 5 - Arundel 7.6.5.22 Arundel is a small town alongside the River Arun at the edge of the South Downs that dates back to the 11th century. The town is divided by the A27 road corridor which passes over the River Arun running east to west. The old town is situated to the north rising up from the river’s edge, while the newer areas are located on the south side, to the west of the River Arun, alongside the floodplain. The relevant character area within the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 201145 is G4: Arun Valley Sides. 7.6.5.23 The old town is designated as a Conservation Area and is a cohesive mix of distinctive styles of architecture reflecting the different periods throughout the history of the town. It has numerous Listed Buildings which include the impressive and dominating medieval Arundel Castle and its grounds and the gothic Arundel Cathedral. Both buildings are located in prominent elevated positions and form imposing and impressive landmarks in views from across the wider landscape (see Figure 7-46). Arundel town itself is an attractive and compact town arranged along tight and occasionally steep streets on the hillside leading down from the castle to the River Arun floodplain (see Figure 7-49). The town is a vibrant mix of terraced shops, art galleries, restaurants and residential properties which is popular with tourists and visitors to the SDNP. From the higher parts of the town, particularly from the castle and from along London Road and Maltravers Street, views can be gained across the open floodplain to the south which reinforces the commanding strategic location of the town and adds to the sense of place. 7.6.5.24 The newer areas of Arundel south of the A27 date from the 19th century and are largely comprised of semi-detached two storey residential properties. This residential expansion is mainly contained between Ford Road and the A27 and extends westwards on the rising landform towards the large expanse of woodland which flanks Arundel (see Figure 7-58). There are also small

45South Downs National Park Authority, South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 2011 https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/planning-advice/landscape/

Page 7-34 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

strips of residential development flanking either side of the River Arun and extending into the floodplain. This part of the town features a more spacious layout than that of the old town, where the large gardens and broader streets lend a distinct suburban quality to this part of town. 7.6.5.25 This townscape is valued for its historic features and its contribution to the setting of the wider landscape where it forms a distinctive landmark in views from the south and north within the SDNP. It is considered to be a townscape of very attractive quality and high value, and the area’s capacity to accommodate change is relatively low. Sensitivity to change in relation to the type of development proposed is therefore considered to be high. Landscape Character Area 6 – Downland Arun Valley 7.6.5.26 The Downland Arun Valley is a wide and flat valley containing the meandering River Arun between Amberley in the north and Arundel in the south, refer to Figure 7-65. The relevant character areas within the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 201146 are F4: Arun and Lower Rother Floodplains and G4: Arun Valley Sides. The valley has an open character formed by pasture across the broad floodplain with arable farmland on the gently rising sides. Steeper sections of the rising chalkland are wooded, at times forming sinuous linear belts of woodland. The open nature of this character area allows for views towards the uplands and along the valley where the prominent Arundel Castle forms an imposing feature in the south, marking the transition to the coastal plain. 7.6.5.27 The valley floor contains a level, simple landscape of reclaimed meadows and pasture, defined by a network of open ditches surrounding the River Arun, which can date from the medieval period. The largely undeveloped landscape reflects the historic land use which has persisted since the medieval era. In the north, these ditches have little vegetation associated with them, while to the south the ditches are frequently lined by vegetation which visually indicates the geometric field pattern. The river itself is a major, but relatively discreet, feature winding through the fields with open but engineered banks. Old meanders of the river however support wooded riparian habitats which introduces some greater vegetation structure to the open valley floor. Located to the south-west between the steeply rising Offham Hanger woods at the edge of Arundel Park and the River Arun is Arundel Wetland Centre47 - a flooded landscape that supports a rich habitat

46South Downs National Park Authority, South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 2011 https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/planning-advice/landscape/ 47 One of nine wildfowl and wetland nature reserves managed by the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust

Page 7-35 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

and provides a shift away from the prevailing pastoral land use on the valley floor. 7.6.5.28 The separate settlements of North and South Stoke are modest hamlets located on small spurs of the downlands approaching the valley floor. A broad rural network of lanes connects these and the other small hamlets around the valley edges. Despite the rural setting there are more modern influences on the landscape. The railway line between Amberley and Arundel runs north to south across the valley floor on embankment in the level and open landscape and introduces prominent movement along the otherwise tranquil setting. The railway has also modified the meanders of the River Arun where it has severed the rivers bends, requiring some engineered diversions to the watercourse. 7.6.5.29 This is a simple and uniform landscape contained within the surrounding and rising South Downs and is relatively free of intrusive development. It is considered to be a landscape of very attractive quality and high value; the inter-visibility with Arundel and the downland to the north and low levels of significant woodland cover results in a landscape with a low capacity to accommodate change. Sensitivity to change in relation to the type of development proposed is therefore considered to be high. Landscape Character Area 7 - Central Downs 7.6.5.30 The Central Downs is a broad tract of rolling chalkland hills stretching between the Arun Valley in the west and the Adur Valley in the east. The relevant character area within the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 201148 is A3: Arun to Adur Open Downs. The northern extents are defined by a distinct steep escarpment affording far reaching elevated views to the north. The broad dip slope descends much more gently towards the south with views across the falling farmland towards the coastal plain and the coast (refer to Figure 7-67). It is a remote and elevated landscape which creates a sense of separation from populated urban areas, reinforced by the availability of far reaching, panoramic views. 7.6.5.31 This sense of isolation is created by the lack of development, the dispersed farm holdings, and the broad expanses of open arable farmland. Furthermore, the limited road network throughout the area restricts intrusive elements such as traffic and lighting, which are, with the exception of the A24, visible as distant and separate aspects of the wider landscape, particularly in

48South Downs National Park Authority, South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 2011 https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/planning-advice/landscape/

Page 7-36 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

the west of the area. Access is limited to the extensive network of public rights of way which provide coverage across this landscape and frequent links to the South Downs Way National Trail which follows the top of the escarpment in the north (see Figure 7-68). 7.6.5.32 Field patterns are generally large and rectilinear and defined by low managed hedges. Woodland cover is sparse and generally limited to narrow belts which further the sense of openness in the west, but woodland cover increases to the east. Steeper areas of the rolling downlands support chalk grassland, which provide some variation within the cohesive rural landscape. Dotted throughout the landscape are numerous historic features reflecting the long association with human settlement, from ancient earthworks and tumuli to windmills. 7.6.5.33 This is a spectacular and popular landscape within the SDNP, valued for the available sense of remoteness and tranquillity, but is susceptible to influences within and beyond its boundaries. The open characteristics, far reaching views including important views with the Arun valley to the south, and lack of significant woodland cover, results in a landscape with a low capacity to accommodate change. As a result, sensitivity to change in relation to the type of development proposed is considered to be high. Landscape Character Area 8 - Park 7.6.5.34 Angmering Park lies between the Arun Valley in the west and in the east and the urban edge of . The relevant character area within the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 201149 is B4: Angmering and Clapham Wooded Estate Downland. The area is composed of wooded chalk uplands and enclosed valleys with a steep and wooded escarpment forming the northern boundary which leads gently southwards towards the coastal plain. 7.6.5.35 The landscape here is sparsely settled arable farmland set around extensive woodlands, formed of a combination of both ancient woodland and plantation. On the higher ground and gentler slopes are broad open arable fields and the larger areas of woodland. Whereas in the small valleys a combination of smaller fields and dispersed woodlands, connected by a strong network of hedgerows, creates a more intimate landscape (see Figure 7-64). Historic parklands in the area, particularly Angmering Park, create large cohesive areas of well managed and secluded rural estates typical of the broader landscape.

49 https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/planning-advice/landscape/

Page 7-37 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.6.5.36 Settlement in general is limited with the small traditional flint villages of and Clapham and the scattered isolated properties forming the extent of built development in the area. The A280 divides the two villages and links with the A27 just to the south of the character area, with the remaining broad network of rural lanes connecting the dispersed properties. A network of public rights of way, including the long-distance Monarch’s Way - a 625 mile footpath from Worcester to Brighton which travels through Arundel north- west towards Findon - provides access throughout the landscape where a strong sense of isolation and remoteness exists due to the enclosure by landform and woodland and limited settlement. 7.6.5.37 The combination of limited settlement and the sense of isolation, enclosure and separation from the wider urban influences creates a distinct landscape within the SDNP. It is considered to be a landscape of very attractive quality and high value. Whilst there is extensive woodland coverage, the inter- visibility with the upper downland and coastal plain results in a landscape that has a low capacity to accommodate change. Sensitivity to change in relation to the type of development proposed is therefore considered to be high. Landscape Character Area 9 - Angmering Upper Coastal Plain 7.6.5.38 The Angmering Upper Coastal Plain is a narrow character area, located to the east of Arundel. It is formed of enclosed and undeveloped farmland extending eastwards from Crossbush towards Worthing and is divided by the A27 corridor running east to west. The relevant character area within the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 201150 is B4: Angmering and Clapham Wooded Estate Downland. The upper coastal plain landscape provides a transition between the level landscapes of the lower coastal plain to the south and the rising South Downs landscape to the north. 7.6.5.39 The landscape has a wooded and rural character, with a broad network of local lanes leaving large areas of intact farmland and woodland, much of which is ancient woodland. A well-defined rural landscape exists, particularly north of the A27, due to the medium sized fields with a strong network of hedges and hedgerows that connect with the wider woodland structure. South of the A27, the fields are typically larger with distinctly less woodland cover, which creates a more open rural character, particularly as the landscape becomes flatter towards the lower coastal plain. The A27 cuts across this landscape, creating a discordant element that

50 South Downs National Park Authority, South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment 2011https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/planning-advice/landscape/

Page 7-38 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

introduces frequently disruptive traffic movement and is out of scale in this otherwise rural landscape. 7.6.5.40 Settlement within the area is typically sparse with small dispersed villages and isolated properties along the rural lanes. Larger properties also exist including extensive farm holdings, estates and institutional properties with formal gardens and parkland. There is a broad network of rights of way that link the scattered settlements and provide access to the woodlands and wider countryside. Highdown Hill in the south east of the area provides a popular recreation destination, containing historic gardens and features and providing elevated views across the South Downs and coastal plain (see Figure 7-63). 7.6.5.41 This landscape with its well managed wooded farmland and sparse settlement retains a rural character, despite the presence of the A27. It is considered to be a landscape of very attractive quality and high value. There is an extensive network of hedgerows and woodland coverage along with some higher landform resulting in inter-visibility with the upper downland and associated coastal plain. Whilst this results in a landscape that has a low capacity to accommodate change overall, sensitivity to change in relation to the type of development proposed (for all Scheme options in this LCA) is considered to be moderate, as impacts would be limited to the self-contained area bordering The Lower Arun Valley (LCA4). Landscape Character Area 10 - Littlehampton And Worthing Fringes 7.6.5.42 The Littlehampton and Worthing Fringes are comprised of a dispersed set of landscapes on the coastal plain separating the sprawling urban development along the coastline between Littlehampton and Worthing. Within the Study Area this consists of the urban fringe landscape to the north of Littlehampton and between Lyminster and Angmering. 7.6.5.43 This area is formed of an open low-lying stretch of drained large scale arable farmland, field boundaries are typically defined by open drainage ditches with low scrubby vegetation emphasising the open landscape. The more substantial drainage lines support a narrow linear vegetation pattern across this landscape, while the limited network of lanes and the settings of villages, including Poling and Lyminster, introduce a noticeable increase in tree cover. The open nature of the landscape affords views to the South Downs to the north from open areas, however the tree-lined lanes and villages generally restrict open views. 7.6.5.44 This is a simple and unremarkable rural landscape that is influenced by nearby urban fringe pressures and commercial development. It is considered to be a landscape of ordinary quality and medium value, providing valued

Page 7-39 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

green space between settlements. As a result, the landscape is considered to have a medium capacity to accommodate change. Sensitivity to change in relation to the type of development proposed is therefore considered to be moderate. 7.6.6 Baseline visual amenity

7.6.6.1 The visual amenity of the Study Area is varied, with broad expansive views to the south coast and coastal plain afforded from the higher reaches of the South Downs, to enclosed views within the wooded downs to the west. The contrast of views experienced is reflected in the representative views identified within this assessment. Zone of Visual Influence: overview 7.6.6.2 The ZVIs for this assessment are discussed below and have been defined with the available detail at this stage. Refer to Figures 7-3 to 7-8 for the ZVI of each Scheme option. Option 1V5 7.6.6.3 Option 1V5 between its western extent and its approach to the existing junction with the A284 in Arundel, would be visible on the rising open landform north of the existing A27. Potential views from this location would be limited by the hill crest and enveloping woodlands of Rewell Wood and Screen Wood. The extensive woodland of Paine’s Wood to the south of the existing A27 would contain views in a southerly direction. Option 1V5 may be visible from residential properties on Jarvis Road and Canada Road to the south of the existing A27 where the alignment would remove existing screening elements and open further views and awareness of the existing road corridor. To the north of the A27, the adjacent woodland and rising topography would contain Option1V5 and limit views from the north. 7.6.6.4 Within Arundel itself, Option 1V5 may be visible in a range of views, including open, direct and partial views from properties in the old town, including views from Arundel Castle, which is set on the rising scarp slope. Views would range from open direct views to, and partial views from, residential properties surrounding the existing junction with Ford Road and Maltravers Street. However, the built form of the highway, combined with the gently rising topography, would begin to limit views to the south. 7.6.6.5 As Option 1V5 diverts from the existing A27 alignment and crosses the open floodplain on embankment, it may become visible from properties on the southern edge of Arundel and from some on higher ground within the town

Page 7-40 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

itself. Views from Arundel to the south across the open expanse of the floodplain would be possible but views would be limited in the south-west by the extensive woodlands of Tortington Common, Binsted Woods and the treed farmland around Tortington Lane. Distant views here would begin to be obscured by intervening features such as roadside vegetation, blocks of woodland and built form. To the south of Option 1V5, direct views across the Arun floodplain would extend to the railway corridor, between Ford and Wick. Potential views beyond this raised feature may be possible from elevated properties, however, the flat coastal plain landscape in combination with existing built form and landscape features would limit the potential extent of these views. 7.6.6.6 West of Arundel, views of Option 1V5 would extend to the north and to the existing A27 corridor which would screen or filter views from the low-lying floodplain of the Upper Arun Valley beyond. However, there may be distant views possible from several points across the rising South Downs, extending as far as the northern escarpment, identified by Amberley Mount at its western extent. Views from the north-east would be limited by Wepham Wood and the network of smaller woodlands and copses that extend down the slope to the existing A27 corridor at Crossbush. Option 1V9 7.6.6.7 Option 1V9 would result in a very similar ZVI as Option 1V5, although this at- grade Scheme option would result in marginally lower visibility to the east and north-west than Option 1V5. The almost identical alignment with Option 1V5 would therefore result in a similar level of visibility as outlined for Option 1V5 above. Option 3V1 7.6.6.8 At the western end of Option 3V1, the new western tie-in junction and the alignment heading southwards through the extensive woodland, may be visible from the rising open landform north of the existing A27. Potential views from this location would be limited by the hill crest and the enveloping woodlands of Rewell Wood and Screens Wood. As Option 3V1 passes through the woodlands to the south of the A27 it would be contained to the immediate surrounds, where potential views would quickly recede within the dense woodland. As Option 3V1 exits to the south of these woodlands in cutting, passing through the rural treed farmland south of Binsted Woods, the potential for views from Binsted Lane and associated properties to the west would begin to be obscured by intervening landscape features, such as existing vegetation, blocks of woodland and land form.

Page 7-41 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.6.6.9 As Option 3V1 crosses the floodplain on embankment the potential for views would extend across a large area in all directions due to the exposed nature of the open floodplain. Direct views from Option 3V1 to the south may extend to the railway corridor between Ford and Wick, views beyond the railway corridor towards Littlehampton may be possible, however the level coastal plain landscape in combination with existing built form and landscape features would limit potential views further south. 7.6.6.10 To the north, Option 3V1 may be visible from properties on the edges of Arundel and from areas and properties on higher ground within the town, including from Arundel Castle. The existing A27 corridor and associated planting would screen or filter views from the low-lying floodplain of the Upper Arun Valley further to the north, however there would be frequent distant and open views possible from across the rising South Downs, extending as far as the northern escarpment and Amberley Mount. 7.6.6.11 Wider views from the north-east would be limited by Wepham Wood and the connected woodlands leading down to the existing A27 corridor. There may be limited partial and distant views west from Highdown Hill in the east. Option 4/5AV1 7.6.6.12 At the western end of Option 4/5AV1, the new western tie-in junction and the alignment heading southwards would cross the northern extent of the existing Avisford Park golf course and pass alongside Little Dane’s Wood and Hundredhouse Copse. It may be visible from the rising open landform north of the existing A27, although potential views from this location would be limited by the hill crest and the nearby woodlands of Rewell Wood and Madehurst Wood. 7.6.6.13 As the Scheme option heads south-east, on viaduct at this location, the corridor would be set above the line of view, greatly increasing visual awareness of the corridor particularly for those properties along Hedger’s Hill and adjacent sections of Yapton Lane and Binsted Lane. The Scheme option may be visible across the falling ground to the south, although local variations in land form and the built form of Walberton would assist in screening the structure from further south. 7.6.6.14 As the Scheme option heads south-east, the viaduct reduces to an at-grade or in cutting alignment as it follows Binsted Lane, passing beneath the eastern section of Binsted Lane and Tortington Lane. The corridor would be partially set below the line of view, which would reduce visual awareness of the corridor. As Option 4/5AV1 returns to grade and transitions to embankment east of Tortington Lane, the potential for views extending to the

Page 7-42 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

west and south towards the B3213, and scattered property along its length, would increase with potential for partial views of the corridor up to Tye Lane, to the north-west, and the railway corridor to the south. 7.6.6.15 As Option 4/5AV1 continues east past the rural treed farmland around Binsted Park on embankment, returning to cutting approaching the eastern section of Binsted Lane and beneath Tortington Lane, potential views of the Scheme from the west would begin to be obscured by intervening features such as existing vegetation, blocks of woodland and land form within the rural farmland. Views to the north would be constrained by the southern edge of Binsted Woods and Tortington Common, whilst views south would be filtered by layers of vegetation within the landscape. 7.6.6.16 East of Ford Road, Option 4/5AV1 shares its alignment with Option 3V1 as it crosses the River Arun floodplain. Views would reflect those outlined above (see Paragraphs 7.6.6.8 - 7.6.6.11). Option 4/5AV2 7.6.6.17 At the western end of Option 4/5AV2, the new western tie-in junction with the existing A27, would be set within woodland preventing views from the north. Awareness of the new junction may be possible to the west as far as Tye Lane. As the Scheme option heads south-east largely at grade, it would cross through Little Danes Wood, Hundredhouse Copse and Barn’s Copse, causing tree loss, allowing trees to contain the road visually from the wider setting. 7.6.6.18 Option 4/5AV2 continues largely at grade or in cutting though open fields alongside Binsted Woods, before passing on viaduct across the valley streams of The Shaw. The wooded landscape and gently undulating landform would strongly filter views to the north, although filtered views to the south towards the B3213 and railway corridor might occur. 7.6.6.19 As Option 4/5AV2 continues east past the rural treed farmland around Binsted Park it returns to cutting beneath the eastern section of Binsted Lane and beneath Tortington Lane. Potential views of the Scheme from the west would begin to be obscured by intervening features such as existing vegetation, blocks of woodland and land form within the rural farmland. Views to the north would be constrained by the southern edge of Binsted Woods and Tortington Common, whilst views south would be filtered by layers of vegetation within the landscape.

Page 7-43 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.6.6.20 East of Ford Road, Option 4/5AV2 shares its alignment with Option 3V1 as it crosses the River Arun floodplain. Views would reflect those outlined above (see Paragraphs 7.6.6.8 - 7.6.6.11). Option 5BV1 7.6.6.21 At the western end of Option 5BV1, the new western tie-in junction with the existing A27, may be visible to the immediate north and south, albeit partially screened by intervening vegetation. The local topography and pockets of woodland such as Potwell Copse would serve to filter longer views south and west of Walberton. As the Scheme option heads south-east at grade and in cutting through the existing golf course and beneath Yapton Lane, the corridor would be set below the line of view, which would reduce visual awareness of it. 7.6.6.22 As Option 5BV1 returns to grade and transitions to embankment east of Yapton Lane, views would remain foreshortened by its location within an existing stream valley. Visibility is channelled along the stream valley but also extends out in filtered views across a wider expanse as far as the railway embankment to the south and Barnham Lane to the west. 7.6.6.23 East of the western extent of Binsted Lane, Option 5BV1 shares its alignment with Option 4/5AV1 as it passes beneath the eastern extent of Binsted Lane below Binsted Park. Views from this point eastwards would reflect those outlined above for Option 4/5AV1. 7.6.7 Visual receptors and viewpoints

Visual receptors within the Study Area 7.6.7.1 The small settlements of Binsted, Walberton and Tortington are located within the Study Area to the south of the existing A27 corridor, with the town of Arundel located to the north. There are potentially views from visitors, recreational users and numerous residential properties within all of the above settlements, as well as scattered throughout the rural landscape. 7.6.7.2 A large number of visitor attractions and publicly accessible, culturally important landscape features are present in the Study Area, particularly in relation to national footpaths, trails and the presence of the SDNP as a tourist destination area. Private receptors are also located across the Study Area and include private properties, businesses and land owners. 7.6.7.3 Following the desk-based review and site visits, the visual receptors likely to experience significant changes to their view or visual amenity as a result of the Scheme are identified and those considered likely to experience

Page 7-44 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

significant changes to views, based on professional judgement, review of the ZVIs and site visits, are outlined below. Their anticipated sensitivity to change of the type of development proposed are also identified, based on professional judgement, review of the ZVIs and site visits and in accordance with Table 7-3. 7.6.7.4 Potentially high sensitivity receptors are considered to be: ▪ Visitors to the SDNP ▪ Users of footpaths and bridleways within designated landscapes within the Study Area (such as users of paths within the SDNP including the South Downs Way National Trail) and users of paths with views containing cultural associations (such as views of Arundel Castle from the river by JMW Turner c1824) ▪ Visitors and residents to local settlements including Arundel, Binsted, Walberton and Tortington, in particular:

- Residential receptors adjacent to the existing A27 corridor (particularly Fitzalan Road, Canada Road, Ford Road, The Slipe, Torton Hill Road and Shayna Rose Way (on the edge of Arundel) - Residential receptors along Binsted Lane, Yapton Lane and Hedgers Hill (Binsted) - Residential receptors along Tortington Lane, Ford Road and Priory Lane (Tortington) - Residential receptors on the northern edge of Walberton, including Tye Lane, Copse Lane and Avisford Park Road 7.6.7.5 Potentially medium sensitivity receptors are considered to be: ▪ Users of the roads and lanes within and surrounding the SDNP ▪ Users of the local railway network ▪ Users of surrounding public rights of way in non-designated landscapes ▪ Residents in surrounding distant settlements with views towards the SDNP 7.6.7.6 Potentially low sensitivity receptors were considered to be: ▪ Users of the existing A27 and main highway network ▪ Businesses along the existing A27, such as the large services area at Crossbush.

Page 7-45 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.6.7.7 As outlined in the preliminary discussion of the ZVIs for each Scheme option, there are numerous visual receptors within the Study Area that would not be likely to experience significant changes to views. These include: ▪ Visual receptors to the south and west of Walberton ▪ Visual receptors around Slindon to the north-west of the Scheme ▪ Properties within Lyminster (due to angle of view, intervening vegetation, built form, railway line and local topography) ▪ Visual receptors beyond 2km to the north within the SDNP ▪ Visual receptors within settlements and countryside beyond 2km of the Scheme. Representative viewpoints 7.6.7.8 The viewpoints from where the Scheme would be seen by the different groups of people outlined above, were then identified. In accordance with GLVIA351, such viewpoints are from publicly accessible locations, rather than private property and is the standard approach at PCF Stage 2 (Option Selection). A series of representative viewpoints were therefore identified from publicly accessible locations, in consultation with the South Downs National Park Authority and West Sussex County Council (in consultation with Arun District Council). The viewpoints looked to capture visual receptors of primarily high or medium sensitivity within the list outlined above and from publicly accessible locations. Effects from residential locations adjacent to the viewpoints can be inferred and have been included within the discussion of significance of visual effects in Section 7.9.4. Consideration of specific viewpoints therefore accompanies this discussion. 7.6.7.9 As part of the representative viewpoint selection process, viewpoint analysis considered selected representative viewpoint locations from within the SDNP which were described in a detailed visual appraisal study published by the South Downs National Park Authority entitled ‘View Characterisation and Analysis Study’ (November 2015)52. The purpose of the View Characterisation study53 was to analyse views to, from and within the SDNP to guide future planning and development management decisions by the South Downs National Park Authority and its partner authorities. The identified representative viewpoints have been discussed and agreed in

51 Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment, Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition, Routledge, Section 6.16 – 6.17 52 https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Viewshed-Study-Report.pdf 53 https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Viewshed-Study-Report.pdf

Page 7-46 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

consultation with representatives from the South Downs National Park Authority and West Sussex County Council. 7.6.7.10 The SDNP viewshed locations correlate with the following viewpoints that were agreed in consultation with the South Downs National Park Authority (see Figures 7-9 and 7-10 for viewpoint locations): ▪ Viewpoint 1 is located on Copse Lane near the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 35 ▪ Viewpoint 2 is located on Tye Lane near the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 34 ▪ Viewpoint 5 is located on Yapton Lane near the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 33 ▪ Viewpoint 14 is located on Walberton footpath 350 near the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 31 ▪ Viewpoint 16 is located at the junction of footpath 341 with Binsted Lane, near the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 30 ▪ Viewpoint 19 is located on Binsted Lane, near the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 29 ▪ Viewpoint 28 is located on Arundel footpath 3402, near the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 52 ▪ Viewpoint 33 is located on Tortington Lane, near the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 53 ▪ Viewpoint 43 is located near Arundel Castle from High Street, close to the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 50 ▪ Viewpoint 45 is located next to the River Arun on Monarch's Way near the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 19 ▪ Viewpoint 53 is located at Highdown Hill, Monarch's Way near the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 31 ▪ Viewpoint 58 is located at Amberley Mount, close to the South Downs National Park Authority’s Viewpoint 32. 7.6.7.11 The representative viewpoints, and associated visual receptors selected for this assessment are briefly described below, however Table 7-9 below provides an overview of the visual receptors and their representative viewpoints identified for inclusion within this assessment.

Page 7-47 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-9 - Visual Receptors and their representative viewpoints Receptor Representative Viewpoint Residential, Viewpoint 10: Footpath 341 at south-eastern corner of tourist and Pedler’s Croft recreational Viewpoint 15: Ash Piece Footpath receptors in Viewpoint 20: Binsted Park (Binsted Lane) the SDNP Viewpoint 21: Binsted Lane, adjacent to Binsted Manor Viewpoint 22: Footpath 347 south of the A27, Chichester Road Viewpoint 23: Long Lane Viewpoint 24: Bridleway 338, Old Scotland Lane Viewpoint 25: Binsted Lane, south of Bridleway 338, Tortington Common Viewpoint 26: Binsted Lane, north of junction with footpath 347 Viewpoint 27: Footpath 342, Tortington Common Viewpoint 43: Arundel Castle Viewpoint 44: Byway 3063, Watermeadows Viewpoint 45: Monarch’s Way (footpath 3069) Viewpoint 53: Highdown Hill Viewpoint 54: Warningcamp Hill Viewpoint 55: Bridleway 2241 at Peppering High Barn Viewpoint 56: Wepham Down Viewpoint 57: Springhead Hill Viewpoint 58: Amberley Mount Users of Viewpoint 4: Yapton Lane (looking north) roads and Viewpoint 5: Yapton Lane junction with Hedgers Hill lanes in and Viewpoint 6: Hedgers Hill around the Viewpoint 8: Binsted Lane SDNP Viewpoint 11: Binsted Lane (Church Farm) Viewpoint 12: Binsted Lane (St Mary’s Church, Binsted) Viewpoint 19: Binsted Lane Viewpoint 20: Binsted Park (Binsted Lane) Viewpoint 21: Binsted Lane, adjacent to Binsted Manor Viewpoint 32: Footpath 3403 from Tortington Manor Viewpoint 33: Tortington Lane Viewpoint 34: Tortington Lane Viewpoint 35: Junction of Priory Lane and Ford Road Viewpoint 38: Maxwell Road, Arundel Viewpoint 39: King Street, Arundel Viewpoint 40: Junction of Maltravers Street and King’s Arms Hill Viewpoint 41: Junction of Maltravers Street and Bakers Arms Hill

Page 7-48 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Receptor Representative Viewpoint Viewpoint 42: Junction of Maltravers Street and High Street Viewpoint 44: Byway 3063, Watermeadows Viewpoint 50: Ford Road, north of Ford railway station Visitors to Viewpoint 16A: Junction of footpath 341 with Binsted locations with Lane Cultural Viewpoint 35: Junction of Priory Lane and Ford Road associations Viewpoint 36: Footpath 206, River Arun Viewpoint 37: Footpath 206, south of footpath 207, River Arun looking north Viewpoint 43: Arundel Castle Viewpoint 46: Priory Farm Residential Viewpoint 39: King Street, Arundel receptors adjacent to the existing A27 corridor Residential Viewpoint 4: Yapton Lane (looking north) and Viewpoint 5: Yapton Lane junction with Hedgers Hill recreational Viewpoint 6: Hedgers Hill receptors Viewpoint 7: Bridlepath 338, Old Scotland Lane junction within with Binsted Lane Binsted and Viewpoint 8: Binsted Lane Yapton (both Viewpoint 9: Bridlepath 338, Old Scotland Lane, east of within and Binsted Lane junction outside the Viewpoint 10: Footpath 341 at south-eastern corner of SDNP) Pedler’s Croft Viewpoint 11: Binsted Lane (Church Farm) Viewpoint 12: Binsted Lane (St Mary’s Church, Binsted, looking east) Viewpoint 13: Binsted Lane (St Mary’s Church, Binsted, looking west) Viewpoint 14: Walberton footpath 350, west of St Mary’s Church, Binsted Viewpoint 15: Ash Piece Footpath Viewpoint 16: Junction of footpath 341 with Binsted Lane Viewpoint 17: Junction of footpath 354 and Binsted Lane Viewpoint 18: Footpath 355 in field south of Oakley Cottages Viewpoint 19: Binsted Lane Viewpoint 20: Binsted Park (Binsted Lane) Viewpoint 21: Binsted Lane, adjacent to Binsted Manor

Page 7-49 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Receptor Representative Viewpoint Viewpoint 29: Footpath 361 at footbridge over stream Residential Viewpoint 30: Footpath 361 in field north of reservoir and Viewpoint 31: Junction of Tortington Manor with Ford recreational Road receptors Viewpoint 32: Footpath 3403 from Tortington Manor within Viewpoint 33: Tortington Lane Tortington (outside the SDNP) Residential Viewpoint 1: Copse Lane, Walberton and Viewpoint 2: Tye Lane, Walberton recreational Viewpoint 3: Walberton footpath 333, Avisford Park receptors on Road the northern edge of Walberton (outside the SDNP) Users of the Viewpoint 48: Arun Valley Railway local railway Viewpoint 51: Arundel Junction Railway network Users of Viewpoint 28: Arundel footpath 3402 surrounding Viewpoint 47: Footpath 2207, Lyminster, looking north public rights Viewpoint 49: Footpath 2207, Lyminster of way in non- designated landscapes Residents in Viewpoint 52: Benjamin Gray Drive, Littlehampton surrounding distant settlements

7.6.7.12 More detailed descriptions of these representative viewpoints are provided in Appendix 7-2 (but will, as part of PCF Stage 3 (Preliminary Design), be assessed in greater detail). Figures 7-9 and 7-10 provide the locations of the viewpoints and Figures 7-11 to 7-68 provide photographs of the views available from each viewpoint. For guidance on the associated sensitivity represented by the viewpoint, refer to Table 7-3. Viewpoints primarily represent a single receptor type (such as users of a public footpath) however views from private receptors (such as properties) can be inferred.

Page 7-50 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Viewpoint 1: Copse Lane, Walberton (see Figure 7-11) 7.6.7.13 Viewpoint 1 represents the peri-urban view from a footpath on the edge of Walberton looking north across agricultural fields towards the A27. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 2: Tye Lane, Walberton (see Figure 7-12) 7.6.7.14 Viewpoint 2 shows the view looking north along the rising incline of Tye Lane, which is enclosed by a dense hedgerow and dense garden boundary vegetation. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 3: Walberton footpath 333, off Avisford Park Road (see Figure 7-13) 7.6.7.15 Viewpoint 3 illustrates the view from a public footpath and properties off Avis Park Road on the edge of Walberton towards Avis Park golf course; a small part of the Avis Park Hotel annex and terraced properties on Manser Road are also visible (foreground excavation is the result of archaeological survey work for a separate potential development Scheme not related to the A27 Bypass). Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 4: Yapton Lane (looking north) (see Figure 7-14) 7.6.7.16 Viewpoint 4 shows a section of Yapton Lane. On the west side of the view, in the foreground, the entrance of a private property, ‘Little Danes’ can be seen, and north of it, the main entrance to The Hilton Avisford Park Hotel is discernible. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 5A: Yapton Lane junction with Hedgers Hill looking north- east (see Figure 7-15A) 7.6.7.17 Viewpoint 5A is from a small grassed traffic island at the junctions of Yapton Lane and Hedgers Hill; the view shows a largely enclosed view with garden boundaries, hedgerows and the rural lane of Hedgers Hill to the right-hand side of the view. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 5B: Yapton Lane junction with Hedgers Hill looking south (see Figure 7-15B) 7.6.7.18 Viewpoint 5B is from a small grassed traffic island at the junction of Yapton Lane and Hedgers Hill. The view is largely enclosed, with tall boundary hedgerows channelling the view along Yapton Lane, edged in the middle distance with pavement, garden frontages and parked cars. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate.

Page 7-51 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Viewpoint 6: Hedgers Hill (see Figure 7-16) 7.6.7.19 Viewpoint 6 shows the rural view from within a dip, which forms the lowest lying point of Hedgers Hill, looking into the shrubs and trees on the edge of Hundredhouse Copse woodland. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 7: Bridlepath 338, Old Scotland Lane junction with Binsted Lane (see Figure 7-17) 7.6.7.20 Viewpoint 7 presents a short distance view along the historic footpath, ‘Old Scotland Lane’ running east from its junction with Binsted Lane to the right of the view, and along Binsted Lane to the left of the view. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 8: Binsted Lane (see Figure 7-18) 7.6.7.21 Viewpoint 8 presents a narrow, enclosed view, south west along Binsted Lane with outgrown hedges and mature trees either side of the road. Gaps in the hedgerow allow glimpsed longer views across enclosed fields. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 9: Bridlepath 338, Old Scotland Lane, east of Binsted Lane junction (see Figure 7-19) 7.6.7.22 Viewpoint 9 shows the mid to longer distance views revealed as the bridleway (Old Scotland Lane) emerges from the woodland at Pedlars Croft and the SDNP. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 10: Footpath 341 at south-eastern corner of Pedler’s Croft (see Figure 7-20) 7.6.7.23 Viewpoint 10 shows the mid to longer distance view revealed as a footpath emerges from Pedlars Croft into the north-west corner of a large field south of Old Scotland Lane. St Mary’s church and properties within Binsted are glimpsed beyond this and the neighbouring field. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 11: Binsted Lane (Church Farm) (see Figure 7-21) 7.6.7.24 Viewpoint 11 presents a view across undulating arable fields with a backdrop of Ash Piece and Binsted Woods, which form the southern extent of the SDNP. Sensitivity is considered to be high.

Page 7-52 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Viewpoint 12: Binsted Lane (St Mary’s Church, Binsted, looking east) (see Figure 7-22) 7.6.7.25 Viewpoint 12 is taken looking north from Binsted Lane outside St Mary’s Church towards the National Park across a midground of open fields. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 13: Binsted Lane (St Mary’s Church, Binsted, looking west) (see Figure 7-23) 7.6.7.26 Viewpoint 13 looks south-westwards from a public footpath adjacent to St Mary’s church. The view looks across a partially wooded stream valley towards a section of Avisford Park golf course. Glimpses of longer distance views along the valley are visible through the trees. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 14: Walberton footpath 350, west of St Mary’s Church, Binsted (see Figure 7-24) 7.6.7.27 Viewpoint 14 is taken from a public footpath from the western side of a stream valley adjacent to a section of Avisford Park golf course. The western end and small tower of St Mary’s church is visible on the low valley ridge. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 15: Ash Piece footpath (see Figure 7-25) 7.6.7.28 Viewpoint 15 presents the view of the rolling landform to the west, with woodland and hedgerows associated with the fringes of Binsted Park. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 16A: Junction of footpath 341 with Binsted Lane, looking north (see Figure 7-26A) 7.6.7.29 Viewpoint 16A takes in the area forming the immediate setting of the National Park and edge of the National Park itself, with the gradual rise in elevation northwards across the landscape evident. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 16B: Junction of footpath 341 with Binsted Lane, looking south-west (see Figure 7-26B) 7.6.7.30 Viewpoint 16B looks across the enclosed Binsted Lane towards a narrow field entrance and agricultural fields. Glimpses of more distant wooded hills are visible through bare tree branches. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate.

Page 7-53 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Viewpoint 17: Junction of footpath 354 and Binsted Lane (see Figure 7-27) 7.6.7.31 Viewpoint 17 shows the view through a broad field entrance alongside a hedgerow towards open, level fields. The eastern section of Binsted Lane runs unseen behind the mid distance field boundary opposite the view, although Meadow Lodge is clearly visible beyond the boundary vegetation. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 18: Footpath 355 in field south of Oakley Cottages (see Figure 7-28) 7.6.7.32 The viewpoint is taken from a footpath in a field adjacent to Binsted Lane with boundary hedgerows and trees partially enclosing the view. The almost continuous band of woodland on the edge of the National Park is partly visible, beyond Oakleys Cottages. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 19: Binsted Lane (see Figure 7-29) 7.6.7.33 Viewpoint 19 extends from the eastern section of Binsted Lane across a large open field to the north. The view looks towards the dense trees and vegetation on the horizon to the north, forming the southern edge of the National Park. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 20: Binsted Park (Binsted Lane) (see Figure 7-30) 7.6.7.34 Viewpoint 20 looks across a large open field containing and bounded by mature trees, associated with the former parkland of Binsted. Binsted Manor is a distinctive modern feature in the view. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 21: Binsted Lane, adjacent to Binsted Manor (see Figure 7- 31) 7.6.7.35 Viewpoint 21 is taken north of the point where Binsted Lane becomes a rough track on the fringe of the former Binsted Park. It is an enclosed, short distance, rural view contained by overgrown hedgerows and mature trees. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 22: Footpath 347 south of the A27, Chichester Road (see Figure 7-32) 7.6.7.36 Viewpoint 22 is from the edge of Paine’s Wood on a public path running north to the A27 and south through ancient woodland. An adjacent open field allows some mid-distance views towards the existing A27, although the remainder of the view is enclosed by trees. Sensitivity is considered to be high.

Page 7-54 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Viewpoint 23: Long Lane (see Figure 7-33) 7.6.7.37 Viewpoint 23 presents the view from the slopes of Rewell Hill with A27 traffic glimpsed on the near-side of extensive woodlands; the view extends to the coast and sea beyond. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 24: Bridleway 338, Old Scotland Lane (see Figure 7-34) 7.6.7.38 Viewpoint 24 presents heavily filtered views contained by dense adjacent woodland. The view is representative of views from the Binsted Woods footpaths and bridleways. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 25: Binsted Lane, south of Bridleway 338, Tortington Common (see Figure 7-35) 7.6.7.39 Viewpoint 25 is of Binsted Lane, which forms a level, single lane surfaced track through dense woodland. The view is channelled along Binsted Lane, with views either side contained by the woodland trees and shrubs. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 26: Binsted Lane, north of junction with footpath 347 (see Figure 7-36) 7.6.7.40 Viewpoint 26 provides a typical view, representative of views experienced by users of Binsted Lane where it is a single lane contained by mature woodland. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 27: Footpath 342, Tortington Common (see Figure 7-37) 7.6.7.41 Viewpoint 27 is representative of views experienced whilst walking the accessible footpaths and bridleways within Binsted Woods and Tortington Common. It is a highly enclosed and tranquil view. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 28: Arundel footpath 3402 (see Figure 7-38) 7.6.7.42 Viewpoint 28 is from a footpath off the western side of Tortington Lane; the right-hand side of the view is slightly foreshortened by the gentle rise of the local terrain with dense woodland of the National Park visible beyond. Longer distance views to the left-hand side of the view are obtained across gently undulating fields. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 29: Footpath 361 at footbridge over stream (see Figure 7-39) 7.6.7.43 Viewpoint 29 represents the view from a footbridge over a culvert showing large fields with a mix of boundaries from post and wire fences to hedgerows with mature trees and woodland beyond on the edge of the National Park. Sensitivity is considered to be high.

Page 7-55 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Viewpoint 30: Footpath 361 in field north of reservoir (see Figure 7-40) 7.6.7.44 Viewpoint 30 is from a footpath crossing a very large field, showing the vast backdrop of woodlands forming the edge of the National Park beyond, although partly hidden by a localised rise in elevation. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 31: Junction of Tortington Manor with Ford Road (see Figure 7-41) 7.6.7.45 Viewpoint 31 presents the view from Ford Road extending a considerable distance; the rising South Downs can be seen on the horizon along with the profiles of Arundel Cathedral and Arundel Castle. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 32: Footpath 3403 from Tortington Manor (see Figure 7-42) 7.6.7.46 Viewpoint 32 represents views overlooking the edge of the River Arun floodplain, with the mature woodlands of Tortington Common to the left of the view (west), Tortington Augustinian Priory boundary vegetation to the centre and The South Downs to the right of the view (east). Arundel Cathedral and Castle are partly visible above The Priory site. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 33: Tortington Lane (see Figure 7-43) 7.6.7.47 Viewpoint 33 is an enclosed view along Tortington Lane, with a gateway with stables beyond to the right of the view and tall boundary vegetation and trees alongside the road to the centre and left of the view. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 34: Tortington Lane (see Figure 7-44) 7.6.7.48 Viewpoint 34 presents views upon leaving Binsted Woods on the boundary of the SDNP, towards the expansive views south to Tortington Manor and Littlehampton and east across the River Arun flood plain towards Tortington Priory. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 35: Junction of Priory Lane and Ford Road (see Figure 7-45) 7.6.7.49 The view looks east across the River Arun flood plain, the embankment of which is visible in the mid distance east of the field gate and south along Ford Road, which is enclosed by a low hedgerow and intermittent trees. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate.

Page 7-56 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Viewpoint 36: Footpath 206, River Arun looking north (see Figure 7-46) 7.6.7.50 Viewpoint 36 presents the expansive views from the banks of the River Arun taking in the breath of landscapes and components that contribute to the setting of Arundel and the SDNP from the open floodplain. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 37A: Footpath 206, south of footpath 207, River Arun looking north (see Figure 7-47A) 7.6.7.51 The view north along the river is towards the distinctive profiles of Arundel Cathedral and Castle perched above the town with the wooded slopes beyond which give way to the distant South Downs stretching along the horizon. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 37B: Footpath 206, south of footpath 207, River Arun looking south (see Figure 7-47B) 7.6.7.52 The view south along the river is across the vast, flat, open expanse of floodplain, stretching towards Littlehampton and the coast in the far distance. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 38: Maxwell Road, Arundel (see Figure 7-48) 7.6.7.53 This framed view extends south-east to the opposite side of the floodplain, affording a focused view of the floodplains with a wooded backdrop, which contrast distinctly with the suburban foreground. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 39: King Street, Arundel (see Figure 7-49) 7.6.7.54 Viewpoint 39 presents views typical of those experienced from within the narrow and steeply sloping streets of Arundel, allowing appreciation of the floodplain in relation to the town’s setting. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 40: Junction of Maltravers Street and King’s Arms Hill (see Figure 7-50) 7.6.7.55 The houses typify the mix of buildings found within the Arundel Conservation Area; post war housing can be seen at the foot of the hill and traffic is discernible moving on the existing A27 bypass beyond a line of mature trees. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 41: Junction of Maltravers Street and Bakers Arms Hill (see Figure 7-51) 7.6.7.56 The tightly framed view looks across the roofscape of the old town extending further south; traffic can be seen on the existing A27 bypass along with its

Page 7-57 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

associated lighting columns and adjacent planting. Beyond, a section of the adjoining floodplain and the base of Crossbush hill, with associated woodland and trees, can be seen. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 42: Junction of Maltravers Street and High Street (see Figure 7-52) 7.6.7.57 The viewpoint is from an elevated position at the junction of High Street and Maltravers street and is framed by the castle wall and a Georgian corner building. South of the town, Crossbush hill, along with traffic on the A27, is visible forming the horizon. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 43: Arundel Castle (see Figure 7-53) 7.6.7.58 Viewpoint 43 is from an elevated position on the castle tower. The vast, panoramic views extend across the compact old town of Arundel in the foreground, the existing A27, partially screened by vegetation, to the fringes of Binsted Wood, the River Arun and Littlehampton and the coast beyond. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 44: Byway 3063, Watermeadows (see Figure 7-54) 7.6.7.59 Viewpoint 44 is taken from a footpath across the water meadows of the River Arun; the tops of a few properties on the southern end of High Street, part of Arundel Castle and Crossbush can be seen in the middle distance of the view. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 45: Monarch’s Way (footpath 3069) (see Figure 7-55) 7.6.7.60 This view is representative of views experienced by users of the local PROW network and looks across the riverside pasture towards the existing A27 which demarcates the southern boundary of the SDNP. The skyline is littered with tall lighting columns interspersed with tree canopies and properties fronting the A27 (including Arunbrook House and Arundel Park hotel). Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 46: Priory Farm (see Figure 7-56) 7.6.7.61 Viewpoint 46 presents views from the transition between the River Arun floodplain and the treed landscape of the floodplain slopes at the edge of the valley. The wide view extends from Crossbush in the east to Tortington in the west. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate.

Page 7-58 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Viewpoint 47: Footpath 2207, Lyminster, looking north (see Figure 7- 57) 7.6.7.62 This view is representative of views experienced by users of the local PROW network and looks across rising ground of a large pasture field backed by mature trees towards the remains of an Augustinian Priory (at Crossbush). Crossbush junction is visible to the right of the view and hills within the South Downs rise up to the left. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 48: Arun Valley Railway (see Figure 7-58) 7.6.7.63 The view is representative of views experienced from the train approaching Arundel from Ford train station. Descending landform is blanketed with extensive woodland, with Arundel on its edge, contrasting with the flat river valley. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 49: Footpath 2207, Lyminster (see Figure 7-59) 7.6.7.64 Viewpoint 49 is located within low lying landform at the edges of the River Arun floodplain, with the railway line embankment forming an interim horizon. Arundel Cathedral and Castle sit before a backdrop of the South Downs in the mid to long distance. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 50: Ford Road, north of Ford railway station (see Figure 7- 60) 7.6.7.65 The partly open, central section of the view gives a long-distance vista across the intervening level landscape of fields towards Arundel and its cathedral at the foot of the Downs. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 51: Arundel Junction Railway (see Figure 7-61) 7.6.7.66 Viewpoint 51 presents transient views north from the Arun Valley railway. It takes in the flat, open landscape which provides uninterrupted views north to the expansive South Downs, including Arundel Castle and Cathedral. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate. Viewpoint 52: Benjamin Gray Drive, Littlehampton (see Figure 7-62) 7.6.7.67 This view represents views along the northern edge of Littlehampton’s residential developments. The River Arun floodplain, fringes of Arundel, including the Cathedral and Castle, and the distant South Downs are visible. Sensitivity is considered to be moderate.

Page 7-59 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Viewpoint 53: Highdown Hill (see Figure 7-63) 7.6.7.68 Viewpoint 53 from Highdown Hill represents the long-range views from the South Downs, looking west in the direction of Arundel. The castle is just discernible in the centre of the view. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 54: Warningcamp Hill (see Figure 7-64) 7.6.7.69 Viewpoint 54 presents an elevated view from a footpath; over the top of a plantation, Arundel Castle, Cathedral and the town can be discerned through gaps in vegetation. A broad sweep of landscape from the foot of the South Downs to Crossbush forms the backdrop. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 55: Bridleway 2241 at Peppering High Barn (see Figure 7-65) 7.6.7.70 Viewpoint 55 is an elevated, panoramic view encompassing the breadth of the Arun Valley and river floodplain, seen from a bridleway on Peppering Lane. In the far distance an extensive stretch of built up coastal strip is visible. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 56: Wepham Down (see Figure 7-66) 7.6.7.71 Viewpoint 56 represents a higher ground view, from the edge of the steep slopes of Perry Hill with the full breadth of the Arun Valley appreciable. Arundel Castle and Cathedral are barely perceptible elements in the centre of the view. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 57: Springhead Hill (see Figure 7-67) 7.6.7.72 Viewpoint 57 represents the view from the South Downs Way and affords extensive views as far as the south coast and Littlehampton; the distinctive and dramatic landforms of the South Downs dominating the view. Sensitivity is considered to be high. Viewpoint 58: Amberley Mount (see Figure 7-68) 7.6.7.73 The view from the South Downs Way provides a broader regional context - beyond the foreground slopes, Arundel is in the centre of the view, where the open River Arun floodplain meets the foot of the South Downs. Sensitivity is considered to be high. 7.6.8 Identified receptors

7.6.8.1 The main receptors identified in the baseline within the Study Area are listed in Table 7-10. The table also shows which Scheme options are relevant to these receptors. Individual receptors are described in detail in the landscape and visual schedules in Appendix 7-1 and 7-2 respectively.

Page 7-60 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-10 - Sensitivity of identified receptors for landscape and visual assessment Receptor Sensitivity Scheme options Landscape Character Area 1: Western High All Downs Landscape Character Area 2: Fontwell Moderate All Upper Coastal Plain Landscape Character Area 3: Chichester Moderate All to Yapton Coastal Plain Landscape Character Area 4: Lower Arun High All Valley Landscape Character Area 5: Arundel High All Landscape Character Area 6: Downland High All Arun Valley Landscape Character Area 7: Central High All Downs Landscape Character Area 8: Angmering High All Park Landscape Character Area 9: Angmering Moderate All Upper Coastal Plain Landscape Character Area 10: Moderate All Littlehampton and Worthing Fringes Users of main paths and trails in the SDNP High Option 1V5 and main residential receptors represented by viewpoints 22, 23, 36 – 45 and 56 – 58 Users of main paths and trails in the SDNP High Option 1V9 and main residential receptors represented by viewpoints 22, 23, 36 – 45 and 56 – 58 Users of main paths and trails in the SDNP High Option 3V1 and main residential receptors represented by viewpoints 22 - 27, 35 – 44 and 53 – 58 Users of main paths and trails in the SDNP High Option and main residential receptors 4/5AV1 represented by viewpoints 3, 9 – 12, 14, 15, 17, 19, 23, 28 – 30, 35 – 44 and 53 – 58

Page 7-61 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Receptor Sensitivity Scheme options Users of main paths and trails in the SDNP High Option and main residential receptors 4/5AV2 represented by viewpoints 7, 9 – 12, 15, 20, 21, 23, 28 – 30, 35 – 44 and 53 – 58, Users of main paths and trails in the SDNP High Option and main residential receptors 5BV1 represented by viewpoints 3, 9 – 12, 14, 17, 18, 19, 23, 28 – 30, 35 – 44 and 53 – 58 Users of scenic transport routes; local Moderate Option 1V5 PRoW network (outside the National Park) and distant edge settlements represented by viewpoints 31, 46 – 49, 51 and 52 Users of scenic transport routes; local Moderate Option 1V9 PRoW network (outside the National Park) and distant edge settlements represented by viewpoints 31, 46 – 49 and 51 Users of scenic transport routes; local Moderate Option 3V1 PRoW network (outside the National Park) and distant edge settlements represented by viewpoints 31, 32, 34 and 46 – 52 Users of scenic transport routes; local Moderate Option PRoW network (outside the National Park) 4/5AV1 and distant edge settlements represented by viewpoints 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 16, 31 – 34 and 46 – 52 Users of scenic transport routes; local Moderate Option PRoW network (outside the National Park) 4/5AV2 and distant edge settlements represented by viewpoints 1, 4, 5, 8, 16, 31 – 34 and 46 – 52 Users of scenic transport routes; local Moderate Option PRoW network (outside the National Park) 5BV1 and distant edge settlements represented by viewpoints 1, 2, 5, 6, 13, 16, 31 – 34 and 46 – 52 7.6.9 Future baseline

7.6.9.1 The Study Area of the Scheme is composed of the SDNP, adjoining deeply rural countryside and open floodplain along with Arundel and other small

Page 7-62 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

settlements. Based on professional judgement, review of committed developments and local policy, a professional judgement has been made on whether there are likely to be changes to the baseline environment by the date of opening (Operation Year 1). 7.6.9.2 There are no identified committed developments or changes to management in the area that will affect the future baseline at the opening year. It is therefore likely that existing trends may continue, including increases in traffic, increase in population putting pressure on recreational areas and settlement expansion (both inside and outside the SDNP) and gradual changes in vegetation and species composition due to pathogens such as ash dieback54. 7.6.9.3 In the absence of the Scheme occurring, both local landscape character and visual amenity within the SDNP are unlikely to be subject to new major changes as its status offers it a high level of protection, although there will still be pressures from expanding population and businesses. The localised, very intrusive effect of traffic levels on the A27 road corridor are also likely to continue for the foreseeable future and the value of the landscape character and visual amenity could deteriorate further if traffic volumes continue to rise. 7.6.9.4 Outside the SDNP, undesignated landscapes are vulnerable to a range of pressures: ▪ The area is potentially under pressure from the residential expansion of settlements. On the southern edge of the Study Area, the larger scale coastal settlements of Littlehampton and Worthing have additional demands for light industrial development and other non-agricultural uses, such as horse grazing and paddocks. ▪ The intensification of agriculture could lead to further tree and hedgerow removals and the increased use of glasshouses and polytunnels in cultivation. ▪ Poor management of existing woodland and parkland on the edges of the SDNP could deteriorate the quality and historic connection of the woodlands through changing boundaries and composition.

54 Ash dieback, also known as Chalara dieback of ash, is a serious disease that is killing ash across Europe. It is likely that ash dieback will spread across the UK such that gaps in woodland and tree lines can be expected to occur where this species is currently present.

Page 7-63 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

▪ The decision by the Environment Agency to cease the maintenance of the existing river Arun flood defences is likely to result in changes to the floodplain, with banks becoming eroded, vegetation growth and periodic inundation of surrounding fields with flood water. The route of the existing public right of way along the bank of the River Arun is likely to become altered or potentially impassable for parts of the year. ▪ The A27 at the Arundel Bypass, particularly around the Ford Road roundabout and at Crossbush, will remain dominated by traffic and existing traffic flow problems could intensify further, resulting in an intensification of negative consequences for the town and its setting. 7.6.9.5 Overall, the future baseline is not anticipated to differ significantly from the current baseline in the immediate future, although current trends are likely to continue.

7.7 Potential impacts

7.7.1.1 This section describes the aspects of the Scheme that may have landscape or visual impacts, and are identified through knowledge of similar schemes and professional judgement. 7.7.1.2 It should be noted that both direct and indirect landscape impacts would occur as a result of the Scheme. Indirect landscape impacts result in perceptual change of the wider landscape from within neighbouring Landscape Characters Areas. Due to inter-visibility between Landscape Character Areas, these effects form an important consideration given the high sensitivity of much of the Study Area. 7.7.2 Construction phase

7.7.2.1 There may be localised landscape impacts from the following construction activities: ▪ The installation of construction compounds ▪ The movement and activity of construction machinery, usually with flashing hazard lights ▪ Views of cranes ▪ New embankments and cuttings (earth works), particularly noticeable because of changes over a short time-scale, and the extent of bare earth visible ▪ Direct loss of landscape features such as trees, woodlands and hedgerows

Page 7-64 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

▪ Temporary spoil heaps and potentially borrow pits and disposal areas ▪ Temporary traffic management ▪ Floodlighting of areas for evening and morning working during the winter. 7.7.2.2 Changes to the landscape are likely to be more noticed by local residents or regular passers-by during the construction phase because of the frequency of viewing of the works. 7.7.2.3 The above impacts are considered during the construction phase on identified landscape and visual receptors, as outlined in the Landscape and Visual Assessment Schedules in Appendix 7-1 and 7-2 respectively.

Table 7-11 - Construction phase potential impacts for landscape and visual receptors Potential Impact Scoped Impact Justification for Scoping Out Change in landscape At this stage in the Not character and perception of assessment, all applicable the landscape within potential impacts landscape character areas 1 mentioned above have to 10 due to construction been scoped in works associated with the Scheme options Change in visual amenity due At this stage in the Not to construction works assessment, all applicable associated with the Scheme potential impacts options mentioned above have been scoped in 7.7.3 Operational phase

7.7.3.1 The Scheme may permanently affect the landscape in a number of ways, including: ▪ Introducing a large linear feature, with associated structures, into a rural area ▪ Direct loss of landscape features such as trees, woodlands and hedgerows ▪ Altering the pattern of the landscape, including field boundaries, by introducing a strong line that cuts across the varied landscape pattern ▪ Modification to existing landform with a cutting or an embankment

Page 7-65 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

▪ Increased or new awareness of traffic movements, headlights and manmade structures ▪ Altering features of natural or cultural heritage interest ▪ New lighting around Crossbush and Ford Road roundabout and their immediate approaches ▪ Increased noise and loss of tranquillity through introducing the movement and noise of vehicles into a tranquil landscape ▪ The introduction of vehicle headlights at night into previously dark areas ▪ Effects of the raw scars of new cuttings and embankments before they have had a chance to ‘green up’ from the landscape works. 7.7.3.2 The Scheme may permanently affect the visual amenity of receptors in a number of ways, including: ▪ The intrusion of the road into comparatively undisturbed areas of higher quality landscape ▪ New embankments which intrude into people’s views ▪ Cuttings which create notches on the skyline or scars on the hillside ▪ Structures that stand out, particularly across the open landscape of the floodplain ▪ The increased visual presence of a new in addition to the existing road, such that roads form a larger part of the view ▪ Felling of trees that leads to the opening of new views ▪ New lighting around Crossbush and Ford Road roundabout and their immediate approaches ▪ Increased noise and loss of tranquillity through introducing the movement and noise of vehicles into a tranquil landscape ▪ The introduction of vehicle headlights at night into previously dark areas ▪ Effects of the raw scars of new cuttings and embankments before they have had a chance to ‘green up’ from the landscape works. 7.7.3.3 The above impacts are considered during the operational phase on identified landscape and visual receptors, as outlined in the Landscape and Visual Assessment Schedules in Appendix 7-1 and 7-2 respectively.

Page 7-66 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-12 - Operational phase potential impacts for landscape and visual receptors Potential Impact Scoped Impact Justificati on for Scoping Out Change in landscape character At this stage (PCF Not and perception of the landscape Stage 2 (Option applicable within landscape character Selection)) in the areas 1 to 10 due to operational assessment, all activity associated with the potential impacts Scheme options mentioned above have been scoped in Change in visual amenity due to At this stage (PCF Not operational activity associated Stage 2 (Option applicable with the Scheme options Selection)) in the Receptor locations assessment, all potential impacts mentioned above have been scoped in

7.8 Design, mitigation and enhancement measures

7.8.1.1 Detailed mitigation proposals will be produced for the Scheme at PCF Stage 3 (Preliminary Design) and once detailed designs are available, including detailed information on construction requirements. However, a summary of mitigation measures appropriate for this assessment in PCF Stage 2 (Option Selection) are outlined below. 7.8.2 Construction phase mitigation measures

7.8.2.1 The following construction phase mitigation measures have been identified for the Scheme following site visits and are those which are standard best practice and included in the assessment of effects: ▪ Temporary construction lighting to be minimal in extent and use. The lighting is to be highly directional and seek to minimise light spill and glare into the surrounding landscape. Construction operations to be limited to daylight working hours where possible ▪ Noise and dust to be kept to a minimum

Page 7-67 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

▪ Construction working area to be as contained and constrained as possible to minimise land take, vegetation loss and reinstatement requirements, by implementation of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). 7.8.2.2 The CEMP will specify control measures for construction and will be developed by the Principal Contractor prior to development commencing on site. The CEMP should include considerations such as: ▪ Use of low level and directional lighting ▪ Protection of trees ▪ Storage of topsoil. 7.8.3 Design and operational phase mitigation measures

7.8.3.1 DMRB guidance55 for mitigation of landscape and visual effects states that the mitigation hierarchy should always be to firstly avoid, then, if this cannot be achieved, to reduce, and finally to replace (or remedy). Where avoidance is not possible, then measures such as planting, barriers or earth shaping could help to reduce or possibly remedy a potential adverse landscape and/or visual effect that would otherwise result from the Scheme. 7.8.3.2 In the first instance, the routing of each Scheme option should consider topography, natural screening and proximity to visual receptors. In some instances, landscape and visual receptors conflict, for example, a road could be well screened from visual receptors by routing it within existing woodland, but conversely, the character of that woodland would be considerably compromised. High quality design of visible structures will therefore be of importance, as will the ability of the receiving landscape to accommodate change of the type proposed. 7.8.3.3 In some instances, the scale, location, positioning and design of the road across the landscape will not be able to accommodate suitable mitigation and adverse effects will remain unchanged. In these areas, the opportunity to enhance the surrounding landscape would be explored. This may include measures such as reinstating field patterns or removing non-native or invasive species from woodland. 7.8.3.4 The following design and operational phase mitigation measures have been identified for the Scheme and are those which are standard best practice and therefore included in the assessment of effects:

55 IAN 135/10

Page 7-68 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

▪ The design of the horizontal and vertical alignments for the main line of each Scheme option and its side roads and junctions considered, amongst other things, the surrounding topography; vegetation; existing landscape features (such as hedges, water features, woodland, and field systems); proximity of residential properties; and key views and vistas ▪ Earthworks design to minimise the impact of the cuttings and embankments. Where appropriate, there is the potential for the grading out of earthworks at sensitive locations to avoid disjointed appearance of landform and aid integration of the Scheme options into the landscape ▪ Consideration of the form and finish of structures, including bridges ▪ No artificial lighting along the Scheme, except at existing junctions (Crossbush and its approaches and Ford Road roundabout and its approaches) ▪ Retention of existing established trees and vegetation wherever possible ▪ Incorporation of new native woodland planting to integrate with existing (where appropriate) ▪ Use of native woodland mixes that comprise a mix of trees and scrub species that reflect the inherent woodland composition and enhance biodiversity. This would be developed further at PCF Stage 3 (Preliminary Design) ▪ Planting at junctions and structures to help assimilate the structures into the landscape (where appropriate) ▪ Planting to respect the existing pattern of vegetation ▪ Limited planting within areas of open landscape character to reflect and reinforce existing floodplain landscape ▪ Consideration as to the use of visual barriers, where planting depth may be insufficient to provide effective screening ▪ Noise reduction screening and surfacing. 7.8.4 Opportunities for enhancement

7.8.4.1 The Scheme provide varying opportunities for enhancement. Although they have not been included in the assessment of effects, the following opportunities for enhancement have been identified for the Scheme for further consideration in PCF stage 3:

Page 7-69 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

▪ Enhancement of the River Arun floodplain character through adopting some of the West Sussex County Council management objectives such as planting of waterside trees; scrub planting along the base of the railway embankment; use of wet grazing meadows; tree planting to screen and shelter urban fringes ▪ Enhancement of the river Arun river channel through naturalisation of the river banks, such as through planting of aquatic and marginal vegetation on the banks ▪ Provision of a non-vehicular access route across the flood plain providing opportunities to introduce new views of historical features which can be augmented by interpretive signage ▪ Enhancing the character of local woodlands where appropriate, through the removal of invasive or non-native species (such as rhododendron); planting of native ground cover, shrubs and trees such as black poplar; hedge laying ▪ Reinstatement of field boundaries through hedge planting and laying ▪ Enhanced ‘gateways’ to the SDNP such as at Crossbush and strategic locations along the Scheme options through use of public art, planting or design

7.9 Assessment of likely significant effects

7.9.1.1 A full schedule of effects, giving details of landscape impacts and resulting effects on the different Landscape Character Areas for each of the Scheme options, is given in Appendix 7-1. A full schedule of effects, giving details of impacts and resulting effects on visual amenity for each of the Scheme options, is given in Appendix 7-2. Effects on trees are considered separately within Appendix 7-3. 7.9.2 Significance of landscape effects

7.9.2.1 A full schedule of effects, giving details of landscape impacts (including description of the magnitude of change) and resulting effects on the different Landscape Character Areas for each of the Scheme options, is given in Appendix 7-1. An outline summary of the significant effects identified (Moderate Adverse or greater) relating to each of the Scheme options by Landscape Character Area is provided below, preceded by a summary of likely impacts. Consideration of operational effects is given for Year 1 and Year 15 (where relevant) to take into account the growth of mitigation planting.

Page 7-70 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Option 1V5

Likely impacts 7.9.2.2 The likely impacts of Option 1V5 are: ▪ Changes to landform within the flat floodplain ▪ Introduction of traffic movements within the static floodplain landscape ▪ Fragmentation of the continuity of the open floodplain south of Arundel ▪ Alterations to field patterns and loss of field boundary vegetation ▪ New structure bridging the Arun Valley Railway ▪ Deterioration of the landscape’s association with the historic town of Arundel ▪ Loss of property boundaries and established screening vegetation ▪ Loss of ancient woodland ▪ New structures within the townscape including widened bridging arrangements over the River Arun ▪ Increased road width within town footprint ▪ Major new junction at western end. Discussion of significance 7.9.2.3 Construction activity would materially change the existing A27 corridor through the town of Arundel and the landscape of the floodplain to the east. 7.9.2.4 The sensitivity of the Lower Arun Valley (LCA 4) is considered to be high (Paragraph 7.6.5.21), and the magnitude of impact is considered to be moderate; therefore, there is likely to be a large adverse effect from Option 1V5 on LCA4. 7.9.2.5 The sensitivity of Arundel (LCA 5) is considered to be high (Paragraph 7.6.5.25), and the magnitude of impact is considered to be major. During construction there is therefore likely to be a very large adverse effect from Option 1V5 on LCA5. 7.9.2.6 Impacts on other Landscape Character Areas would not be significant. 7.9.2.7 During the operational phase, the permanent effects of Option 1V5 would include changes to the setting of Arundel and its relationship with the River Arun, resulting in an increased sense of urbanisation (occurring in the highly sensitive lower Arun valley) and localised long term but perceptible changes within the historic core of the town. 7.9.2.8 Within the Lower River Arun Valley (LCA 4) the large adverse effect during construction would reduce to moderate adverse in Year 1 and would remain

Page 7-71 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

moderate adverse in Year 15. This significant adverse effect is primarily a result of the fragmentation of a unique landscape, defined by its largely undeveloped character and openness and the disruption of the historic and iconic relationship between the river plain, town and South Downs. 7.9.2.9 Within Arundel (LCA 5), the very large adverse effect during construction would reduce to large adverse in Year 1 and remain at large adverse by Year 15. This is due to the wide ranging physical change to the fabric of the road corridor and adjoining townscape and landscape (including ancient woodland, direct effects on properties and indirect effects on the setting of the conservation area). Option 1V9

Likely impacts 7.9.2.10 Impacts would be similar to Option 1V5 except for differences in arrangements for crossing the Arun River within Arundel and at Ford Road Roundabout due to the proposed flyover; other townscape differences are of similar significance in scale and effect. Discussion of significance 7.9.2.11 Construction activity would materially change the existing A27 corridor through the town of Arundel and the landscape of the floodplain to the east. 7.9.2.12 The sensitivity of the Lower Arun Valley (LCA 4) is considered to be high (Paragraph 7.6.5.21), and the magnitude of impact is considered to be moderate. Therefore, there is likely to be a large adverse effect from Option 1V5 on LCA4. 7.9.2.13 The sensitivity of Arundel (LCA 5) is considered to be high (Paragraph 7.6.5.25), and the magnitude of impact is considered to be major. Therefore, the localised disruption caused by removal of vegetation and scale of construction activity at Ford Road roundabout and on Chichester Road for Option 1V9 is likely to be very large adverse in effect. 7.9.2.14 Impacts on other Landscape Character Areas would not be significant. 7.9.2.15 During the operational phase, the permanent effects of Option 1V9 would include changes to the setting of Arundel and localised long term but perceptible changes within the historic core of the town. These would include changes brought about by the flyover arrangements at Ford Road roundabout and the changed relationship with the River Arun - where the flyover, as a grade separated river crossing, would be particularly unsympathetic. The structure’s additional height would be emphasised by elevated traffic

Page 7-72 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

resulting in, locally, a greater sense of increased urbanisation than Option 1V5; otherwise the wide ranging physical change to the fabric of the road corridor and adjoining townscape and landscape (including ancient woodland, direct effects on properties and indirect effects on the setting of the conservation area) would be similar to Option 1V5. 7.9.2.16 Within the Lower River Arun Valley (LCA 4) the large adverse effect during construction would reduce to moderate adverse in Year 1 and would remain in Year 15. This would be primarily as a result of the fragmentation of a unique landscape, defined by its largely undeveloped character and openness and the disruption of the historic and iconic relationship between the river plain, town and South Downs. 7.9.2.17 Within Arundel (LCA 5), the very large adverse effect during construction would reduce to large adverse in Year 1 and remain at large adverse by Year 15. This is due to the wide ranging physical change to the fabric of the road corridor and adjoining townscape and landscape (including ancient woodland, direct effects on properties and indirect effects on the setting of the conservation area). Option 3V1

Likely impacts 7.9.2.18 The likely impacts of Option 3V1 are: ▪ Modification to landform within the flat floodplain ▪ Introduction of traffic movements within the static landscape ▪ Fragmentation of the continuity of the open floodplain south of Arundel ▪ Alterations to field patterns and loss of field boundary vegetation ▪ New structure bridging the Arun Valley Railway ▪ Deterioration of the landscape’s association with the historic town of Arundel ▪ Loss of and division of existing ancient woodland ▪ Loss of tranquillity ▪ Modification to landform and existing field/woodland pattern ▪ Significant new road layout out of scale within a quiet rural landscape. Discussion of significance 7.9.2.19 The sensitivity of the Lower Arun Valley (LCA 4) and Arundel (LCA 5) is considered to be high, whilst the sensitivity of Fontwell Upper Coastal Plain (LCA 2) is considered to be moderate. Construction activity would materially change the existing A27 corridor through all of these areas.

Page 7-73 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.2.20 At construction, significant direct adverse effects would result within the Lower Arun Floodplain (LCA 4) as a result of the building of a new elevated road across the open landscape, within what is currently a largely static landscape; a major magnitude of impact would result in very large adverse effects. Significant indirect effects would also ensue at Arundel (LCA 5) due to the changes in the Lower Arun Floodplain (LCA 4) and impacts of moderate magnitude would cause an adverse change to the important interrelationship between the town and it’s setting, resulting in large adverse effects. 7.9.2.21 The proposed western section of the Scheme and tie-in junction west of Arundel, would also incur large adverse effects on the landscape of Fontwell Upper Coastal Plain (LCA 2). This would be the result at construction from the removal of extensive areas of existing mature ancient woodland, and major earthworks and road construction, including the formation of the new junction on the existing A27 at Tortington Common and the disturbance of the open fieldscape around Tortington Lane. 7.9.2.22 All effects would remain significant post construction. The open characteristics of the Lower Arun Valley (LCA 4) would limit the capacity to mitigate through additional planting and the significant adverse effects arising during construction would continue at operation, becoming large adverse at Year 1 and 15. 7.9.2.23 Changes to the setting of Arundel (LCA 5) would also be long term, with an increased sense of urbanisation in the setting of the town, which, in the absence of a capacity to provide extensive areas of screen planting would become permanent, meaning Arundel (LCA 5) would receive moderate adverse effects as a result of the changes both at Year 1 and 15. Within Fontwell Upper Coastal Plain (LCA 2) a perceptible reduction in tranquillity and sense of remoteness within the woodland and fieldscape forming its setting would also result in a permanent change, coupled with a loss of ancient woodland, which could not be mitigated for; these changes would result in permanent, long-term effects of moderate adverse. 7.9.2.24 Impacts in other Landscape Character Areas would not be significant.

Page 7-74 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Option 4/5AV1

Likely impacts 7.9.2.25 The likely impacts of Option 4/5AV1 are: ▪ Modification to landform within the flat floodplain (where on embankment) ▪ Deterioration of the landscape’s association with the historic town of Arundel ▪ Introduction of traffic movements within the static landscape ▪ Fragmentation of the continuity of the open floodplain south of Arundel ▪ Alterations to field patterns and minor loss of field boundary vegetation in the east ▪ New structures bridging Ford Road, the River Arun and the Arun Valley Railway ▪ Loss of existing mature and ancient woodland ▪ Loss of tranquillity ▪ Modification to landform, including Binsted Valley ▪ Alterations to field patterns ▪ Severance of hedgerows and woodland ▪ Large scale new road layout within the quiet rural setting around Binsted Village. Discussion of significance 7.9.2.26 East of Tortington Lane, the Option 4/5AV1 would follow a shared alignment with Option 3V1 and the crossing the River Arun floodplain, which would result in significant effects on the landscape character associated with Arundel (LCA 5) and the Lower Arun Valley (LCA 4). This would result in an effect on the Lower Arun Valley (LCA 4) of very large adverse occurring during construction, reducing to large adverse at both Year 1 and year 15 due to the fragmentation and permanent degradation of character that the Scheme would cause. Similarly, within Arundel (LCA 5), effects of large adverse would occur during construction, reducing to moderate adverse at both Year 1 and Year 15. 7.9.2.27 Continuing west, within Fontwell Upper Coastal Plain (LCA 2), construction activity would materially change the existing A27 corridor where the Scheme would skirt the National Park boundary to the north of Tortington, disrupting the tranquillity of the settled landscapes around Binsted and the character of the dispersed village itself, with the loss of field pattern, woods, trees and the

Page 7-75 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

fragmentation of the village. A flyover at Hedgers Hill would save some woodland though contribute further to the fragmentation of Binsted. The western tie-in junction at Avisford Park would result in further tree loss to Little Danes Wood and the northern edge of Avisford Park golf course to create a large adverse impact at construction. 7.9.2.28 Post construction, it is anticipated that replacement woodland would, over time, provide some screening and reduce the awareness of the changes, but this could not fully mitigate for a lasting change to the perception of the landscape character and significant loss of tranquillity, including from the elevated moving traffic on the Hedgers Hill flyover. This would also disrupt the dark and tranquil rural landscape significantly at night; effects of large adverse would be caused. 7.9.2.29 Impacts on other Landscape Character Areas would not be significant. Option 4/5AV2

Likely impacts 7.9.2.30 The likely impacts of Option 4/5AV2 are: ▪ Modification to landform within the flat floodplain (where on embankment) ▪ Deterioration of the landscape’s association with the historic town of Arundel ▪ Introduction of traffic movements within the static landscape ▪ Fragmentation of the continuity of the open floodplain south of Arundel ▪ Alterations to field patterns and minor loss of field boundary vegetation in the east ▪ New structures bridging Ford Road, the River Arun and the Arun Valley Railway ▪ Loss of existing ancient woodland and mature woodland ▪ Loss of tranquillity ▪ Modification to landform ▪ Alterations to field patterns ▪ Severance of hedgerows and woodland ▪ Significant new road layout and change in scale within the quiet rural setting.

Page 7-76 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Discussion of significance 7.9.2.31 Impacts would be the same as Option 4/5AV1 and Option 3V1 within the Lower Arun Valley (LCA 4) with the magnitude of impact considered to be major and the likely effects of construction considered to be very large adverse reducing to large adverse at both Year 1 and Year 15 due to the fragmentation and permanent degradation of character that the Scheme would cause. Effects would also mirror those of the above on Arundel (LCA 5), being moderate adverse at both Year 1 and 15, due to the lack of mitigation opportunity. 7.9.2.32 The Fontwell Upper Coastal Plain (LCA 2) would experience a moderate degree of impact at construction, being of moderate sensitivity, which would result in large adverse constructional effects on the quiet rural setting. 7.9.2.33 During the operational phase, permanent effects of Option 4/5AV2 would include changes to the setting of Arundel and its relationship with the River Arun, resulting in an increased sense of urbanisation. This would occur in the highly sensitive lower Arun valley, along with localised long term but perceptible changes within the historic core of the town. 7.9.2.34 Within the Lower Arun Valley (LCA 4) the very large adverse effects during construction would reduce to large adverse in Year 1 but remain so in Year 15. This would be primarily as a result of the fragmentation of a unique landscape, defined by its largely undeveloped character and openness and also the substantial disruption of the historic and iconic relationship between the river plain, town and South Downs. 7.9.2.35 Within Fontwell Upper Coastal Plain (LCA 2) as a result of the extensive nature of the corridor and scale of the new western tie-in junction, Option 4/5AV2 is also anticipated to give rise to significant adverse effects of large adverse at both Year 1 and Year 15; the interruption to the existing historical landscape pattern associated with Binsted Park, medieval field patterns and loss of associated woodland would be permanent. There would be significant tree loss around Binsted, at Little Dane’s Wood and Barn’s Copse, as well as some tree and vegetation loss from the northern edge of Avisford Park golf course. From Old Scotland Lane to east of Binsted Manor the Scheme option would be primarily within the National Park. It is anticipated that some replacement woodland would provide screening and reduce the awareness of the changes, although planting would be limited to maintain the historic pattern of Binsted Park. There would therefore be a lasting change to the perception of the landscape character and loss of tranquillity that would be significant.

Page 7-77 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Option 5BV1

Likely impacts 7.9.2.36 The likely impacts of Option 5BV1 are: ▪ Modification to landform within the flat floodplain ▪ Introduction of traffic movements within the static landscape ▪ Fragmentation of the continuity of the open floodplain south of Arundel ▪ Alterations to field patterns and loss of field boundary vegetation ▪ New structure bridging the Arun Valley Railway ▪ Loss of tranquillity ▪ Modification to landform ▪ Alterations to field patterns ▪ Severance of hedgerows, mature trees and woodland ▪ Significant new road layout and change in scale within the quiet rural setting. Discussion of significance 7.9.2.37 To the east, the Option 5BV1 would follow a shared alignment with Option 4/5AV1 in crossing the River Arun floodplain and as far as east of Binsted Lane, which would result in comparable significant effects on the landscape character associated with Arundel (Landscape Character Area 5) and the Lower Arun Valley (Landscape Character Area 4). For the Lower Arun Valley (LCA 4) an effect of very large adverse would occur during construction, reducing to large adverse at both Year 1 and Year 15 due to the fragmentation and permanent degradation of character that the Scheme would cause across these parts of the landscape. Similarly, effects on Arundel (LCA 5) of large adverse would occur during construction, reducing to moderate adverse at both Year 1 and Year 15. 7.9.2.38 Option 5BV1 would be the longest of the Scheme options and create significant adverse effects within Fontwell Upper Coastal Plain (LCA 2) and constructional activity would materially change an extensive swathe of tranquil settled landscape and the more developed area to the west, creating a major magnitude of impact, resulting in large adverse effects. Post construction, this would result in fragmentation of the fieldscape, tree loss and fragmentation of hedgerows and woodland south and west of Binsted and additional fragmentation and tree and woodland loss around Avisford Park golf course and the peri-urban edge of Walberton. It is anticipated that some replacement woodland and field boundary planting and other screening

Page 7-78 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

planting would reduce the awareness of the changes, however there would be a lasting loss of tranquillity and changes to the perception of the landscape character that would be significant. The effect of this change would be a large adverse effect continuing at Year 1 after construction, reducing to a moderate adverse effect at Year 15 as a result of mitigation planting growth. 7.9.3 Summary

7.9.3.1 All Scheme options would have a significant adverse effect on the landscape of the Lower Arun Valley (LCA 4) and Arundel (LCA 5). Options 3V1, 4/5AV1, 4/5AV2 and 5BV1 would also have a significant adverse effect on the Fontwell Upper Coastal Plain (LCA 2). All of the Scheme options would also have an adverse effect on Downland Arun Valley (LCA 6), Central Downs (LCA7), Angmering Park (LCA8) and Angmering Upper Coastal Plain (LCA 9) but these effects would not be significant. None of the Scheme options would have an effect on the landscape of the Littlehampton and Worthing fringes (LCA 10). 7.9.3.2 The likely significance of effect for each of the Scheme options at the construction phase is outlined in Table 7-13. The likely significance of effect for each of the Scheme options at operation (Year 1 and Year 15) is outlined in Table 7-14.

Page 7-79 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-13 - Likely landscape effects: construction phase

Landscape Option 1V5 Option 1V9 Option 3V1 Option Option Option 5BV1 Character Area 4/5AV1 4/5AV2 (LCA) LCA1 Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Western Downs LCA2 Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Large Large Large Large Fontwell Upper Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Coastal Plain LCA 3 Neutral Neutral Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Chichester to Yapton Coastal Plain LCA 4 Large Large Adverse Very Large Very Large Very Large Very Large Lower Arun Valley Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse LCA5 Very Large Very Large Large Adverse Large Adverse Large Adverse Large Adverse Arundel Adverse Adverse LCA6 Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Downland Arun Valley LCA7 Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Central Downs LCA8 Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Angmering Park

Page 7-80 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Landscape Option 1V5 Option 1V9 Option 3V1 Option Option Option 5BV1 Character Area 4/5AV1 4/5AV2 (LCA) LCA9 Angmering Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Upper Coastal Plain LCA10 Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Littlehampton and Worthing fringes

Page 7-81 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-14 - Likely landscape effects: operational phase, Year 1 and Year 15 Landscape Impact Option 1V5 Option 1V9 Option 3V1 Option Option Option 5BV1 Character 4/5AV2 4/5AV1 Area (LCA) LCA1 Year 1 Slight Slight Slight Neutral Neutral Neutral Western Adverse Adverse Adverse Downs Year 15 Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral LCA2 Year 1 Neutral Neutral Large Large Large Large Fontwell Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Upper Year 15 Neutral Neutral Moderate Large Large Moderate Coastal Plain Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse LCA 3 Year 1 Neutral Neutral Slight Slight Slight Slight Chichester to Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Yapton Year 15 Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Coastal Plain LCA 4 Year 1 Moderate Moderate Large Large Large Large Lower Arun Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Valley Year 15 Moderate Moderate Large Large Large Large Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse LCA5 Year 1 Large Large Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Arundel Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse

Year 15 Large Large Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse

Page 7-82 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Landscape Impact Option 1V5 Option 1V9 Option 3V1 Option Option Option 5BV1 Character 4/5AV2 4/5AV1 Area (LCA) LCA6 Year 1 Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Downland Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Arun Valley Year 15 Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse LCA7 Year 1 Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Central Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Downs Year 15 Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse LCA8 Year 1 Neutral Neutral Neutral Slight Slight Slight Angmering Adverse Adverse Adverse Park Year 15 Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral LCA9 Year 1 Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Slight Angmering Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Upper Year 15 Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Coastal Plain LCA10 Year 1 Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Littlehampton Year 15 Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral and Worthing fringes

Page 7-83 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4 Significance of visual effects

7.9.4.1 The assessment of predicted impacts and their likely effects are given for each Scheme option and outlined in full in Appendix 7-2. Viewpoint locations and photographs are shown in Figures 7-9 and 7-10 and Figures 7-11 to 7- 68. Below is a summary of the impacts on visual receptors for each of the Scheme options. Consideration of operational effects is given for Year 1 and Year 15 (where relevant) to take into account the growth of mitigation planting. Visual effects from Option 1V5

Likely impacts 7.9.4.2 Likely impacts include: ▪ Localised impacts on views from residential properties adjacent to the existing A27 on the fringes and within the centre of Arundel ▪ Views from residential properties within Arundel will have an awareness of a new road corridor in association with the existing A27 particularly between the existing roundabout with Ford Road/A284 and the widened crossing of the River Arun, but the presence of a new flyover will increase awareness ▪ Limited impacts on the views from higher ground within the SDNP from the north and north west ▪ Views towards Arundel from public rights of way within the floodplain to the south of Arundel would be aware of a new road corridor and distinctive flyover, albeit within the context of the existing A27 ▪ Views from public rights of way to the east of the River Arun would be aware of the crossing of the River Arun floodplain and existing railway ▪ Views from users of the railway network south of Arundel particularly where it traverses the River Arun floodplain ▪ Likely visual impacts on local residential properties off Tortington Lane and Ford Road ▪ Awareness and limited views of the Scheme option crossing the northern extent of the River Arun floodplain from limited elevated areas of the SDNP and sensitive assets including Arundel Conservation Area, Arundel Castle, Arundel Cathedral and Tortington Augustinian Priory.

Page 7-84 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4.3 Option 1V5 would be visible from 21 of the 58 viewpoints representing a range of views and receptors across the Study Area, and which may experience the impacts outlined above. Discussion of significance 7.9.4.4 Construction activities would materially change the existing A27 corridor through the town of Arundel and the landscape of the floodplain to the east and therefore significant effects to visual amenity during the construction phase is likely to arise within a number of the viewpoints. Construction activities would not, however, result in significant effects on long-distance views beyond 2 kilometres. 7.9.4.5 During construction there are likely to be large adverse effects from Option 1V5 for Viewpoints 22, 43, 46 and 47 (representing visitors to and users of footpaths and bridleways in the SDNP and in non-designated landscapes as well as locations with cultural associations). 7.9.4.6 During construction there are likely to be moderate adverse effects from Option 1V5 for Viewpoints 31, 36, 37A, 39 and 40 (representing residents, visitors to, and users of footpaths and bridleways in the SDNP and in non- designated landscapes as well as locations with cultural associations). 7.9.4.7 Impacts on other viewpoints would not be significant. Effects at construction on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 1V5 are summarised in the table below.

Table 7-15 - Construction phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 1V5 Likely impact of construction Sensitivity Magnitude Significance of works on visual amenity of of impact effect receptors at: Viewpoint 22 High Major Large Adverse

Viewpoint 23 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 37A High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Minor Slight Adverse

Page 7-85 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of construction Sensitivity Magnitude Significance of works on visual amenity of of impact effect receptors at: Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 43 High Moderate Large Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 45 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 48 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 52 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 58 High Negligible Slight Adverse 7.9.4.8 At operation, Option 1V5 would result in significant large adverse visual effects in Year 1 on Viewpoints 43, 46 and 47 and significant moderate adverse visual effects in Year 1 on Viewpoints 22, 36, 37A and 39. These effects occur on receptors in and around the town of Arundel, the open floodplain and the tie-in with the existing junction at Crossbush. Option 1V5 would not, however, result in significant effects on long-distance views beyond 2 kilometres or on the remaining viewpoints. 7.9.4.9 By Year 15, limited mitigation planting (restricted to Crossbush junction and some sections to the west of Ford Road roundabout) would have matured and provide some additional screening. As no planting across the floodplain or over the flyover is proposed, then the majority of effects at Year 15 are the same as in Year 1 of opening. The residual effects would therefore result in significant moderate adverse visual effects on Viewpoints 36, 37A, 39, 43, 46 and 47. 7.9.4.10 A discussion of the effects on visual amenity at operation is outlined below.

Page 7-86 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4.11 Effects are generally contained within shorter distance views, largely due to Option 1V5 following the existing A27 alignment, where existing views of the road corridor are already experienced. Where the Scheme passes through the constrained townscape of Arundel and diverges from the existing A27 alignment to cross the northern extent of the floodplain however, the likely for significant visual effects increases. 7.9.4.12 As Option 1V5 approaches and passes through the townscape, the widening of the existing route would result in the loss of existing visual screening and modifications to built features, such as roadside vegetation, sections of ancient woodland to the north, and distinctive flint walls. This would make the existing A27 alignment a much more prominent and substantive townscape element that would detract from views from the residential properties adjacent and the setting of the Arundel Conservation Area. Construction of an alternative access to the hospital off the A284, as outlined in Option 1V5, would also create an overall urbanising effect on the local landscape due to loss of trees and ancient woodland. 7.9.4.13 For visual receptors in and around Ford Road roundabout, Option 1V5 would create additional urbanising effects due to vegetation and tree loss, increased carriageways, lighting around Ford Road roundabout and additional bridges and associated traffic across the River Arun. In addition, a fly-over approximately 10m above the existing Ford Road roundabout would elevate traffic and add a distinctive built structure into local views. Properties along Fitzalan Road, the Slipe, Torton Hill Road and Shayna Rose Way would, in particular, experience changes in visual amenity as a result of Option 1V5. The impact of the elevated structure on views would generally decrease with elevation and distance within the town, due to the containment of views within the built form of the townscape. The majority of views would become more contained and channelled as the viewer moved to more elevated areas of the town. Viewpoint 39, for example, shows that significant effects are not likely to arise due to views of the existing route in the distance through a tightly framed view with additional and detracting features. The view is contained and channelled by the urban environment whereby the existing and proposed highway would form only a small element of the view. 7.9.4.14 However, where there are occasionally more open views from within Arundel, such as Viewpoint 43, Option 1V5 would form a conspicuous new element in the wider view, introducing views of traffic movements on embankment as it diverges across the floodplain towards Crossbush. The traffic movements, while still associated with the urban edge of the town and existing A27, would detract from the stillness of the floodplain and modify the level open

Page 7-87 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

landscape. This would affect the floodplain’s relationship and contribution to the setting of Arundel in both views from within and towards the town where uninterrupted views towards its imposing position in the context of the floodplain exist, such as within Viewpoint 36 and 37. 7.9.4.15 Further south the views of Option 1V5 in views towards Arundel would be less obvious as the alignment is kept to the northern extents of the open floodplain. The potential for Option 1V5 to significantly influence more distant views would be reduced with the distance and the sense of the Option 1V5 being more associated with the existing A27 and leaving the majority of the open floodplain intact. The tie in of the alignment with the existing raised junction at Crossbush would introduce an expanded junction where slip roads, structures, traffic movements and additional lighting on slip roads would be introduced and would urbanise the farmland that leads down to the open floodplain. 7.9.4.16 Option 1V5 would not form a significant component in the range of views from within the elevated and open areas of the SDNP to the north. Viewpoints 54, 56, 57 and 58 demonstrate that Option 1V5 would either not be visible or would form a minor and distant element that is not likely to draw the focus away from the setting of Arundel or the broader expanse of the open floodplain. In the range of views from the south towards the SDNP the open foreground of the floodplains would generally be retained in views, particularly further south, where the contrast with the dramatic rise of the Downs and the prominent position of Arundel would still be experienced. Option 1V5 would influence the setting through the increased awareness of traffic movements crossing the northern expanse of floodplain in association with other built elements around the urban fringe of Arundel.

7.9.4.17 Effects at operation on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 1V5 are summarised in Table 7-16.

Page 7-88 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-16 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint viewpoints from Option 1V5 Likely Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational Impact Year 1 effect Year 1 Impact Year 15 effect Year 15 works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 22 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 23 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 37A High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight beneficial Negligible Slight beneficial Viewpoint 43 High Moderate Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse No change Neutral Viewpoint 45 High No change Neutral No change Neutral Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse

Page 7-89 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational Impact Year 1 effect Year 1 Impact Year 15 effect Year 15 works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 48 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Viewpoint 57 High No change Neutral No change Neutral Viewpoint 58 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight

Page 7-90 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Visual effects from Option 1V9

Likely impacts 7.9.4.18 Likely impacts include: ▪ Localised impacts on views from residential properties adjacent to the existing A27 on the fringes and within the centre of Arundel ▪ Views form residential properties within Arundel will have an awareness of a new road corridor in association with the existing A27 particularly between the existing roundabout with Ford Road/A284 and the widened crossing of the River Arun ▪ Limited impacts on the views from higher ground within the SDNP from the north and north west ▪ Views towards Arundel from public rights of way within the floodplain to the south of Arundel would be aware of a new road corridor, albeit within the context of the existing A27 ▪ Views from public rights of way to the east of the River Arun would be aware of the crossing of the River Arun floodplain and existing railway ▪ Views from users of the railway network south of Arundel particularly where it traverses the River Arun floodplain ▪ Potential visual impacts on local residential properties off Tortington Lane and Ford Road ▪ Awareness and limited views of the Scheme option crossing the northern extent of the River Arun floodplain from limited elevated areas of the SDNP and sensitive assets including Arundel Conservation Area, Arundel Castle, Arundel Cathedral and Tortington Augustinian Priory. 7.9.4.19 Option 1V9 would be visible from 20 of the 58 viewpoints representing a range of views and receptors across the Study Area and which may experience the impacts outlined above. Discussion of significance 7.9.4.20 Construction activities would materially change the existing A27 corridor through the town of Arundel and the landscape of the floodplain to the east and therefore significant effects to visual amenity during the construction phase is likely to arise within a number of the viewpoints. Construction activities would not, however, result in significant effects on long-distance views beyond 2 kilometres.

Page 7-91 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4.21 During construction, there are likely to be large adverse effects from Option 1V9 for Viewpoints 22, 43, 46 and 47 (representing visitors to and users of footpaths and bridleways in the SDNP and in non-designated landscapes as well as locations with cultural associations). 7.9.4.22 During construction there are likely to be moderate adverse effects from Option 1V9 for Viewpoints 31, 36, 37A, 39 and 40 (representing residents, visitors to, and users of footpaths and bridleways in the SDNP and in non- designated landscapes as well as locations with cultural associations). 7.9.4.23 Impacts on other viewpoints would not be significant. Effects at construction on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 1V9 summarised in the table below.

Table 7-17 - Construction phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 1V9 Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance construction works on of impact of effect visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 22 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 23 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 37A High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight Adverse

Page 7-92 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance construction works on of impact of effect visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 43 High Moderate Large Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 45 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 48 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 58 High Negligible Slight Adverse 7.9.4.24 At operation, Option 1V9 would result in similar significant visual effects in and around the town of Arundel, the open floodplain and the tie in with the existing junction at Crossbush as Option 1V5. Effects are generally contained within shorter distance views, largely due to Option 1V9 following the existing A27 alignment, where existing views of the road corridor are already experienced. 7.9.4.25 Where the Scheme passes through the constrained townscape of Arundel and diverges from the existing A27 alignment to cross the northern extent of the floodplain however, the potential for significant visual effects increases. Option 1V9 differs primarily from Option 1V5 at Ford Road, whereby a larger, lit at-grade roundabout is proposed at Ford Road rather than the construction of a fly-over above the existing roundabout. Impacts for visual receptors around Ford Road roundabout are therefore likely to have a marginally lower magnitude of impact than Option 1V9, although overall significance is similar.

Page 7-93 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4.26 At operation, Option 1V9 would result in significant large adverse visual effects in Year 1 on Viewpoints 43, 46 and 47 and significant moderate adverse visual effects in Year 1 on Viewpoints 22, 36 and 37A. 7.9.4.27 By Year 15, limited mitigation planting (restricted to Crossbush junction and some sections to the west of Ford Road roundabout) would have matured and provide some additional screening. As no planting across the floodplain or over the flyover is possible, then the majority of effects at Year 15 are the same as in Year 1 of opening. The residual effects would therefore result in significant moderate adverse visual effects on viewpoints 36, 37A, 39, 43, 46 and 47. 7.9.4.28 Impacts on other viewpoints would not be significant. A discussion of the effects on visual amenity at operation is outlined below. 7.9.4.29 Option 1V9 approaches and passes through the Arundel townscape with a widening of the existing route. Resultant loss of existing visual screening and modifications to built features would make the existing A27 alignment a much more prominent and substantive townscape element that would detract from views from the residential properties adjacent and the setting of the Arundel Conservation Area. Widening of the carriageway further to allow access to the community hospital off the A27 would create a further urbanising effect of the corridor due to width of carriageways in this location and resultant tree loss. 7.9.4.30 For visual receptors in and around Ford Road roundabout, Option 1V9 would create additional urbanising effects due to vegetation and tree loss, increased carriageways, lighting around Ford Road roundabout and additional bridges and associated traffic across the River Arun. Properties along Fitzalan Road, the Slipe, Torton Hill Road and Shayna Rose Way would, in particular, experience changes in visual amenity as a result of Option 1V9. The impact of the new bridge structures across the River Arun and floodplain would generally decrease with elevation and distance within the town, due to the containment of views within the built form of the townscape. 7.9.4.31 Where there are occasionally more open views, however, (such as Viewpoint 43), Option 1V9 would form a conspicuous new element in the wider view, introducing views of traffic movements on embankment as it diverges across the floodplain towards Crossbush. The traffic movements, while still associated with the urban edge of the town and existing A27, would detract from the stillness of the floodplain and modify the level open landscape. This would affect the floodplain’s relationship and contribution to the setting of Arundel in both views from within and towards the town where uninterrupted

Page 7-94 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

views towards its imposing position in the context of the floodplain exist, such as within Viewpoint 36 and 37. 7.9.4.32 Effects of Option 1V9 on views further south and in the range of views from within the elevated and open areas of the SDNP to the north would result in similar effects as Option 1V5. 7.9.4.33 The assessment has identified that likely significant effects to the visual amenity of visual receptors at operation as a result of Option 1V9. Effects at operation on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 1V9 are summarised in Table 7-18.

Page 7-95 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-18 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 1V9 Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational works Impact Year 1 effect Year 1 Impact Year 15 effect Year 15 on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 22 High Moderate Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Adverse Viewpoint 23 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Adverse Viewpoint 37A High Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight beneficial Negligible Slight beneficial Viewpoint 43 High Moderate Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse No change Neutral Viewpoint 45 High No change Neutral No change Neutral

Page 7-96 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational works Impact Year 1 effect Year 1 Impact Year 15 effect Year 15 on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 48 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High No change Neutral No change Neutral Viewpoint 58 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse

Page 7-97 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Visual effects from Option 3V1

Likely impacts 7.9.4.34 Likely impacts include: ▪ Views of the new western tie-in junction, associated lighting, as well as views of the alignment and loss of woodland as the Scheme option passes through the extensive ancient woodlands of Paine’s Wood, Binsted Wood and Tortington Common to the north west of Arundel and from higher ground within the SDNP ▪ Views from within the areas of ancient woodland would be impacted at a localised level as previously enclosed views are opened up by the loss of woodland and introduction of a new road corridor ▪ Potential for bridge crossing and/or public rights of way diversions to cross the new alignment would introduce modern structures and detract from the visual continuity within the woodland ▪ Visual impacts on local residential properties off Tortington Lane and Ford Road ▪ Reduction of visual amenity associated with the views from within and surrounding the open River Arun floodplain and the River Arun, where the Scheme option would be elevated and introduce new bridge structures ▪ Use of an embankment across the floodplain would limit lower level views through creation of a solid barrier, reducing visual continuity within this landscape ▪ Views from public rights of way to the east of the River Arun would be aware of the crossing of the River Arun floodplain ▪ Views from users of the railway network south of Arundel particularly where it traverses the River Arun floodplain ▪ Residential properties within Arundel and at the edge of Lyminster will have an awareness of a new road corridor set in the middle distance ▪ Views and awareness of the new alignment crossing the River Arun floodplain from elevated areas of the SNDP and sensitive assets, including Arundel Conservation Area, Arundel Castle, Arundel Cathedral and Tortington Priory, resulting in impacts to their setting and perception.

Page 7-98 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4.35 Option 3V1 would be visible from 30 of the 58 viewpoints representing a range of views and receptors across the Study Area – see Figures 7-9 and 7-10 for viewpoint locations. Discussion of significance 7.9.4.36 Construction activity would materially change a part of the South Downs National Park, its setting and the landscape of the open floodplain to the east. Significant effects to visual amenity during the construction phase is therefore likely to arise within a number of the viewpoints. 7.9.4.37 During construction there are likely to be large adverse effects from Option 3V1 for Viewpoints 22 - 27, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37B, 43, and 46 – 49 (representing residents, visitors and users of public rights of way in the SDNP and in non-designated landscapes as well as locations with cultural associations). 7.9.4.38 During construction there are likely to be Moderate Adverse effects from Option 3V1 for Viewpoints 38, 39, 40, 41, 50 and 51 (representing residents, visitors and users of public rights of way in the SDNP and in non-designated landscapes as well as locations with cultural associations and users of the railway network and local lanes). 7.9.4.39 Impacts on other viewpoints would not be significant. Details of the anticipated effects are described in full in Appendix 7-2. Effects at construction on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 3V1 are summarised below in Table 7-19.

Table 7-19 - Construction phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 3V1 Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance construction works on of Impact of effect visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 22 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 23 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 24 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 25 High Major Large Adverse

Page 7-99 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance construction works on of Impact of effect visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 26 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 27 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 32 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 34 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 35 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 37B High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 43 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse

Page 7-100 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance construction works on of Impact of effect visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 48 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 49 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 50 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 52 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 55 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 58 High Minor Slight Adverse 7.9.4.40 At operation, Option 3V1 would result in significant large adverse visual effects in Year 1 on Viewpoints 22, 24 - 27, 34, 35, 36, 37B, 43, 46 and 47 and significant moderate adverse visual effects in Year 1 on Viewpoints 23, 31, 32, 38, 39, 40, 48, 49, 50 and 51. 7.9.4.41 By Year 15, limited mitigation planting (restricted to Crossbush junction and some sections to the west of Ford Road) would have matured and provide some additional screening. As no planting across the floodplain is proposed, then the majority of effects at Year 15 are the same as in Year 1 of opening. The residual effects would therefore result in significant large adverse visual effects at Year 15 on Viewpoints 24 - 27, 35, 36, 37B and 43 and moderate adverse visual effects at Year 15 on Viewpoints 22, 23, 31, 32, 34, 38, 39, 40 and 46 - 51. 7.9.4.42 Impacts on other viewpoints would not be significant. A discussion of the effects on visual amenity at operation is outlined below. 7.9.4.43 Where the Scheme option passes through the extensive woodlands of Paine’s Wood, Binsted Woods and Tortington Common, Option 3V1 would introduce a significant and detracting new element in the secluded and tranquil woodlands. The Scheme option would create an open tract within the enclosed woodland and introduce engineered landform and traffic movements in nearby views. While the extent of these significant impacts

Page 7-101 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

would recede with distance within the surrounding retained woodland, awareness of the Scheme option along the local lanes and footpaths would greatly detract from the visual continuity and sense of isolation and tranquillity within the woods. 7.9.4.44 Option 3V1 would also become a major new component in views approaching and within the River Arun floodplain as it crosses this largely static and uniform open expanse. Viewpoints 31, 32, 34 – 40, 43 and 45 – 50 demonstrate that Option 3V1 would be visible from a range of locations and receptors within and around this landscape, which would experience significant adverse effects in Year 1. 7.9.4.45 As Option 3V1 approaches Ford Road and the floodplain from the west, it begins to emerge from cutting in the open arable field and transitions to embankment alongside Tortington Priory. Option 3V1 would introduce visible traffic movements within open arable fields that separate Tortington and Tortington Augustinian Priory, with the embankment section creating further visual obstruction and elevated traffic in direct views to the scheduled monument from the south at the edge of Tortington. Option 3V1 would result in significant impacts to the setting of Tortington Augustinian Priory and its relationship with Tortington further south, as Option 3V1 would run between them, in close proximity to the priory. 7.9.4.46 Within the floodplain itself, the introduction of built form and elevated traffic movements across this open landscape would be the primary source of adverse impacts within the undeveloped and static nature of the floodplain. The addition of new and distracting moving elements in views where little or infrequent movement currently occurs would affect the floodplain’s relationship and contribution to the setting of Arundel in both views from within and towards the town in often uninterrupted views towards its imposing position above the floodplain. This would also be true of views from the south towards the SDNP which forms the backdrop of views looking north across the open and undeveloped floodplain, within which Arundel is a key component. The setting of the SDNP in these views would again be detracted from due to the curtailment and interruption of the open views across the undeveloped landscape resulting from the elevated crossing and traffic movements. 7.9.4.47 Crossing the floodplain on embankment would form an obstructive and unsympathetic feature in the flat landscape, and from within surrounding views, reducing intervisibility across the floodplain, particularly from views within the floodplain itself. The open expanse and solitude the floodplain

Page 7-102 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

creates in surrounding views would be substantially impacted by the introduction of the elevated traffic movements created as a result of Option 3V1. 7.9.4.48 The tie in of Option 3V1 with the existing raised junction at Crossbush would introduce an expanded junction where slip roads, structures, traffic movements and increased lighting would be introduced and would urbanise the farmland that leads down to the open floodplain. 7.9.4.49 Option 3V1 would be visible in a range of longer distance views from within the elevated and open areas in the SDNP to the north. Viewpoints 54, 56, 57 and 58 demonstrate that Option 3V1 would form a relatively minor new element in distant and contextual views and would not create a significant impact on those views. It would be viewed in the broader context of the surrounding built form and urban development along the coastal plain, although the distant views of the traffic crossing the open floodplain would create a detraction from the undeveloped stretch of floodplain leading to the south coast. The presence of Option 3V1 would not be considered to form a major element within these views however, and would not give rise to significant visual effects from these more elevated locations. 7.9.4.50 Details of the anticipated effects are described in full in Appendix 7-2. Effects at operation on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 3V1 are summarised below in Table 7-20.

Page 7-103 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-20 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 3V1 Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational works Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 22 High Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 23 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Minor Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 24 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 25 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 26 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 27 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Major Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 32 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 34 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 35 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 37B High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse

Page 7-104 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational works Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight Beneficial Negligible Slight Beneficial Viewpoint 43 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse No Change Neutral Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 48 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 49 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 50 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 52 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 55 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 58 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse

Page 7-105 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Visual effects from Option 4/5AV1

Likely impacts 7.9.4.51 Likely impacts include: ▪ Views of the new western tie-in junction and loss of woodland would occur around Walberton to the west of Arundel, and potentially from higher ground within the SDNP ▪ Views from residential properties and businesses within the dispersed village of Binsted as the Scheme option passes to the west and south west of Binsted Woods and associated historic parkland of Binsted Park, including properties on Binsted Lane, Hedgers Hill, Yapton Lane and Tye Lane ▪ Visual impacts on local residential properties off Tortington Lane and Ford Road, including Tortington Manor and Tortington Priory Barn ▪ Visual impacts on local business properties off Tortington Lane and Ford Road including Manor Farm Liveries, Billycan camping and Brooklands Country Guest House ▪ Reduction of visual amenity associated with the views from within and surrounding the open River Arun floodplain and the River Arun, where the Scheme option would be elevated and introduce new bridge structures ▪ Use of an embankment across the floodplain would limit lower level views through creation of a solid barrier, reducing visual continuity within this landscape ▪ Views from public rights of way along and to the east of the River Arun would be strongly aware of the crossing of the River Arun floodplain ▪ Views from users of the railway network south of Arundel particularly where it traverses the River Arun floodplain would be aware of the crossing of the River Arun floodplain ▪ Residential properties within Arundel and at the edge of Lyminster will have an awareness of a new road corridor set in the middle distance ▪ Views and awareness of the Scheme option crossing the River Arun floodplain from elevated areas of the SDNP and sensitive assets to the north, including Arundel Conservation Area, Arundel Castle and Arundel Cathedral and Tortington Priory, resulting in impacts to their setting and perception.

Page 7-106 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4.52 Option 4/5AV1 would be visible within 44 of the 58 viewpoints representing a range of views and receptors across the Study Area, see Figures 7-9 and 7- 10 for viewpoint locations. Discussion of significance 7.9.4.53 Construction activities would materially change the existing A27 corridor where the Scheme would skirt the National Park boundary to the north of Tortington, disrupting the visual quality of the settled landscapes around Binsted and the character of the dispersed village itself, with the loss of field pattern, woods, trees and the fragmentation of the village. The flyover at Hedgers Hill would save some woodland but would elevate the structure in views. 7.9.4.54 During construction there are likely to be significant very large adverse effects from Option 4/5AV1 for Viewpoints 12 and 17 (representative of users of lanes and footpaths outside the SDNP) and significant large adverse effects for Viewpoints 4, 5A, 6, 8-11, 15, 16A, 19, 28 – 36, 37B, 43 and 46-50 (representing residents, visitors and users of public rights of way in the SDNP and in non-designated landscapes as well as locations with cultural associations and users of the railway network and local lanes). 7.9.4.55 During construction there are likely to be moderate adverse effects from Option 4/5AV1 for Viewpoints 14, 38, 39, 40, 41 and 51 (representing residents, visitors and users of public rights of way in non-designated landscapes as well as locations with cultural associations and users of the railway network and local lanes). 7.9.4.56 Details of the anticipated visual effects from Option 4/5AV1 are described in full in Appendix 7-2. Effects at construction on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 4/5AV1 are summarised below in and summarised below in Table 7-21.

Table 7-21 - Construction phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 4/5AV1 Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance of construction of Impact effect works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 1 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 3 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 4 Moderate Major Large Adverse

Page 7-107 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance of construction of Impact effect works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 5A Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 6 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 8 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 9 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 10 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 11 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 12 High Major Very Large Adverse Viewpoint 14 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 15 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 16A Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 17 High Major Very Large Adverse Viewpoint 19 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 23 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 28 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 29 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 30 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 32 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 33 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 34 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 35 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 37B High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Moderate Moderate Adverse

Page 7-108 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance of construction of Impact effect works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 41 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 43 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 48 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 49 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 50 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 52 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 55 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 58 High Minor Slight Adverse 7.9.4.57 At operation, it is anticipated that replacement woodland would provide some screening and reduce the awareness of changes as a result of Option 4/5AV1, but this could not fully mitigate for a lasting change to the perception of the landscape, loss of tranquillity and intrusion of manmade structures, including the elevation of moving traffic on the Hedgers Hill flyover. 7.9.4.58 At operation, Option 4/5AV1 would result in significant very large adverse visual effects in Year 1 on Viewpoint 12 and significant large adverse visual effects in Year 1 on Viewpoints 4, 6, 9-11, 15, 16A, 17, 19, 28, 29, 30, 32 – 36, 37B, 43, 46 and 47. 7.9.4.59 By Year 15, mitigation planting would have matured to provide some additional screening. As no planting across the floodplain or over the flyover is proposed, then the majority of effects at Year 15 are the same as in Year 1 of opening. 7.9.4.60 The residual effects at Year 15 would therefore result in significant large adverse visual effects on Viewpoints 4, 6, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16A, 17, 19, 29, 30,

Page 7-109 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

32, 33, 35, 36, 37B and 43 and significant moderate adverse visual effects in Year 15 on Viewpoints 5A, 8, 11, 28, 31, 34, 38, 39, 40 and 46 – 51. 7.9.4.61 Impacts on other viewpoints would not be significant, including the majority of views from within Arundel (including some beneficial effects), and long- distance views from within the SDNP. 7.9.4.62 A discussion of the effects on visual amenity at operation is outlined below. 7.9.4.63 At the western tie-in with the existing A27, Option 4/5AV1 would result in loss of trees and vegetation within Avisford Park, as well as south of Barn’s Copse where Option 4/5AV1 would cut through the edge of Barn’s Copse woodland on a viaduct. As Option 4/5AV1 heads south-east on viaduct at this location, the corridor would be set above the line of view, greatly increasing visual awareness of the Scheme option particularly for those properties along Hedger’s Hill and adjacent sections of Yapton Lane and Binsted Lane. The height of the corridor at this location would also introduce traffic headlights into a very dark, treed landscape at the southern extent of the SDNP (within the Transitional Lighting Zone but outside the designated Dark Skies Reserve Core area and 2 kilometre buffer zone). The Scheme option would be visible across the falling ground to the south, although local variations in land form and the built form of Walberton would assist in screening the structure from further south. 7.9.4.64 Viewpoints 4 – 12 and 15 show the impact of Option 4/5AV1 on the existing secluded, tranquil, rural landscape around Binsted, within and on the edge of the SDNP. Option 4/5AV1 would introduce highly elevated traffic movements at the canopy level and whilst the pattern of existing lanes would remain, the noise and headlights from vehicles and visibility of the structures from properties alongside and users of the local lanes, would fundamentally alter the character of this landscape. 7.9.4.65 The assessment has shown through Viewpoints 16A, 17, 19 and 28 - 34 that Option 4/5AV1 would form a prominent new and urbanising element south of Binsted Woods and Tortington Common, within the rural setting around Binsted and the SDNP. Option 4/5AV1 would introduce traffic movements, structures and modifications to the existing landforms that would be out of character and scale with the existing visual amenity and would alter the perception of this landscape. Within the more intimate and enclosed landscapes, such as Binsted Park, it would become a dominant and highly intrusive visual element, resulting in severance of Binsted Lane and surrounding landscape, properties and community.

Page 7-110 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4.66 As the alignment approaches Ford Road and the floodplain from the west, it begins to emerge from cutting in the open arable fields and transition to embankment alongside Tortington Augustinian Priory. Option 4/5AV1 would introduce visible, elevated traffic movements and earthworks within the open arable fields that separate Tortington and Tortington Augustinian Priory, with the embankment section creating further visual obstruction and elevated traffic in direct views to the scheduled monument from the southern edge of Tortington. 7.9.4.67 West of the river Arun, Option 4/5AV1 shares the same alignment as Option 3V1 across Arun floodplain. Option 4/5AV1 would similarly become a major new component in views approaching and within the River Arun floodplain as it crosses this largely static and uniform open expanse. Viewpoints 35 - 51 demonstrate that Option 4/5AV1 would be visible from a range of locations and receptors within and around this landscape, which would experience significant adverse effects in Year 1. 7.9.4.68 Within the floodplain itself, the introduction of built form and elevated traffic movements across this open landscape would be the primary source of adverse impacts. This would be due to the addition of new and distracting moving elements in views where little or infrequent movement currently helps to emphasise the undeveloped and static nature of the floodplain. This would affect the floodplain’s relationship and contribution to the setting of Arundel in both views from within and towards the town. This would also be true of views from the south towards the SDNP which forms the backdrop of views looking north across the open and undeveloped floodplain, within which Arundel is a key component. The setting of the SDNP in these views would again be detracted due to the curtailment and interruption of the open views across the undeveloped landscape resulting from the elevated crossing and traffic movements. 7.9.4.69 Crossing the floodplain on embankment would form an obstructive and unsympathetic feature in the flat landscape. From surrounding views, the level of inter-visibility across the floodplain would be considerably reduced, particularly from views within the floodplain itself. The open expanse and solitude the floodplain creates in surrounding views would be substantially impacted by the introduction of the elevated traffic movements introduced by the crossing of the floodplain. 7.9.4.70 The tie in of Option 4/5AV1 with the existing A27 junction at Crossbush would introduce an expanded junction where slip roads, structures, traffic

Page 7-111 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

movements and increased lighting would be introduced and would urbanise the farmland that leads down to the open floodplain. 7.9.4.71 Option 4/5AV1 would be visible in a range of views from within the elevated and open areas in the SDNP to the north. Viewpoints 56, 57 and 58 demonstrate that this Scheme option would form a relatively minor new element in distant and contextual views. Option 4/5AV1 would be viewed in the broader context of the surrounding built form and urban development along the coastal plain. However, the distant views of the traffic crossing the open floodplain would create a detraction from undeveloped stretch of floodplain leading to the south coast. The presence of Option 4/5AV1 would not be considered to form a major element within these more distant views however, and would not give rise to significant visual effects from them. 7.9.4.72 Details of the anticipated visual effects from Option 4/5AV1 are described in full in Appendix 7-2. Effects at operation on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 4/5AV1 are summarised below in Table 7-22.

Page 7-112 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-22 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 4/5AV1 Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 1 Moderate Negligible Slight Adverse No change Neutral Viewpoint 3 High Negligible Slight Adverse No change Neutral Viewpoint 4 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 5A Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 6 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 8 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 9 High Moderate Large Adverse Moderate Large Adverse Viewpoint 10 High Moderate Large Adverse Moderate Large Adverse Viewpoint 11 High Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 12 High Major Very Large Major Large Adverse Adverse Viewpoint 14 Moderate Minor Slight adverse Minor Slight adverse Viewpoint 15 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 16A Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 17 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse

Page 7-113 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 19 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 23 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 28 High Major Large Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 29 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 30 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Major Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 32 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 33 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 34 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 35 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 37B High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse

Page 7-114 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight beneficial Negligible Slight beneficial Viewpoint 43 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse No change Neutral Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 48 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 49 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 50 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 52 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 55 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 58 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse

Page 7-115 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Visual effects from Option 4/5AV2

Likely impacts 7.9.4.73 Likely impacts include: ▪ Views of the new western tie-in junction and loss of woodland would occur around Walberton to the west of Arundel, and potentially from higher ground within the SDNP ▪ Views from residential properties and businesses within the dispersed village of Binsted as the Scheme option passes to the west and south west of Binsted Woods and associated historic parkland of Binsted Park, including properties on Binsted Lane and Hedgers Hill ▪ Visual impacts on local residential properties off Tortington Lane and Ford Road, including Tortington Manor and Tortington Priory Barn ▪ Visual impacts on local business properties off Tortington Lane and Ford Road including Manor Farm Liveries, Billycan camping and Brooklands Country Guest House ▪ Reduction of visual amenity associated with the views from within and surrounding the open River Arun floodplain and the River Arun, where the Scheme option would be elevated and introduce new bridge structures ▪ Use of an embankment across the floodplain would limit lower level views through creation of a solid barrier, reducing visual continuity within this landscape ▪ Views from public rights of way along and to the east of the River Arun would be strongly aware of the crossing of the River Arun floodplain ▪ Views from users of the railway network south of Arundel particularly where it traverses the River Arun floodplain ▪ Residential properties within Arundel and at the edge of Lyminster will have an awareness of a new road corridor set in the middle distance ▪ Views and awareness of the Scheme option crossing the River Arun floodplain from elevated areas of the SDNP and sensitive assets to the north, including Arundel Conservation Area, Arundel Castle and Arundel Cathedral and Tortington Priory, resulting in impacts to their setting and perception.

Page 116 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4.74 Option 4/5AV2 would be visible within 42 of the 58 viewpoints representing a range of views and receptors across the Study Area - see Figures 7-9 and 7-10 for viewpoint locations. Discussion of significance 7.9.4.75 Construction activities would materially change a part of the SDNP, its setting and the landscape of the open floodplain to the east. Significant effects to visual amenity during the construction phase is therefore likely to arise within a number of the viewpoints. 7.9.4.76 During construction, there are likely to be significant very large adverse effects from Option 4/5AV2 for Viewpoints 15, 20 and 21 (representing residents, visitors and users of public rights of way in the SDNP at Binsted Park) and significant large adverse effects for Viewpoints 7, 9-12, 16A, 28 – 36, 37B, 43 and 46 – 50 (representing residents, visitors and users of public rights of way in the SDNP and in non-designated landscapes as well as locations with cultural associations and users of the railway network and local lanes). 7.9.4.77 During construction, there are also likely to be significant moderate adverse effects from Option 4/5AV2 for Viewpoints 8, 38 - 41 and 51 (representing residents, visitors and users of public rights of way in the SDNP and in non- designated landscapes (including Arundel) as well as locations with cultural associations and users of the railway network and local lanes). 7.9.4.78 Details of the anticipated effects are described in full in Appendix 7-2. Effects at construction on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 4/5AV2 are summarised below in Table 7-23.

Table 7-23 - Construction phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors from Option 4/5AV2 Likely Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of construction works impact effect on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 1 Moderate Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 4 Moderate Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 5A Moderate Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 7 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 8 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 9 High Major Large Adverse

Page 117 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of construction works impact effect on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 10 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 11 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 12 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 15 High Major Very Large Adverse Viewpoint 16A Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 20 High Major Very Large Adverse Viewpoint 21 High Major Very Large Adverse Viewpoint 23 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 28 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 29 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 30 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 32 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 33 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 34 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 35 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 37B High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 43 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 48 Moderate Major Large Adverse

Page 118 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of construction works impact effect on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 49 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 50 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 52 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 55 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 58 High Minor Slight Adverse 7.9.4.79 At operation, Option 4/5AV2 would result in significant very large adverse visual effects in Year 1 on Viewpoints 15, 20 and 21 and significant large adverse visual effects in Year 1 on viewpoints 7, 9-12, 16A, 28 – 30, 32 – 36, 37B, 43, 46 and 47. Option 4/5AV2 would also result in significant moderate adverse visual effects in Year 1 on viewpoints 31, 38 – 40, and 48 – 51. 7.9.4.80 By Year 15, mitigation planting would have matured to provide some additional screening. As no planting across the floodplain is proposed, then the majority of effects at Year 15 are the same as in Year 1 of opening. 7.9.4.81 The residual effects of Option 4/5AV2 at Year 15 would therefore result in significant large adverse visual effects on viewpoints 7, 9, 10, 12, 16A, 29, 31, 32, 34, 38 – 40 and 46 – 51 and significant moderate adverse visual effects on Viewpoints 11, 16A, 29, 31, 32, 34, 38, 39, 40 and 46 – 51. 7.9.4.82 Impacts on other viewpoints would not be significant, including the majority of views from within Arundel (including some beneficial effects), and long- distance views from within the SDNP. 7.9.4.83 A discussion of the effects on visual amenity at operation is outlined below. 7.9.4.84 At operation, as a result of the extensive nature of the corridor and scale of the new western tie-in junction, Option 4/5AV2 would result in loss of trees and vegetation within Avisford Park and through Barn’s Copse, with a junction set to the east of Barn’s Copse within arable fields and cutting across the historic Old Scotland Lane bridleway. Viewpoints 7 – 12 and 15 show the impact of the Scheme option on the existing secluded, tranquil, rural landscape around Binsted, within and on the edge of the SDNP. The Scheme option would introduce traffic movements and built structures, in cutting and

Page 119 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

partially on embankment around the junction, resulting in uncharacteristic traffic movement, noise and vehicle headlights into a currently rural, tranquil and secluded landscape. 7.9.4.85 The assessment has shown through Viewpoints 16A, 17, 19 and 28 - 34 that Option 4/5AV2 would form a prominent new and urbanising element south of Binsted Woods and Tortington Common, within the rural setting around Binsted and the SDNP. The Scheme option would introduce traffic movements, structures and modifications to the landform that would be out of character and scale with the existing visual amenity and would alter the perception of this landscape. Within the intimate and enclosed landscapes, particularly Binsted Park, it would become a dominant and highly intrusive visual element. 7.9.4.86 Details of the anticipated effects at operation are described in full in Appendix 7-2. Effects at operation on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 4/5AV2 are summarised below in Table 7-24.

Page 120 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-24 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors as a result of Option 4/5AV2 Likely Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 1 Moderate No change Neutral No change Neutral Viewpoint 4 Moderate No change Neutral No change Neutral Viewpoint 5A Moderate No change Neutral No change Neutral Viewpoint 7 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 8 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 9 High Moderate Large Adverse Moderate Large Adverse Viewpoint 10 High Moderate Large Adverse Moderate Large Adverse Viewpoint 11 High Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 12 High Major Large Adverse Moderate Large Adverse Viewpoint 15 High Major Very Large Major Large Adverse Adverse Viewpoint 16A Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 20 High Major Very Large Major Large Adverse Adverse Viewpoint 21 High Major Very Large Major Large Adverse Adverse

Page 7-121 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 23 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 28 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 29 High Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 30 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Major Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 32 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 33 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 34 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 35 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 37B High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight beneficial Negligible Slight beneficial

Page 7-122 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 43 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse No change Neutral Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 48 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 49 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 50 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 52 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 55 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 58 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse

Page 7-123 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Visual effects from Option 5BV1

Likely impacts 7.9.4.87 Likely impacts include: ▪ Views of the new western tie-in junction and loss of woodland would occur around Walberton to the west of Arundel, including Copse Lane, Tye Lane and Yapton Lane and potentially from higher ground within the SDNP ▪ Views from residential properties and businesses within the dispersed village of Binsted as the Scheme option passes to the west and south west of Binsted Lane and associated historic parkland of Binsted Park, including properties on Binsted Lane and Yapton Lane ▪ Visual impacts on local residential properties off Tortington Lane and Ford Road, including Tortington Manor and Tortington Priory Barn ▪ Visual impacts on local business properties off Tortington Lane and Ford Road including Manor Farm Liveries, Billycan camping and Brooklands Country Guest House ▪ Reduction of visual amenity associated with the views from within and surrounding the open River Arun floodplain and the River Arun, where the Scheme option would be elevated and introduce new bridge structures ▪ Use of an embankment across the floodplain would limit lower level views through creation of a solid barrier, reducing visual continuity within this landscape ▪ Views from public rights of way along and to the east of the River Arun would be strongly aware of the crossing of the River Arun floodplain ▪ Views from users of the railway network south of Arundel particularly where it traverses the River Arun floodplain ▪ Residential properties within Arundel and at the edge of Lyminster will have an awareness of a new road corridor set in the middle distance ▪ Views and awareness of the Scheme option crossing the River Arun floodplain from elevated areas of the SDNP and sensitive assets to the north, including Arundel Conservation Area, Arundel Castle and Arundel Cathedral and Tortington Priory, resulting in impacts to their setting and perception.

Page 7-124 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4.88 Option 5BV1 would be visible within 42 of the 58 viewpoints representing a range of views and receptors across the Study Area – see Figures 7-9 and 7-10 for viewpoint locations. Discussion of significance 7.9.4.89 The construction activities would substantially alter the character of the landscape across the floodplain, resulting in fragmentation and permanent degradation of character. Construction activities would materially change an extensive swathe of tranquil settled landscape, where Option 5BV1 would skirt the National Park boundary to the north of Tortington, disrupting the visual quality of the settled landscapes around Binsted and the character of the dispersed village itself, with the loss of field pattern, woods, trees and the fragmentation of the village. 7.9.4.90 During construction, there are likely to be significant very large adverse effects from Option 5BV1 for Viewpoints 3 and 13 (representing residents and users of public rights of way and lanes in non-designated landscapes) and significant large adverse effects for Viewpoints 2, 5B, 9, 10, 14, 16B, 17 – 19, 28 – 36, 37B, 43 and 46 – 50 (representing residents, visitors and users of public rights of way in the SDNP and in non-designated landscapes as well as locations with cultural associations and users of the railway network and local lanes). 7.9.4.91 During construction, there are also likely to be significant moderate adverse effects from Option 5BV1 for Viewpoints 1, 38 - 41 and 51 (representing residents, visitors and users of public rights of way in the SDNP and in non- designated landscapes (including Arundel) as well as locations with cultural associations and users of the railway network and local lanes). 7.9.4.92 Details of the anticipated effects at construction are described in full in Appendix 7-2. Effects at construction on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 5BV1 are summarised below in Table 7-25.

Table 7-25 - Construction phase likely effects for viewpoint receptors from Option 5BV1 Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance of construction of impact effect works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 1 Moderate Major Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 2 Moderate Major Large Adverse

Page 7-125 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance of construction of impact effect works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 3 High Major Very Large Adverse Viewpoint 5B Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 6 Moderate Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 9 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 10 High Moderate Large Adverse Viewpoint 13 High Major Very Large Adverse Viewpoint 14 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 16B Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 17 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 18 High Moderate Large Adverse Viewpoint 19 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 23 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 28 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 29 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 30 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 32 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 33 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 34 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 35 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 37B High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Moderate Moderate Adverse

Page 7-126 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Likely impact of Sensitivity Magnitude Significance of construction of impact effect works on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 43 High Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 48 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 49 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 50 Moderate Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 52 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 55 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 56 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 58 High Minor Slight Adverse

7.9.4.93 At operation, Option 5BV1 would result in fragmentation of the fieldscape, tree loss and fragmentation of hedgerows and woodland south and west of Binsted and additional fragmentation and tree and woodland loss around Avisford Park golf course and the peri-urban edge of Walberton. 7.9.4.94 At operation Year 1, there are therefore likely to be significant very large adverse effects from Option 5BV1 for Viewpoint 13 and significant large adverse effects for Viewpoints 3, 9, 10, 14, 16B, 17 – 19, 28 – 30, 32 - 36, 37B, 43. 46 and 47. There are also likely to be significant moderate adverse effects for Viewpoints 2, 5B, 31, 38 – 40, and 48 – 51. 7.9.4.95 It is anticipated that some replacement woodland and field boundary planting and other screening planting would reduce the awareness of the changes, however there would be a lasting loss of tranquillity, visual amenity and changes to the perception of the landscape that would be significant.

Page 7-127 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

7.9.4.96 At operation by Year 15 there are therefore likely to be significant very large adverse effects from Option 5BV1 for Viewpoint 13 and significant large adverse effects for Viewpoints 10, 14, 16B, 19, 29, 30. 33, 35, 36, 37B and 43. There are also likely to be significant moderate adverse effects for Viewpoints 2, 3, 5B, 9, 17, 18, 28, 31, 32, 34, 38 – 40 and 46 – 51. 7.9.4.97 Impacts on other viewpoints would not be significant, including the majority of views from within Arundel (including some beneficial effects), and long- distance views from within the SDNP. 7.9.4.98 A discussion of the effects on visual amenity at operation is outlined below. 7.9.4.99 At the western tie-in with the existing A27, Option 5BV1 would result in loss of trees and vegetation west of Copse Lane, Tye Lane and across Avisford Park golf course, as shown in Viewpoints 1, 2, 3 and 5B (from the peri-urban edge of Walberton). The more open, man-made landscape of the gold course and farmland around Hooe Farm is more able to accommodate change than the more intimate and secluded landscape of the SDNP further east, but the Scheme option would still introduce uncharacteristic traffic movement, earthworks and visual intrusion into the largely rural and tranquil landscape north of Walberton. 7.9.4.100 Option 5BV1 then cuts across Yapton Lane and runs south of Binsted Lane, behind St Mary’s church on viaduct. Viewpoints 13 – 19 show the impact of the Scheme option on the existing secluded, tranquil, rural landscape around Binsted, within and on the edge of the SDNP. Option 5BV1 would introduce traffic movements and built structures, in cutting and on embankment and viaduct, resulting in uncharacteristic elevated traffic movement, noise and vehicle headlights into a currently rural, tranquil and secluded landscape. Its proximity to Binsted Lane and St Mary’s Church in particular will result in severing of the character and setting of the rural village and the church from the wider landscape, and alter the peaceful, meditative atmosphere of the existing church and its grounds as a focal point for the community. 7.9.4.101 The assessment has shown through Viewpoints 16B, 17, 18, 19 and 28 - 34 that Option 5BV1 would form a prominent new and urbanising element south of Binsted Woods and Tortington Common, within the rural setting around Binsted and the SDNP. Option 5BV1 would introduce traffic movements, structures and modifications to the landform that would be out of character and scale with the existing visual amenity and would alter the perception of this landscape. Within the intimate and enclosed landscapes, particularly Binsted Park, it would become a dominant and highly intrusive visual

Page 7-128 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

element, resulting in severance of Binsted Lane and surrounding landscape, properties and community. 7.9.4.102 Option 5BV1 shares the same alignment as Option 4/5AV1 from Meadow Lodge on Binsted Lane (east) onwards, towards Tortington, across Ford Road and the River Arun floodplain and to its eastern tie-in with the existing Crossbush junction. Its impacts will therefore be the same as Option 4/5AV1 from Meadow Lodge to Crossbush. 7.9.4.103 Details of the anticipated effects at operation are described in full in Appendix 7-2. Effects at operation on all viewpoints which have a view of Option 5BV1 are summarised below in Table 7-26.

Page 7-129 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Table 7-26 - Operational phase likely effects on viewpoint receptors as a result of Option 5BV1 Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational works Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 1 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 2 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 3 High Moderate Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Viewpoint 5B Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 6 Moderate No change Neutral No change Neutral Viewpoint 9 High Moderate Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 10 High Moderate Large Adverse Moderate Large Adverse Viewpoint 13 High Major Very Large Major Very Large Adverse Adverse Viewpoint 14 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 16B Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 17 High Major Large Adverse Major Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 18 High Moderate Large Adverse Minor Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 19 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 23 High Negligible Slight Adverse Negligible Slight Adverse Viewpoint 28 High Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse

Page 7-130 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational works Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 29 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 30 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 31 Moderate Major Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 32 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 33 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 34 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 35 Moderate Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 36 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 37B High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 38 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 39 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 40 High Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 41 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 42 High Negligible Slight beneficial Negligible Slight beneficial Viewpoint 43 High Major Large Adverse Major Large Adverse Viewpoint 44 High Minor Slight Adverse No change Neutral Viewpoint 46 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse

Page 7-131 August 2019

Environmental Assessment Report Chapter 7 – Landscape and Visual A27 Arundel Bypass – PCF Stage 2 Further Consultation

Impact of Sensitivity Magnitude of Significance of Magnitude of Significance of operational works Impact: Year 1 effect: Year 1 Impact: Year 15 effect: Year 15 on visual amenity of receptors at: Viewpoint 47 Moderate Major Large Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 48 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 49 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 50 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 51 Moderate Moderate Moderate Adverse Moderate Moderate Adverse Viewpoint 52 Moderate Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 55 High Minor Slight adverse Minor Slight adverse Viewpoint 56 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 57 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse Viewpoint 58 High Minor Slight Adverse Minor Slight Adverse

Page 7-132 August 2019