04 July 2018

Land off Crudwell Road, Malmesbury

Landscape and Visual Appraisal

Report Number: 11593_R01a_JC_LP

Author: Jennifer Cawood CMLI

Birmingham ・ Cotswolds ・ Exeter ・ London ・ Manchester

Contents

Section 1: Executive summary and background ...... 1 Section 2: Planning policy context ...... 7 Section 3: Landscape character ...... 10 Section 4: Visual context ...... 13 Section 5: Classification of resources ...... 17 Section 6: Nature of the change ...... 20 Section 7: Conclusions ...... 24

Appendices

Appendix 1: Pre-application response from Senior Landscape Officer Mark Goodwin

Appendix 2: GLVIA3 Table 3.1 Components of the EIA process and the role of LVIA

Appendix 3: Landscape Institute GLVIA3 Clarification 1/13 Note

Appendix 4: Illustrative layout

Plans

Plan 1: Topography (11593/P01)

Plan 2: First Sieve Visual Analysis ZTV (11593/P02)

Plan 3: Landscape Character (11593/P03)

Plan 4: Planning Policy (11593/P06)

Plan 5: Photoviewpoint Locations and Visual Envelope (11593/P07)

Plan 6: Photoviews 1-15 (11593/P06)

Plan 7: Site Context (11593/P04)

This report, all plans, illustrations, and other associated material remains the property of Tyler Grange LLP until paid for in full. Copyright and intellectual property rights remain with Tyler Grange LLP.

The contents of this report are valid at the time of writing. Tyler Grange shall not be liable for any use of this report other than for the purposes for which it was produced. Owing to the dynamic nature of ecological, landscape, and arboricultural resources, if more than twelve months have elapsed since the date of this report, further advice must be taken before you rely on the contents of this report. Notwithstanding any provision of the Tyler Grange LLP Terms & Conditions, Tyler Grange LLP shall not be liable for any losses (howsoever incurred) arising as a result of reliance by the client or any third party on this report more than 12 months after the date of this report.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP

Section 1: Executive Summary and Background

Executive Summary

1.1. The site to which this application refers, lies within an employment allocation in the adopted Wiltshire Core Strategy. It is also identified as such in the adopted Malmesbury Neighbourhood Plan. The principle of large unit development on this site has therefore been established and as such an appropriate and proportionate landscape and visual assessment has been carried out. In addition, built form of the size and scale proposed is already present in the vicinity and the site itself is in commercial use. It is not a greenfield site.

1.2. This Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) has been undertaken by Tyler Grange LLP to consider the effect of a foodstore development on key landscape and visual resources on land at the Malmesbury Garden Centre in Malmesbury, Wiltshire.

1.3. In his email of 16 April 2018 (refer to Appendix 1), senior landscape officer at Wiltshire Council, Mark Goodwin identified a particular concern regarding potential visual impacts arising from the proposed development on the setting of the Grade I Listed Charlton Mansion within the non-registered Charlton Park. The vista along the tree lined avenue was identified as aligning with the site and therefore giving rise to potential visual effects. However, aerial imagery does not support this alignment with the site (refer to Plan 7: Site Context) and dense intervening vegetation affects intervisibility. The Heritage Assessment (refer to supporting planning application document) concludes that in terms of the NPPF, the development proposals would result in no harm to the significance of any surrounding designated assets, including Listed Buildings. With regard to the unregistered parkland at Charlton Park, the Heritage Assessment states that there would be no impact on this parkland and that the site did not contribute to the historic character or views of the park and in turn the Grade I Listed Charlton Mansion. Planting proposals and specifically boundary treatments on the eastern flank are an improvement to the baseline situation and would assist assimilation of built form through the reinforcement of a soft edge in proximity to Charlton Park.

1.4. In the pre-application response from Wiltshire Council dated 7 February 2017 a number of urban design and visual amenity concerns were raised and these have been considered and addressed either within subsequent design iterations or within supporting technical documents.

1.5. The stand-alone LVA has been undertaken in accordance with Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd edition (GLVIA3) using a methodology that is based on recognised guidance. The framework for an appraisal of landscape character and visual effects considers the Baseline Appraisal and the Nature of the Change. Refer to table 3.1 in Appendix 2 regarding recommended components of Landscape and Visual Appraisals compared to full Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments for EIA’s and also the Landscape Institute (LI) GLVIA3 clarification 1/13 note in Appendix 3.

1.6. The site itself is located within an allocation (less than 1 Ha of the 4 Ha allocation amounting to approximately 20%) that includes the functioning Malmesbury Garden Centre comprising of a collection of differing building styles of varying quality, storage areas, yards, parking areas and derelict land. In a slightly wider context the site lies on a roundabout at the junction of the A429 and B4014 amidst a much more extensive area of larger scale built-form, agricultural sheds, farm houses and other units with a water tower, BP filling station, shop and garage nearby. The allocation and its context therefore are considered to be of an urban, generic, non-specific character and it is this urbanisation

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 1

that forms the baseline in this case. It is unlike the published landscape character types and areas within which it lies:

• the National Character Area 107 Cotswolds; • the Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment Rolling Clay Lowland Landscape Character Type or Minety Rolling Clay Lowland Landscape Character Area; and • the North Wiltshire Lowland Clay Farmland Landscape Character Type or the Minety and Malmesbury Rolling Lowland Landscape Character Area.

1.7. The combination of the key characteristics in terms of landform and landcover visually contain this allocation with the exception of part of the western aspect. The mature flank of evergreen Leyland cypress trees on the northern boundary provides extensive screening cover to the allocated area all year round and this protects the soft green views to the distant approach of Malmesbury along the A429. In addition, it protects visual amenity from the public footpath (MALW9) close to Charlton Park (non-registered and without public access).

The lack of adverse effects is due to a combination of factors namely;

• the acceptance of the principle of development of built form of the scale and mass proposed arising from the allocation; • the existing brownfield nature of the allocation; • the urban character and context of the site; • the visual containment already afforded; and • the accompanying landscape and visual mitigation and enhancement measures proposed.

1.8. Visibility has been tested in the field and the limited extent of intervisibility with the wider landscape is demonstrated within this LVA and any mitigating measures are described. The field verified visual envelope is particularly small and is for the most part limited to the site itself and its immediate surroundings with spillage just to the immediate west. Due to the interleaving effects of tree groups, woodland belts and well-treed hedgerows in combination with rolling topography and built form nearby, any mid to long range views are either heavily filtered or obscured from the north, south and east. Views from the west are to some extent filtered and all are short to mid-range where some private views may be afforded from a limited number of dwellings. Occupants at Filands Gate and Filands Farm are located close to the site to the northwest of the roundabout with intervening vegetation that filters views and one other single storey property to the immediate west of the roundabout set behind a tall evergreen screen on the roadside boundary that again provides substantial screening.

1.9. Taking it all into consideration the visual effects are assessed as being no more than neutral when a well-designed landscape scheme is incorporated within the proposed layout.

1.10. Whilst it is beyond the scope of this LVA to consider the significance of and effects upon the setting of heritage assets including views from the Grade I Listed Charlton House, the introduction of a tree belt on the eastern boundary will deliver an enhanced and softened edge that improves the existing baseline situation.

1.11. In conclusion, the landscape and visual effects are considered to be very limited and localised in extent and would not undermine the wider character and ultimately the objectives and aspirations of local landscape policy and conservation/enhancement guidelines contained within published landscape character assessments. It is the conclusion of this LVA that there would be no harmful effect on landscape character or the visual amenity arising from the proposals, nor on the receiving landscape or on visual resources. The private views of residents who may possibly afford views further west on the edge of the residential area (from windows in daytime) already experience the urbanising view of the garden centre and other unattractive nearby buildings.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 2

Background

1.12. This LVA forms part of the technical suite supporting a ‘hybrid’ planning application with full details for the demolition of the existing garden centre and the erection of a Class A1 discount foodstore, with associated access, car parking and landscaping on the north west portion of the site, and outline details for the provision of a replacement garden centre and/or employment uses on the remainder of the site (hereafter referred to as the “site.”)

1.13. The site (less than 1 Ha) is identified as lying within the wider employment allocation (of 4 Ha) of land in the adopted Wiltshire Core Strategy (reference BD1) and replicated within the adopted Malmesbury Neighbourhood Plan.

1.14. Of relevance, an earlier planning application for a Sainsbury’s foodstore (planning reference N/1104092/OUT) was refused on 4 October 2013. It is noted that of the 2 reasons for refusal none were landscape or visual related. The Wiltshire Council Landscape Officer in 2012 was Mark Goodwin (as present) and he provided on 3 February 2012 a consultation response where he cited boundary landscape treatments as unreliable and inadequate. He was concerned that in his opinion intervisibility between the proposed development and the Charlton Park and listed buildings within it, would give rise to negative effects. Clearly the scale and massing of the refused Sainsbury’s development proposals was much greater than this current planning application proposes (this foodstore proposal is significantly smaller than Sainsbury’s). Locating the smaller building further to the west and closer to the existing building footprints than the Sainsbury’s application is an important consideration together with a more generous and strategically placed landscape proposal.

1.15. Further to the 7 February 2017 pre-application response from Wiltshire Council, concerns have been addressed and amendments included in the current planning application.

1.16. This LVA has been undertaken by a Chartered Member (1984) of the Landscape Institute in accordance with GLVIA3 using a methodology that is based on recognised guidance.

1.17. This document will analyse landscape character and the visual amenity and identify and describe the effects that are likely to occur as a result, including whether they are adverse or beneficial, in accordance with Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd edition (GLVIA3)1.

1.18. The LVA will determine the ability of the landscape setting and visual context to accommodate such change within the framework of planning policy.

Site context

1.19. The site lies to the northeast of Malmesbury and within an urban context located at the roundabout junction of the A429 and B4014. Business units of large scale sheds are mixed with agricultural farm buildings, bed and breakfast facilities, a BP filling station with shop, and garage together with some vacant brownfield land and more buildings to the south.

1.20. Three residential properties are located close to the A429 in the vicinity of the roundabout, Filands Farm, Filands Gate and a single storey dwelling. All three properties enjoy the benefit of substantial screening planting that surround them at this orientation.

1.21. The site comprises part of a dilapidated collection of mixed buildings of differing styles, materials and conditions together with land use associated with an active commercial horticultural nursery. Some

1 Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, LI and IMEA, 2013 (3rd Edition)

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 3

areas have been neglected and have a derelict appearance with parking and delivery spaces of poor quality and minimal maintenance. Defunct areas of land lie within the allocation. A series of business units and other buildings and sheds abut the southwestern boundary of many shapes and sizes and similar in mass to what is proposed.

1.22. There are few landscape features associated with the site save for the mature Leyland cypress tree screens on the northern and western boundaries (refer to the arboriculture report for detail) and sporadic vegetative cover.

The Proposal

1.23. It is proposed that the existing garden centre is demolished and replaced by a class A1 discount foodstore, with associated access, car parking and landscaping on the north west portion of the site. Outline details relate to the provision of a replacement garden centre and/or employment uses. The masterplan is illustrated in Appendix 4.

1.24. The mature Leyland cypress tree screen on the northern boundary is retained (G2, G4 of the arboriculture report), the gap infilled with 4 no Leyland cypresses (G3), and Leylandii tops reduced to prevent more windblow to a height (11m approximately) that is greater than the proposed maximum ridge height of 10m in line with sound arboriculture practice (refer to the arboriculture report for detail and proposed removals).

1.25. Softening tree screen planting is proposed on the site’s eastern boundary to provide an appropriate vegetative interface with the remaining allocation (not yet detailed) and contributing eventually to the landscape treatment of the whole allocation that will interweave with the agricultural and parkland landscape beyond.

1.26. The tree screen on the western boundary is to be removed and replaced with a more attractive line of appropriate deciduous trees with seasonal interest as an improvement on the Leyland cypress material (G1). For detail refer to the arboriculture report and landscape plan that accompany this application.

1.27. A natural stone wall that is in keeping with the local landscape character and in accordance with the pre-application response dated 7 February 2017, is proposed along the A429 road frontage. This combines with the replacement deciduous tree planting to form a unified linear landscape feature that aligns with landscape characteristics and provides an attractive frontage to the allocated site, representing an improvement on the current baseline.

1.28. In order to provide softening elements to built form and car parking, new tree planting is introduced within the layout.

1.29. Vehicular access will be via the existing roundabout on the A429.

1.30. Built form is located around the footprints of the collection of existing buildings.

1.31. Conservation and enhancement proposals are carefully considered, and improvements represent a quantum increase in terms of Green Infrastructure (GI).

Methodology

1.32. The methodology used to undertake the appraisal has been based on recognised guidance, and draws upon information contained within the following documents:

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 4

• 'Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment' Third Edition 2013 (GLVIA3) under the auspices of the Landscape Institute (LI) and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA); and • ‘An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment’ published by Natural England 2014. 2

1.33. The review and appraisal of landscape character and visual effects has involved the following tasks – Baseline Appraisal and Nature of the Change.

a) Baseline Appraisal. The LVA provides an understanding of the landscape in terms of its constituent elements and character, its condition, how it is experienced, and the value attached to it. This stage also establishes the area over which the site may be visible and those groups of people who may experience views of the site. The study area relates to that area of visibility.

1.34. The appraisal process comprises a combination of desk and field studies with subsequent analysis and involves the following:

• A review of landscape designations and planning policies relevant to the study area; • An assessment of the landscape character of the site with reference to published landscape character assessments and verified and refined through fieldwork.; • Geographic Information System (GIS) visual mapping of the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) of the development proposals using industry standard software and identification of representative viewpoints; and • Fieldwork to check and verify the findings of the desktop studies and take a photographic record of views for inclusion in the report.

1.35. In the first instance GIS and Ordnance Survey Terrain data are modelled to create a topographical plan (refer to Plan 1: Topography) and this is followed by the ZTV (refer to Plan 2: First Sieve Visual Analysis). The computer generated ZTV is created using bare earth OS 3D modelling data and does not take into consideration the screening effect of existing built form, trees and vegetation. This information provides a starting point for the fieldwork in terms of determining the extent of visibility and the likely receptors. The ZTV is a guide only to assist the fixing of a visual envelope in the field.

1.36. Typically representative views of the site from a variety of receptors in the local area are determined on the basis of the first sieve GIS mapping and subsequent fieldwork. The identification of views is carried out from external spaces within the public domain, and not from buildings or private spaces. Views from Charlton Park and buildings cannot be included as no public access exists to facilitate this. It is determined at this stage that there are no views of the site afforded from any area that is coloured blue on Plan 2: First Sieve Visual Analysis that has been set to the ridge height and location of the proposed built form (maximum 10 metres). Blue coloured areas are subsequently scoped out of the appraisal.

1.37. Viewpoint locations, field verified visual envelope and area of study are set out on Plan 5: Photoviewpoint Locations and Visual Envelope. This plan also illustrates any features of both built form or of a woody nature (such as copses, trees, hedgerows and woodlands) that limit visibility.

b) Nature of the Change. An understanding of the nature of the change is usually based upon the description of the changes required. Any relevant mitigation and enhancement measures which form part of the application and embedded within it are considered in this LVA and a conclusion is drawn as to the effects arising.

2 “An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment”, Christine Tudor, Natural England, 2014

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 5

1.38. In accordance with GLVIA3, the LVA will identify and describe the effects that are likely to occur, including whether they are adverse or beneficial. Unlike a full LVIA, an LVA does not systematically and transparently assess the likely significance of the effects identified (refer to Appendix 2).

1.39. Professional judgement plays an important role in the LVA process where the assessment of landscape character and visual amenity is both a subjective and objective process. However, the appraisal process seeks to provide a narrative to explain the judgement reached.

1.40. The assessment of the nature of the change depends on the degree to which the development:

• Compliments, respects and fits into the existing scale, landform and pattern of the landscape context and visual composition; • Enables enhancement, restoration or retention of the landscape character and visual amenity and delivers policy aspirations; and • Affects strategic and important views in addition to the visual context and the experience of the visual receptors.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 6

Section 2: Planning Policy Context

2.1. The following text summarises the planning policies relevant to landscape and visual issues and should be read in conjunction with Plan 4: Planning Policy. This section is limited to those policies with a primary focus on landscape and visual issues.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)3 2012

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) outlines the Government’s planning policies for England, setting out how these are expected to be applied. The NPPF is a material consideration in planning decisions and any development would need to accord with the following planning provisions

2.2. Paragraph 14, footnote 9 indicates those designated areas where development should be restricted, namely:

• Sites of Special Scientific Interest; • Green Belt; • Local Green Space; • Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB); • Heritage Coasts; • National Parks; • Designated Heritage Assets; and • Areas at Risk of Flooding or Coastal Erosion.

2.3. The site does not lie within any of the above designated areas.

2.4. Paragraph 109 references the need to protect and enhance “valued landscapes” no definition of a valued landscape is provided in the NPPF or NPPG. The value of the landscape is considered in relation to the sensitivity of the landscape and features within this report.

2.5. Attention is drawn to the difference between international, national and local landscape designations at paragraph 113 regarding the criteria-based policies against which development proposals should be judged where it states:

“Distinctions should be made between the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites, so that protection is commensurate with their status and gives appropriate weight to their importance and the contribution that they make to the wider ecological network.”

2.6. The site is not located within an international, national or local landscape designation.

National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)

2.7. Those categories within the NPPG that are of particular relevance to landscape and visual matters are set out below:

3 National Planning Policy Framework. March 2012 Published by the Department for Communities and Local Government

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 7

Design

2.8. NPPG emphasises the need for development to be integrated with its surrounding context, reinforces local distinctiveness, reduces impacts on nature and sense of place, and considers views into and out of sites. This includes the use of local building forms and ensuring that development reflects the layout, scale, pattern and materials within new development. At paragraph 007, it states:

“planning should promote local character (including landscape setting). Development should seek to promote character in townscape and landscape by responding to and reinforcing locally distinctive patterns of development, local man-made and natural heritage and culture, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation.”

2.9. The use of high quality hard and soft landscape design to help successfully integrate development into the wider environment is also emphasised as being important to consider from the outset, in order to ensure proposals, improve the overall quality of the townscape and landscape.

Wiltshire Core Strategy Development Plan (2015)

2.10. The Wiltshire Core Strategy Development Plan Document was formally adopted on 20 January 2015 and provides an overarching framework for Wiltshire for the period up to 2026. Policies relevant to landscape and visual issues are summarised below and shown on Plan 4: Planning Policy. No landscape designations wash over the allocation or site.

Core Policy 13 - Malmesbury Area Strategy

2.11. The site lies within the saved North Wiltshire District Plan allocation of 4 ha for employment land described as “Land at Garden Centre.” (BD1). The principle of large scale mass buildings within this area is therefore already in place, having already been taken into consideration during the planning policy process. It is noted that the site lies within less than 1 ha of this allocation.

Core Policy 51 – Landscape

2.12. Development should protect, conserve and where possible enhance landscape character. Development should avoid harmful impact upon the character and demonstrate mitigation through sensitive design and landscape measures.

Core Policy 52 – Green Infrastructure (GI)

2.13. Development should protect, manage and plan for the preservation of existing and the delivery of new GI.

Core Policy 57 – Ensuring high quality design and place shaping

2.14. Development is to demonstrate a high standard of design that creates a strong sense of place that makes a positive contribution to the character of Wiltshire.

Core Policy 58 – Ensuring the conservation of the historic environment.

2.15. Development should protect, conserve and where possible enhance the historic environment.

2.16. It is noted that matters relating to heritage assets and their settings are considered within the Heritage Assessment that accompanies the application. Any intervisibility as assessed from public places between assets and the proposals will be identified within this LVA.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 8

2.17. The nearest listing is a limestone milestone located just to the north of the site boundary on the A429.

2.18. The parkland of Charlton Park is washed over by no landscape or heritage designation at either a local or national level. Charlton Mansion is however Grade I listed together with a number of buildings within the parkland that are otherwise Grade II listed. It is noted that there is no public access associated with the parkland.

Malmesbury Neighbourhood Plan (2015)

2.19 The adopted Malmesbury Neighbourhood Plan confirms the identification of the 4 Ha site known as “Land at Garden Centre” as an employment site in Task 4.1. This suggests an acceptance of the principal of a certain scale and mass of buildings within this allocation.

Landscape Character Assessments (2004 and 2005)

2.20. Details of the Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment (LUC 2005) and North Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment (White Consultants 2004) that inform planning policy and applications are considered further in Section 3 of this report.

Interim Conclusions

2.21. As the site lies within an employment allocation in the Wiltshire Core Strategy and the Malmesbury Neighbourhood Plan, the principle of development of the scale and mass proposed is already established.

2.22. The site is not the subject of any scale of landscape designation.

2.23. The site lies within an urban context that contains unattractive large generic shed-like built forms and areas of derelict land.

2.24. Boundary features, existing on-site and nearby built form and topography interact to provide containment.

2.25. It is noted that policy demands proposals should protect, enhance and conserve landscape character and should also be informed by and be sympathetic to the relevant published landscape characterisations.

2.26. With regard to GI, development should make provision for the retention and enhancement of the GI network and shall ensure that more is delivered.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 9

Section 3: Landscape Character

3.1. In accordance with guidance within GLVIA3, NPPF and local policy context, this section considers the existing landscape character and features as relevant to the site and its environs.

3.2. An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (AALCA)4 sets out 5 key principles for landscape assessment which are listed as follows:

“Principle 1: Landscape is everywhere and all landscape and seascape has character.”

“Principle 2: Landscape occurs at all scales and the process of landscape character assessment can be undertaken at any scale”

“Principle 3: Landscape Character Assessment should involve an understanding of how the landscape is perceived and experienced by people”

“Principle 4: Landscape Character Assessment provides an evidence base to inform a range of decisions and applications.”

“Principle 5: Landscape Character Assessment can provide an integrating framework.”

3.3. This section, in accordance with policy and professional guidance, considers the existing landscape character of the site and its environs and should be read in conjunction with Plan 3: Landscape Character. This plan illustrates the national and regional and district landscape character, based on desktop study and published character assessment and the LVA sets out the relevant context to the published character assessments and the need to consider the character at a scale appropriate to the proposals.

3.4. It is established through field work that the site is not typical of national, county or district landscape characteristics because of its developed nature within an urban context. Where any similarities exist, they are explored below.

National Character

3.5. Natural England’s ‘National Character Assessment’, identifies the site within NCA 107: Cotswolds and is located very close to both NCA 117: Avon Vales and also NCA 108 Upper Thames Clay Vales. Because of the urban nature of the allocation, the developed nature wider context and its position on the cusp of 3 NCA’s, the relevance at this scale is limited. Therefore, a more detailed regional character assessment and site-specific assessment is of greater relevance to this LVA.

County Character

Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment (2005) 3.6. The Landscape Character Assessment of Wiltshire area was produced by Land Use Consultants and published in 2005.

3.7. The site lies within the Landscape Character Type (LCT) 11: Rolling Clay Lowland. This is a generic landscape type with a distinct and relatively homogenous character. The LCT’s are sub-divided further

4 “An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment”, Christine Tudor, Natural England, 2014

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 10

into component Landscape Character Areas (LCA)’s. These are discreet geographic areas with a recognisable local identity. The site lies within LCA 11B: Minety Rolling Clay Lowland. While it is adjacent to LCT16: Limestone Lowland and the LCA 16A: Malmesbury – Corsham Limestone Lowlands the site and its context, it shares very few characteristics of this area and type.

3.8. The developed site is unlike the LCT 11: Rolling Clay Lowland or the LCA 11B Minety Rolling Clay Lowland. Charlton Parkland that lies to the east of the site also lies within this LCA but represents a great contrast to the site. The site shares no positive landscape features of significance associated with this LCA.

3.9. In terms of identifying relevant elements of the broad management objectives for the LCA, the following could be taken forward:

• Retain and manage the dense hedgerow network and nurture new hedgerow trees.

• Consider strengthening the enclosed character of the landscape and screening views to intrusive urban edges through nurturing existing and planting new woodland.

District Character

North Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment (2004) 3.10. The Landscape Character Assessment of the North Wiltshire area was produced by White Consultants and published in 2004. It was used to inform the natural environment policies in the North Wiltshire Local Plan 2011.

3.11. At a district level, the site falls within the Lowland Clay Farmland LCT and at a smaller scale within the Minety and Malmesbury Rolling Lowland LCA 5.

3.12. The wider landscape of the site is more representative of the Oxford Clay landscape that includes features such as the parkland character and dry-stone wall boundary features associated with nearby Charlton Park. This gently rolling or undulating topography is present in the wider landscape where Malmesbury Abbey and St Paul’s Church in Malmesbury appear in views. The water tower is also identified as a prominent feature in this LCA though as a detractor together with overhead power lines.

3.13. As established, the site itself reflects few characteristics of the LCT or LCA and in terms of management guidelines and strategy the management of hedgerows and hedgerow trees together with the potential use of limestone in boundary walls would be the only applicable objectives to take forward in scheme development.

Site Specific Local Landscape Character

3.14. It is important to consider the site at a finer grain, especially in this case where the site and its immediate surroundings bear little resemblance to any published character assessments as demonstrated above.

3.15. The site lies within an urban enclave that is dominated by generic built form of small to large scale shed-like structures, where many are non-agricultural in use. Areas of neglected and spoilt land surround the Malmesbury Garden centre within the allocated site.

3.16. The key landscape features are the 2 non-native, evergreen Leyland cypress linear tree belts on the northern and western boundaries and while they are non-native they do provide beneficial screening. The northern belt offers screening of the site and allocation when viewed from the northwest to northeast, when viewed travelling south along the A429 or when viewed from the public footpath

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 11

MALW8 between Charton Park and the site. A small number of trees have been lost to windblow and a gap is present in the line. This can be infilled with the same species in order to restore the integrity of the feature in addition to the reduction in height to counter provide stability. The western linear tree belt provides a softening effect that is beneficial to road users primarily and only partially screens views of the garden centre, other built form and activities within the allocation.

3.17. Subtle undulations in surrounding landform in combination with woody features in the landscape and the Leyland cypresses limit intervisibility with the wider landscape. The site itself is generally flattish.

3.18. There are real opportunities to enhance the landscape baseline and to deliver improvements of a much more extensive GI benefit than currently exists.

Interim Conclusions

3.19. The site and its context represent an urban character that is not reflected in the published landscape characterisations.

3.20. The land use, pattern, scale and materials of built form that prevail not only on the site or within the allocation but also nearby, are generic with an absence of any reference to local building integrity.

3.21. The combined effect of landform, woody landcover and existing off-site built form, serves to reduce intervisibility with the landscapes beyond that include the unregistered Charlton Park and associated heritage assets including the Grade I Listed Charlton Mansion.

3.22. The site and allocation does provide an opportunity to deliver conservation and landscape enhancement measures that would endorse the relevant aspirations of the management guidelines and strategy for the Minety and Malmesbury Rolling Lowland LCA. At the same time, a landscape scheme would provide a more robust GI benefit, especially in boundary features that connect more strongly to the adjacent landscapes. This would include the provision of new native hedgerows and other ornamental planting and more trees to extend the planting palette and introduce greater age diversity. So that biodiversity is increased, wildflower meadows are also to be introduced in association with the other new landscape elements. In addition, the careful management of the northern Leyland cypress tree belt will see the replenishment of Leyland cypress feature.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 12

Section 4: Visual Context

4.1. Chapter 6 of GLVIA3 sets out how the visual baseline is established. The baseline for visual effects should determine the area in which the proposed development may be visible, those people who may experience views of the development, the viewpoints where they will be affected and the nature of the views at the viewpoints.

4.2. The senior landscape officer at Wiltshire Council, Mark Goodwin identified a particular concern regarding potential visual impacts arising from development on the setting of the Grade I Listed Charlton Mansion within the non-registered Charlton Park. The Heritage Assessment that accompanies this application has concluded that taking into account the Charlton Parkland with the key heritage assets that include the Grade I Listed Charlton Mansion, there would be no alteration to the setting of heritage assets and their significance would be in no way affected. No harm has been identified arising from the proposals in accordance with the NPPF.

4.3. In order to provide a good landscape “fit” the proposals include linear tree planting, on the western and eastern boundaries, as enhancement measures to embolden existing vegetation or to introduce new features. It is proposed that the management of the northern boundary trees together with infilling will ensure the screening function of the feature is maintained in line with sound arboricultural practice. The introduction of tree planting within the site adds more softening effects that will increase as planting matures.

4.4. A natural stone wall, that is in keeping with local character and responds to pre-application comments, will provide an attractive roadside frontage that combines with new planting to present an attractive feature that is an improvement on the current baseline and of visual benefit. The landscape elements of the layout will serve to provide a soft framework for the new and replacement built-form.

Extent of Visibility

4.5. When describing the visibility of the site, this report considers the representative views towards it from the surrounding area. This is based on the findings of GIS first sieve analysis mapping as shown in Plan 2: First Sieve Visual Analysis and has been refined and verified through field assessment. Field verification is essential in determining the actual extent of the visual envelope. Views where the site is barely discernible are excluded.

4.6. The photographs included in this report have been taken using an SLR digital camera using a focal length equivalent to 50mm, they are intended to provide an indication of the view and extent of visibility. It is recognised however, that such views are best experienced in the field. The photographs were taken on the 16th April 2018 in clear skies with sunshine for the most part but with increasing light cloud towards the end of the day. The photographs were taken during periods of good visibility. The photographic locations are shown on Plan 5: Photoviewpoint locations and visual envelope and are set out on photographic sheets in Plan 6: Photoviews with a description of the composition of the views. The photoviewpoint locations and study area have been approved by the Senior Landscape Officer, Mark Goodwin at Wiltshire Council on 16th April and one additional viewpoint was added as a result (Appendix 1).

4.7. The 15 selected viewpoints are located within the public domain and are representative views from a variety of receptors in the local area. They have been determined on the basis of the ZTV and fieldwork. Viewpoints within the site have also been recorded to give visual site context. The viewpoints are as follows:

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 13

• Photoviewpoint 1: View from the minor road close to Bishoper Farm Cottages. • Photoviewpiont 2: View from the B4014 close to Quobwell Farm and PRoW. • Photoviewpoint 3: View from the B4014 close to the newly constructed development. • Photoviewpoint 4: View from the intersection of the PRoW and A429 approaching Malmesbury. • Photoviewpoint 5: View from the PRoW to the north east of the site. • Photoviewpoint 6: View from the graveyard of St John the Baptist in Charlton. • Photoviewpoint 7: View from the PRoW in Milbourne. • Photoviewpoint 8: View from the B4040 at the locked site entrance. • Photoviewpoint 9: View from the A429 close to the BP Garage and Water Tower. • Photoviewpoint 10: View from within the allocation. • Photoviewpoint 11: View from the B4014 close to the single storey dwelling of the A429 roundabout. • Photoviewpoint 12: View from the Cotswolds AONB at a PRoW intersection. • Photoviewpoint 13: View from PRoW to rear of properties off the B4042. • Photoviewpoint 14: View from the intersection with the B4042 and the road to Lea. • Photoviewpoint 15: View from the PRoW on the edge of Lea.

Nature of Views

4.8. The site is largely limited to close views from the A429 and B4014 and westwards only as far as the new residential development (approximately 250m + distance) and this is demonstrated by the extent of the visual envelope shown on Plan 5: Photoviewpoint Location and Visual Envelope.

4.9. The Water Tower to the immediate south of the site off the A429 is a useful indicator to locate the site in views and this is identified on relevant photosheets within the contents of Plan 6: Photoviews. Existing large shed-like units on the edge of the site also serve to locate it in views.

4.10. Photoviewpoint 10, taken within the allocation shows the nature of the landuse, condition and features. These largely relate to the operations of the Malmesbury Garden Centre within a wider more urban context.

Distant Views

4.11. There are no distant views at all afforded from any direction as demonstrated on Plan 5: Photoviewpoint Location and Visual Envelope. Distance, topography and drainage coupled with the numerous woodland belts and clumps and built form combine to limit visibility of the site.

4.12. The following distant viewpoints afford no clear views of the site or existing buildings upon it or those shed-like units nearby. It is noted that the vegetation is mostly just coming into leaf so when in full leaf those deciduous elements will provide more cover. Refer to the photosheets in Plan 6: Photoviews for detail and description.

• Photoviewpoints 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14.

It is evident that the Cotwolds AONB designation has no intervisibility with the site as bourne out from field work. This is illustrated by representative Photoviewpoint 12 and also by reference to the ZTV.

Close views

4.13. North. Close views of the site are blocked by the Leyland cypress boundary tree belt that is mature and evergreen in nature (Photoviewpoint 4). In spite of a small gap caused by wind-blow there is no

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 14

intervisibility from this location on the PRoW and A429 intersection. This boundary is planned to be strengthened and the gap infilled. It will be sensitively managed in terms of maintaining the feature.

4.14. South. Views from the south are interrupted by the effect of intervening vegetation in combination with built form. Photoviewpoint 9 from the side of the A429 and close to the Water Tower and petrol station illustrates this very clearly. Photoviewpoint 8 from the locked entrance to the Malmesbury Garden Centre on the B4040 identifies the existing built form behind hedgerows and trees in the view with the site not being clearly visible.

4.15. East and Southeast. Public views from the east/southeast are afforded when walking along the PRoW. The Leyland cypress boundary tree belt that is mature and evergreen in nature together with quantities of deciduous trees, hedgerow and shrub planting provides an important visual screen of activites and built form on the site which is hidden from view. As the rolling topography comes into play, landform starts to obscure views when walking along this PRoW. (Photoviewpoint 5).

4.16. West. Views from the B4014 towards the roundabout and Malmesbury Garden Centre are clear when approaching on the road or footway from the west. However, the road alignment combined with mature roadside vegetation results in a shortening of views of the garden centre to a close distance only. The string of dwellings on the north side of the B4014 have no intervisibility and the 3 properties close to the site, Filands Park, Filands Gate and the single storey property opposite them have such a plethora of mature garden and hedgerow vegetation that intervene to the effect that intervisibility with the site even at this close distance is not possible.

4.17. The cluster of single storey dwellings off Powell Rise located further west are unlikely to afford views of the site but the new Bloor Homes development located further west along the B4014 may well have views from upper storey windows that face towards the site. Other two storey or 2.5 storey dwellings in this location that are currently being built, may have views from upper windows also facing the site. However, it is noted that the site is not greenfield and that garden centre structures together with adjacent shed-like buildings are already present in these views. Intervening vegetation also plays a part in filtering views at this distance.

Types of Receptors

4.18. The photographs included in this LVA are representative of individuals/groups of people likely to experience visual change. The sensitivity of the receptors is set out in Section 5. In respect of this site, the key views and receptors are as follows:

• Users of the PRoW to the east/southeast of the site boundary • Users of the A429 travelling by vehicle close to the site • Users of the footways to the A419 close to the site • Users of the B4014 travelling by vehicle close to the site • Users of the footway to the B4014 close to the site • Residents with potential views from the west off Powell Rise and within Bloor Homes • Workers at adjacent workplaces to the site

Interim Conclusions

4.19. The visibility of the site and its intervisibility with the wider context is very limited.

4.20. Visibility has been tested in the field and the limited extent of intervisibility with the wider landscape is determined as being close to the site.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 15

4.21. The field verified visual envelope is particularly small and is for the most part limited to the site itself and its immediate surroundings. Due to the effects of the densely wooded and interleaving effects of the hedgerow pattern with the topography and existing built form, any mid to long range views are either heavily filtered or obscured from the east, south and north.

4.22. Views from the site to the Grade I Listed Charlton Mansion and its setting of Charlton Park (refer to the Heritage Assessment for precise detail) are limited by intervening vegetation, especially the parkland woodland features. There is no public access available to the parkland but the Heritage Assessment has concluded there is no harm arising from development on site to the heritage assets and their settings.

4.23. The quality of the visual amenity of the current site baseline (from publicly accessible areas) is one of degraded components in a declining setting.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 16

Section 5: Classification of Resources

Landscape Character and Landscape Resources

5.1. Understanding the landscape’s sensitivity to change associated with the proposed development is an important consideration when addressing the suitability of development in relation to a receiving landscape.

5.2. The classification of sensitivity of the landscape character and landscape resources is related to:

• The susceptibility of the landscape; • The type of change proposed; and • The value placed on the landscape.

Susceptibility

5.3. This means the ability of a defined landscape type to accommodate the development proposed without undue negative consequences.

5.4. This LVA considers:

• High landscape susceptibility to be defined as: The landscape is such that changes in terms of the development proposed would be entirely at odds with the character of the local area, related to matters including pattern, grain, use, scale and mass. • Medium landscape susceptibility to be defined as: The proposed development has a degree of consistency with the existing scale, pattern, grain, land use of the prevailing character, although mitigation may be appropriate to enhance assimilation. • Low landscape susceptibility to be defined as: The development proposed is entirely consistent with the character of the local area, related to matters including pattern, grain, use, scale and mass.

5.5. Considering the character assessment in section 3, the susceptibility of the receiving landscape to accommodate the development is low. This reflects the scale of proposed development and the site’s relationship to the existing urban context. This is a site allocated for large mass and large-scale development beyond and above the domestic scale and the presumption is that this is acceptable to the Local Planning Authority and Malmesbury Town Council as described in the adopted Core Strategy and Neighbourhood Plans.

Value

5.6. The site is not the subject of any statutory landscape designation which is based on the quality of the landscape. It is currently in commercial use and has a neglected and derelict appearance in general.

5.7. ‘Having value’ and being a ‘valued landscape’ are not inter-changeable terms. A landscape may have a degree of local value but that does not equate to possessing value sufficient to reach and surpass the necessary threshold to be ‘valued’ by a particular community at either a local or national scale. In order for a landscape to be considered “of value” it needs to be more than ordinary. This is a matter that has been considered at numerous appeals and this is not considered to be a site of value.

5.8. Judgements are set out below with regard to the landscape characteristics and perception of the physical attributes of the site and the surrounding area. In considering the value of the landscape the

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 17

following aspects of the landscape are noted as relevant in the assessment process (GLVIA3 Box 5.1 page 84). For each of these considerations there is a range from ‘good’ through ‘ordinary’ to ‘poor’ in terms of the landscape’s performance against these criteria:

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

Scenic Quality: The term used to describe landscapes which appeal primarily to the senses (primarily but not wholly the visual senses). The site has minimal scenic quality - POOR

Rarity: The presence of rare features and elements in the landscape or the presence of a rare Landscape Character Type. The site does not contain rare features identified in its LCT or LCA - POOR

Representativeness: Whether the landscape contains a particular character, and/or features and elements, which are considered particularly important examples. The site does not contain representative elements - POOR

Conservation interests: The presence of features of wildlife, earth science or archaeological or historical and cultural interest can add to the value of a landscape as well as having value in their own right. (Refer to Ecology Assessment).

Recreation value: Evidence that the landscape is valued for recreational activity where experience of the landscape is important. None – POOR

Perceptual aspects: A landscape may be valued for its perceptual qualities and/or tranquility. None – POOR

Associations: Some landscapes are associated with particular people, such as artists or writers, or event in history that contribute to perceptions of natural beauty of the area. None – POOR

5.9. Having considered the key elements related to value there is nothing associated with the site and its immediate surroundings that makes this land as a whole more than POOR. It is not considered a valued landscape for the purposes of the Framework as set out in paragraph 109.

5.10. Combining the low susceptibility and the no more than poor value, the landscape is considered to be of low sensitivity to change of the nature and scale proposed in this location.

Visual Resources

Susceptibility

5.11. This means the ability of the visual receptor to view the development proposed without undue negative consequences.

5.12. This LVA considers:

• High visual susceptibility to be defined as: The visual composition following the development as proposed will include discordant and incongruent elements. • Medium visual susceptibility to be defined as: The visual composition following the development as proposed will be consistent with the baseline situation, although some aspects may be at odds with the visual composition.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 18

• Low visual susceptibility to be defined as: The visual composition following the development as proposed will be in harmony with the existing composition.

5.13. Considering the visual context in section 4, the susceptibility of the receiving landscape to accommodate the proposed development is low. This reflects the site’s existing land use, the urban context and lack of intervisibility to the wider landscape.

5.14. As noted in section 4 the people (visual receptors) likely to be affected by the proposals are:

• Users of the PRoW to the east/southeast of the site boundary • Users of the A429 travelling by vehicle close to the site • Users of the footways to the A419 close to the site • Users of the B4014 travelling by vehicle close to the site • Users of the footway to the B4014 close to the site • Residents with potential views from the west off Powell Rise and within Bloor Homes • Workers at adjacent workplaces to the site

5.15. Those using the PRoW system will have their attention focussed on the landscape. As a result, their sensitivity to visual change will be high.

5.16. Those residents overlooking the site (private views) will experience views on a daily basis. However as those that are close to the site have been scoped out and only those (few in number) off Powel Rise and facing the site from the new Bloor Homes development are included. They are not likely to have clear views from daytime windows so their sensitivity to visual change will be medium.

5.17. Those people using the footways to the roads are likely to have a different focus to those using PRoW footpaths. Their sensitivity to change will be medium.

5.18. Those using the road network will have a different focus to their activities and drivers will be moving at speed. These people will be of medium sensitivity to visual change.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 19

Section 6: The Nature of the Change

6.1 GLVIA3 recognises the importance of the judgement of the professional undertaking the appraisal to identify the nature of the change. To provide transparency as to the judgements made in this appraisal, the following text describes how the existing landscape and the views and visual amenity of the area may be affected, predicting the effects (though not their likely significance) including whether they are adverse or beneficial and how those effects might be mitigated. In addition, it may be that some effects are considered to be neutral.

Landscape

6.2 The following text summarises the landscape resources within the site and its immediate environs:

• The District level published characterisation is the most relevant to the wider setting rather than the site itself which is more urban in character. Lowland Clay Farmland LCT and at a smaller scale the Minety and Malmesbury Rolling Lowland LCA 5. • The Charlton Park (unregistered) • The hedgerow boundary network of the site.

6.3 The following effects on the key landscape resources will occur:

• Beneficial: The LCT and LCA

The proposals will see the retention, restoration and new planting of new linear features that include tree, hedgerow, shrub and wildflower seeding to enhance landscape character and to improve habitat connectivity.

• Neutral: The Charlton Park

The proposals will have no direct effect on the landscape character of this asset or the setting of the Grade I Listed Charlton Mansion. The conservation and enhancement measures proposed will serve to improve the Green Infrastructure of the site and wider area.

• Beneficial: The boundary vegetation

The quantum of new native trees and native hedgerows is increased not only on boundaries but within the site. The retained existing Leyland cypress trees will be managed (G2 and G4) by reducing height (above the proposed ridge height) to provide protection from potential wind blow and to infill with 4 no Leyland cypresses in order to reinstate the linear feature. The enhancement of existing and retained boundary features represents a net gain.

6.4 The proposals will be situated within an existing urbanised area that is currently unkempt and unmanaged, delivering a stronger landscape structure and a soft framework within which the new development sits.

6.5 The proposals will represent the delivery of improved GI features in the landscape through new landscape proposals of the site.

6.6 Pre-application discussion with the council has seen the proposals refined so that they maximise a more harmonious integration into the landscape.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 20

6.7 The mature boundaries of the site will be retained to the north and any loss is compensated. The landscape proposals of planting will ensure not only a good fit into the landscape but enhancement of it.

6.8 The heritage asset of Charlton Mansion or its parkland setting will not be adversely affected by the proposals.

Visual

6.9 The appraisal has established that the proposals would be visually well contained as illustrated by the visual envelope on Plan 5: Photoviewpoint Locations and Visual Envelope.

6.10 There are no long-distance views afforded.

6.11 The proposals would be most visible in localised views from the site boundaries themselves rather from the wider landscape. This is due to a combination of factors that are:

• The nature of the proposals to replace existing commercial buildings that lie within an urbanised pocket that includes large generic shed buildings that screen views. • The beneficial network of the Leyland cypress features; • The proposed tree and hedgerow planting; • The limited number of publicly available views of the site; • Local topographic and woody vegetative interventions; and • The presence of intervening built form in the area.

6.12 The following visual receptors (people) are identified as those who may be affected by the implementation of the proposals. It is accepted that residential views are essentially private views.

• Users of the PRoW to the east/southeast of the site boundary; • Users of the A429 travelling by vehicle close to the site; • Users of the footways to the A419 close to the site; • Users of the B4014 travelling by vehicle close to the site; • Users of the footway to the B4014 close to the site; • Residents with potential views from the west off Powell Rise and within Bloor Homes; and • Workers at adjacent workplaces to the site.

6.13 Considering the above visual receptors, the following effects will occur:

• Neutral users of the PRoW to the east/southeast (Photoviewpoint 5)

The view will maintain little change. The proposed buildings, hedgerows and tree planting will not be out of keeping at this location and as planting matures views will continue to maintain a softened appearance. The focus of views of those walking along the PRoW will be sequential as they pass by.

• Neutral users of the A429 travelling by vehicle (Photoviewpoints 4, 9)

The focus of road users will be on the road. When slowing to navigate the roundabout at the site entrance the existing view of dilapidated buildings of a low quality and the Leyland cypress hedge on the roadside will be replaced by new tree planting, enclosing elements that are in keeping with landscape character, parking in a different arrangement broken up with new shrub and tree planting, and a new ALDI foodstore. The proposals will not be visually jarring at this location and as planting matures views will continue to develop with a softened appearance.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 21

• Beneficial Users of the footways to the A429 close to the site (Photoviewpoint 11)

The view will maintain change as the existing view of dilapidated buildings of a low quality and the Leyland cypress hedge on the roadside will be replaced by new tree planting, enclosing elements that are in keeping, parking in a different arrangement to existing but with new tree and shrub planting, and a new ALDI foodstore. The proposed buildings, hedgerows and tree planting will not be out of keeping at this location and as planting matures views will become more softened in appearance. The focus of views of those walking along the footways will be sequential as they pass by.

• Neutral Users of the B4014 travelling by vehicle (Photoviewpoint 11)

The focus of road users will be on the road. When slowing to navigate the roundabout at the site entrance the existing view of dilapidated buildings of a low quality and the Leyland cypress hedge on the roadside will be replaced by new tree planting, enclosing elements that are in keeping, parking in a different arrangement to existing with new tree and shrub planting, and a new ALDI foodstore. The proposals will not be out of keeping at this location and as planting matures views will continue to develop a softened appearance.

• Beneficial Users of the footways to the B4014 close to the site (Photoviewpoint 11)

The view will maintain change as the existing view of dilapidated buildings of a low quality and the Leyland cypress hedge on the roadside will be replaced by new tree planting, enclosing elements that are in keeping, parking in a different arrangement to existing with new tree and shrub planting, and a new ALDI foodstore. The proposed buildings, hedgerows and tree planting will not be out of keeping at this location and as planting matures views will become more softened in appearance. The focus of views of those walking along the footways will be sequential as they pass by.

• Neutral Residents with potential views from the west off Powell Rise and within Bloor Homes (Photoviewpoint 3)

Without access to private views it is anticipated from fieldwork nearby that there will be a neutral change to views for those residents that may experience filtered views of the existing site. The components of any existing views will already contain built form of the scale and mass proposed and what is proposed will be an improvement on existing. As site planting matures the softening effect will increase.

• Beneficial Workers at adjacent workplaces to the site (Photoviewpoint 10)

For those people working close by, the replacement of derelict and poor-quality buildings and spaces with new built form that includes an improved landscape will be a benefit.

6.14 This appraisal has established that while change will take place on this already developed site, there are no more than neutral visual effects arising from this proposal and no more than neutral or beneficial arising in terms of landscape character. The replacement of a declining development in a poor setting with good quality design in an enhanced landscape framework is beneficial in both landscape and visual terms. Taking all of this into account, it is the conclusion of this appraisal that the implementation of the proposals can be integrated without detriment to the visual amenity or to the receiving visual environment.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 22

Policy

Wiltshire Core Strategy

6.15 Compliance with policies relevant to landscape and visual issues are summarised below.

Core Policy 13 establishes the principle of large scale and large mass development over an area allocation of 4 Ha.

Core Policy 51 relates to the conservation and enhancement of the landscape and this proposal identifies a quantum improvement on the existing baseline.

Core Policy 52 relates to GI improvements that have been incorporated within the layout.

Core Policy 58 ensures that heritage assets are respected and in this case the Heritage Assessment has confirmed there is no harm to the significance of any heritage asset or to their settings.

Malmesbury Neighbourhood Plan

6.16 The Neighbourhood Plan accords with Wilshire Core Strategy Core Policy 13. See above.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 23

Section 7: Conclusion

7.1 The purpose of this LVA was to determine the ability of the landscape and visual context to accommodate change within the framework of relevant guidance and planning policy.

7.2 The site lies within an employment allocation of 4 Ha, occupying less than 1 Ha of it. The allocation establishes the principle of development of this scale and mass on this site to be acceptable.

7.3 In this instance, the site occupies a location that is urban in character and context and includes the functioning commercial concern of the Malmesbury Garden Centre.

7.4 It does not reflect the characteristics of the LCA’s and LCT’s set out in published landscape character assessments (Wiltshire and North Wiltshire and the National Character Areas).

7.5 The site lies outside any statutory qualitative landscape designation at any level.

7.6 The site has a neglected and unmanaged appearance with no vernacular or reference.

7.7 Pre-application advice has been incorporated within amended scheme iterations and specific concerns relating to the Grade I Listed Charlton Mansion and the associated and undesignated parkland setting have been addressed by the Heritage Assessment accompanying this application.

7.8 The LVA has concluded that there is no adverse effect on the landscape resources and that due to the visual containment of the site, that there is also no adverse effect on visual receptors.

7.9 The proposed landscape provision within the scheme will result in beneficial outcomes relating to the landscape “fit” in the receiving landscape, to GI benefits with positive bio-diversity and to an improvement overall in visual amenity.

7.10 The development would not result in the loss of any rare or unique features and affects only a very limited geographic area.

7.11 The earlier planning application for a Sainsbury’s foodstore (planning reference N/1104092/OUT) was refused on 4 October 2013 on this allocation. It is noted that of the 2 reasons for refusal none were landscape or visual related. Clearly the scale and massing of the refused Sainsbury’s development proposals is much greater when compared to this current planning application. The 2 proposals are very different in scale.

7.12 In conclusion, the landscape and visual effects are considered to be very limited and would not undermine the wider character and ultimately the objectives and aspirations of local landscape policy and any relevant guidelines contained within published landscape character assessments (of which there are very few). The replacement of existing built form in what is already an urbanised context with built form of similar scale and mass is not considered to have an adverse effect on either the local or wider landscape character.

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP Page 24

Appendix 1: Wiltshire Council

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP

Appendix 2: GLVIA3 Table 3.1 Components of the EIA process and the role of LVIA

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP

Table 3.1 Components of the EIA process and the role of LVIA

Component of EIA Brief description of LVIA role in EIA LVIA role in landscape process action in this part of ‘appraisal’ the process

Site selection and Identifies opportunities Required (but May not be required consideration of and constraints alternatives should not but considering alternatives relating to alternative be invented and it is landscape to inform options and makes acceptable if there are site selection is good comparative none) practice assessments of them in order to identify those with least adverse (or indeed most beneficial) effects and greatest potential for possible mitigation and enhancement. Screening Determines whether Required by Not required an EIA is needed for competent authority the proposed development. Scoping Makes an initial Required Optional judgement about the scope of the assessment and of the issues that need to be covered under the individual topics or themes. Includes establishment of the relevant study area. Project Provides a description Required Required description/specification of the proposed development for the purpose of the assessment, identifying the main features of the proposals and establishing parameters such as maximum extents of the development or sizes of the elements. Normally includes description of any alternatives considered. Baseline studies Establishes the Required Required existing nature of the landscape and visual environment in the study area, including any relevant changes likely to occur independently of the development proposal. Includes information on the value attached to the different environmental resources. Identification and Systematically Required Required description of effects identifies and describes the effects that are likely to occur, including whether they are adverse or beneficial. Assessing the Systematically and Required Not Required significance of effects transparently assesses the likely significance of the effects identified. Mitigation Makes proposals for Required If required measures designed to avoid/prevent, reduce or offset (or compensate for) any significant negative (adverse) effects. Preparation of the Presentation of the Required Appraisal Report Environmental findings of the Statement assessment in written and graphic form. Monitoring and auditing Monitors and audits If required If required the effects of the implementation of the proposal and of the mitigation measures proposed, especially where they are covered by conditions attached to any permission that may be given.

Appendix 3: Landscape Institute GLVIA3 Clarification 1/13 Note

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP

GLVIA3 Statement of Clarification 1/13 10-06-13

Purpose of Statement of Clarification As a result of questions posed by members and a request for a response from the GLVIA3 Panel, the Panel has prepared this statement of clarification which has been approved by the Chair and a member of the Technical Committee on behalf of the Committee. The statement deals with the following:

1 GLVIA3 and how it should be understood; 2 The use of the phrase ‘significant in EIA terms’; 3 The use of the term ‘significant’; and 4 How the assessment process may differ between Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment undertaken for EIA purposes and landscape and visual impact appraisal undertaken for other purposes.

Statement of Clarification

1 GLVIA3 and how it should be understood The guidance in GLVIA3 should be read with common sense. Chapters 1 and 2 are introductory, setting the context in general terms and are aimed at general readers. Chapter 3 and those which follow provide advice for the landscape professional. Chapter 3 establishes the principles to which later chapters conform. Therefore if there appears to be a measure of ambiguity between something stated in Chapter 1 and Chapter 3, then the professional is encouraged to regard Chapter 3's advice as having primacy.

2 The Phrase ‘Significant in EIA Terms’ In carrying out LVIAs, landscape professionals have on occasion identified effects as being ‘significant in EIA terms’. It is recommended that this phrase should not be used in a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA). It is understood that the phrase does not appear in any relevant EIA Regulations or associated statutory publications. (see GLVIA3 Page 40, Para 3.32)

3 Significance Concerning ‘significance’, it is for the assessor to define what the assessor considers significant. Members may find the following helpful: In simple terms, assume an environment (A). Then assume a proposed development (B). B is placed into A and, as a result, gives rise to impacts which permit the identification of effects of various sorts. The level of, or degree of, effect may then be judged. This may be achieved, for example, by determining magnitude and registering it against sensitivity, each as defined in GLVIA3 in Paras 3.23 to 3.30. Depending on the means of judgement and terminology (which should be explicitly set out), effects of varying degrees of change (or levels of change), may be derived. The assessor should then establish (and it is for the assessor to decide and explain) the degree or level of change that is considered to be significant.

4 For Non-EIA Landscape and Visual Impact Appraisal In carrying out appraisals, the same principles and process as LVIA may be applied but, in so doing, it is not required to establish whether the effects arising are or are not significant given that the exercise is not being undertaken for EIA purposes. The reason is that should a landscape professional apply LVIA principles and processes in carrying out an appraisal and then go on to determine that certain effects would be likely be significant, given the term ‘significant’ is enshrined in EIA Regulations, such a judgement could trigger the requirement for a formal EIA. The emphasis on likely ‘significant effects’ in formal LVIA stresses the need for an approach that is

GLVIA3 Statement of Clarification 1/13 10-06-13 proportional to the scale of the project that is being assessed and the nature of its likely effects. The same principle - focussing on a proportional approach – also applies to appraisals of landscape and visual impacts outside the formal requirements of EIA.

GLVIA3 Statement of Clarification 1/13 10-06-13

Appendix 4: Illustrative Layout

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP

Key:

Aldi Site Area

Denotes hatched road markings for disabled bay and Costa service area Existing tree groupings Refer to Bosky Trees

PWF (1.0m) TM New Tarmacadum Surfacing information for details Line of Firs PWF (1.0m) to Car Park (TM) Line of Firs

TM Parking bays Tarmacadum

Surface CBF

ET 200sq 'ARGELITH FEINSTEINZEUG R12' CS CS External Tiles under canopy. Colour 'Dark Grey' EP LP CS Concrete Slabs WELFARE WAREHOUSE Plant C/C Concrete Surface (C/C) CBF Exact position of Contractor Signing in Station to be agreed with client

S/L Surface finish with soft landscaping External

BP Blister Paving

PRF O/H Elec C/C Banking

1.8m Close boarded fence (CBF) CS TKR Timber Knee Rail Grass

Stone PRF Post and Rail fence

Wall ALDI Food store ET (refer to drg. 1401 for layout details) Stainless steel bollard C/C

HDB Heavy duty bollard SP RETAIL AREA

RPZ Grass

Existing Trees T11

Trees removed (Please see CBF T11 arboricultural report for full details) Denotes new tree (Refer to Cambium drg. for details) Stone HDB

Wall ET Asphalt TM

LP TM TKR

TKR

HDB

CBF (1.8m) TM

GY

RS

BT

TP

EP

d a o R l l e w d u r C

Grass

Hedge

LP

TM

Asphalt

GY

SP

TKR PRF

LP TKR Natural stone wall to western TM boundary, New trees provided

for screening. IC

Grass

BOL

TKR IC

Asphalt GY Potential sub-station location SP Details to be confirmed

LP 2no Double pole signs.

(Subject to separate signage MH

.3m) application) (0 TKR

Wall

Stone Refer to drg. 160389-1100 Site Location Plan GY for full extent of application boundary LP GY P5 3/7/18 MW GS Store type changed to 1315 retail area. RS Asphalt Site layout adjusted to suit.

Stone Grass Wall (0.3m) P4 8/6/18 MWSK Site boundary amended NP Asphalt P3 15/5/18 MW GS Plant layout amended. P2 10/5/18 MW GS Graphics updated. Timber knee rail and RS fence added.

Asphalt P1 9/5/18 MW GS New road layout added. Detail and   colours added. Grass  Rev Date By Ap Note  Project Drawing Title Aldi Stores, Nurdens Garden Centre, Proposed Site Plan 0 10 15 20 25 30 m IC GY MH Malmesbury. SP RS Kerb BOL Drop Client Project Number Drawing Number - Revision C:\Users\djones\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\ILFUTDIP\Aldi_4C_CMYK (2).jpg

Asphalt GY  Tactile Aldi Stores Ltd. Scale = 1:250 @ A1 Glentworth Court, Lime Kiln Close 160389 1400 P5 IC PRF (1.4m) Stoke Gifford, Bristol BS34 8SR Scale Paper Size Filename Date Drawn Checked Status +44 (0)117 931 2062 1:250 A1 160389 Site Master.vwx 1/5/18 JC MW PLANNING

 www.kendallkingscott.co.uk © Copyright Do not scale this drawing Check all dimensions and levels on site  Only to be used on the site for which designed. The electronic transmission of designs/information contained in this drawing is carried out entirely at the User's risk and Kendall Kingscott Ltd. will have no liability for any errors or inaccuracies arising therefrom. The production of amended or updated information from the said designs/information by the User is entirely the responsibility of the User and Kendall Kingscott Ltd. shall have no responsibility in respect thereof whatsoever. Type 8505 double sided sign - 1899 H x 1594 W x 145 D with 1 x 120 Watt Transformer powering 38 LED Lights Double Sided Sign - Type 8505 Brightness 41 LUX - 115 Watt Aluminium Sign Case - Finished RAL 7016 Anthracite Sign Weight Approx 62 kg

DESIGNED: AB FINISH: RAL DATE: Nov 2015 - CLIENT: Aldi BREAK ALL SITE: SHARP EDGES. Various TITLE: THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF Kingsley ORDER NUMBER & DRAWING NUMBER  DO NOT SCALE Child. LTD. THE DESIGN AND CONTENTS MAY Type 8505 Double sided IF IN DOUBT - ASK. NOT BE COPIED OR DIVULGED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. sign - Led Setup 505 D/S LED 01 A

Plans and Photoviewpoints

Plan 1: Topography (11593/P01)

Plan 2: First Sieve Visual Analysis ZTV (11593/P02)

Plan 3: Landscape Character (11593/P03)

Plan 4: Planning Policy (11593/P06)

Plan 5: Photoviewpoint Locations and Visual Envelope (11593/P07)

Plan 6: Photoviews 1-15 (11593/P06)

Plan 7: Site Context (11593/P04)

Land off Crudwell Lane, Malmesbury Landscape and Visual Appraisal

11593_R01a_4th July 2018_JC_LP

Site Boundary

Height AOD (m)

125m and above

109m

93m

78m

62m and below

Source: The plan has been modelled using GIS computer software (QGIS) and Ordnance Survey Terrain 5 data.

0 1km

Project ALDI, Crudwell Road, Malmesbury

Drawing Title Topography

Scale As Shown (Approximate) Drawing No. 11593/P01 Date April 2018 Checked JC/TRS

Marsden Estate, Rendcomb, Cirencester, Gloucestershire, GL7 7EX Tyler Grange LLP T: 01285 831 804 E: [email protected] W: www.tylergrange.co.uk © Crown copyright, All rights reserved. 2018. Licence number 0100031673 Site Boundary

Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV)

High Potential Visibility

Low Potential Visibility

No Visibility

Source: The Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) illustrates the extent to which the site at 10m is potentially visible within a 5km radius (1.6m high receptor). The ZTV has been modelled using GIS computer software (Global Mapper) and Ordnance Survey Terrain 5 data, and as such does not take into account built form or vegetation present within the landscape. Field verification is required to refine the accuracy of the ZTV.

0 1km

Project ALDI, Crudwell Road, Malmesbury

Drawing Title Plan 2: First Sieve Visual Analysis (ZTV)

Scale As Shown (Approximate) Drawing No. 11593/P02 Date April 2018 Checked JC/TRS

Marsden Estate, Rendcomb, Cirencester, Gloucestershire, GL7 7EX Tyler Grange LLP T: 01285 831 804 E: [email protected] W: www.tylergrange.co.uk © Crown copyright, All rights reserved 2018. Licence number 0100031673