BDL 6

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane Pyrford, Woking

Prepared on behalf of: Burhill Developments Ltd

Date: August 2016

Gillespies LLP

05 18.08.16 KP RM FINAL Issued to client

04 24.02.16 KP RM FINAL Issued to client

03 19.02.16 KP RM DRAFT Issued to client

02 15.02.16 KP RM DRAFT Issued to client

01 29.01.16 KP RM DRAFT Issued to client

00 02.10.15 KD KP DRAFT

REASONS FOR REV DATE BY CHKD STATUS REVISION/COMMENTS

Gillespies File Reference: OX5363 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane LVIA

ORIGINATOR ORIGINATOR REVISION REFERENCE GILLESPIES LLP P 00

Gillespies File Reference: OX5363 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane LVIA Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

CONTENTS

1 Introduction 1

2 Legislation, Policy And Guidance 2

3 Landscape Baseline 8

4 Visual Baseline 19

5 Assessment of Landscape Effects 21

6 Assessment of Visual Effects 32

7 Mitigation and Enhancement Measures 36

8 Summary of Landscape and Visual Effects 37

GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

Appendix 01 Figures

Appendix 02 LVIA Methodology

Appendix 03 Landscape Character Assessments

Appendix 04 Arboricultural and TPO Information

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 1 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

1 Introduction

1.1 The development

1.1.1 In August 2015, Gillespies was instructed by Burhill Developments Ltd (BDL), (the Landowner) to prepare a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) in respect of proposals for the release of two sites from the Green Belt for residential development on land at Pyrford, Surrey.

1.1.2 The sites comprise two agricultural fields, known as Randall’s Field and Land east of Upshot Lane respectively, and are located to the south of Pyrford, approximately 3.5km east of Woking town centre (with the centre of the site located at National Grid Reference TQ039589). The two sites are identified in Woking Borough’s Draft Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) for release from the Green Belt in order to meet future development needs for housing in Woking.

1.1.3 This LVIA was commissioned by BDL to support representations that were submitted to Woking Borough Council (WBC) in respect of the DPD. For the purposes of this LVIA, BDL also commissioned an updated Phase 1 Habitat survey (ADAS), access assessment (White Young Green) a tree survey (Hayden’s) and a draft illustrative masterplan (Carter Jonas).

1.1.4 It is proposed to provide a wide range of house types in accordance with WBC’s policies, with the remainder of the sites to be used for open space and green infrastructure. This is shown on Carter Jonas’ illustrative masterplan.

1.1.5 The sites are bound by:  Pyrford Common Road and Church Hill to the south;

 Sandy Lane, a public bridleway, to the east;

 Residential areas of Pyrford on the northern and western boundary, including Aviary Road, Tegg’s Lane and Lovelace Drive; and

 The two sites are separated by Upshot Lane.

1.1.6 The wider surrounding area is dominated by residential areas to the north and west, which forms part of the wider conurbation of Woking. Pyrford Common is located to the west of the sites. Areas of open farm land lie to the east, beyond which is Pyrford Golf Course which runs down to the river valley of the River Wey and the Wey Navigation. To the south is the historic house and gardens of Pyrford Court.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 2 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

1.1.7 The sites are shown on OX5363 Figure 01 Site Location.

1.1.8 The masterplan proposals are shown in Carter Jonas’s Figure 1013212.009.REV1, Concept Plan.

1.2 Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Methodology

1.2.1 The methodology used by Gillespies in the preparation of this LVIA is based on principles set out by the Landscape Institute (LI) and Institute of Environmental Management Assessment (IEMA) in the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Assessment (GLVIA3) (Ref.i) and guidance from Natural England An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (Ref ii).

1.2.2 An outline of the methodology used in this LVIA is attached at Appendix 02.

1.2.3 The scope of this LVIA was discussed and agreed with planning officers of WBC, in particular the extent of the study area and the proposed viewpoints.

2 Legislation, Policy And Guidance

2.1 Introduction

2.1.1 This section identifies and describes legislation, policy and guidance of relevance to the assessment of potential landscape and visual effects associated with the construction and occupation of the proposed housing.

2.1.2 It should be noted that although the southern boundary of the study area includes land within the administration boundary of Guildford Borough and full regard has been had to its planning designations affecting this land, the approach to the LVIA has not been discussed with that authority as this was not required.

2.2 International

2.2.1 The European Landscape Convention (ELC), which was signed by the UK in February 2006 and became binding in 2007, is the first international convention to focus specifically on landscape issues and aims to protect, manage and plan landscapes in Europe.

2.2.2 The ELC defines landscape as:

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

‘An area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors.’

2.3 National Legislation, Planning Policy and Guidance

2.3.1 National Planning Policy is set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), March 2012 (Ref 1.0). Paragraph 17 of the NPPF includes 12 principles of plan making and decision-taking. These include the principles that planning should: • ‘take account of the different roles and character of different areas, ….recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and supporting thriving rural communities within it.’ • ‘contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment and reduce pollution. Allocations of land for development should prefer land of lesser environmental value, where consistent with other policies in this Framework.’

2.3.2 Paragraph 61 states that ‘Although visual appearance and the architecture of individual buildings are very important factors, securing high quality and inclusive design goes beyond aesthetic considerations. Therefore, planning policies and decisions should address the connections between people and places and the integration of new development into the natural, built and historic environment.’

2.3.3 Section 11 of the NPPF, Conserving and enhancing the natural environment, states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by, amongst others, ‘protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils;’ (Paragraph 109).

2.3.4 The sites are currently located within the Green Belt, although as explained above in paragraph 1.1.2, the two sites are identified for release from the Green Belt in WBC’s Draft Site Allocations DPD. Section 09 of the NPPF, Protecting Green Belt Land, states that the Government attaches great importance to the Green Belt. The fundamental aim of the Green Belt is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; and the essential characteristics of the Green Belt is its openness and permanence. The extent of the Green Belt is shown on OX5363 Figure 02 National Designations.

2.4 Local Policy

2.4.1 The sites are located within Woking Borough and the development is subject to the saved policies within the Woking Borough Council Local Plan (1999) and the Policies from the Core Strategy (2012) that have superseded those Local Plan Policies as listed in Appendix

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 4 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

6: List of Saved (and Superseded) Polices of Woking Local Plan (1999) (Ref. iii). The local policies which apply to the sites are shown on OX5363 Figure 03 Local Plan Designations.

2.4.2 The sites are currently located in the Green Belt. Core Strategy CS6 Green Belt relates to strategies for the protection of the Green Belt as defined by Government policy outlined in the NPPF. However, the Core Strategy also states that the Green Belt has been identified as a potential future direction of growth to meet housing need between 2022 and 2027.

2.4.3 WBC carried out a Green Belt boundary review (The Woking Green Belt Review July 2014) to identify sufficient land to meet development needs. The review was informed by the Woking Green Belt review - Final Report (January 2014) prepared by Peter Brett Associates (PBA) for WBC and we have had regard to this in the preparation of this LVIA.

Both sites are assessed by PBA as part of a much larger site and this and surrounding parcels are indicated on OX5363 Figure 07. We provide below an extract from PBA’s report which identifies that both sites form part of a much wider area that incorporates around 91 hectares (both sites have a total of about 23 hectares) and extends some 900metres south of the land east of Upshot Lane, and thus is close to the edge of the study area.

2.4.4 Given the fine grain of the analysis that we have undertaken, in particular the analysis around the alignment of the defined Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance, we contend that this aspect of PBA’s analysis is flawed because it is not appropriate to have considered this as a single plot. The area is so varied in character, land use and topography that assessment of this in a single area is almost impossible.

2.4.5 PBA’s conclusion in respect of the whole area, namely land above and below the ridge line is that it “fulfils a ‘Critical’ role in respect of Purposes 1 and 3 and has a Low to Very Low

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 5 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

Suitability as an Area of Search. The Assessment of Landscape Character notes that the area has Little/No or Low capacity to accommodate change; this is a reflection of the open exposed nature of much of the parcel, and the contribution that it provides in terms of the towns setting” (paragraph 4.3.10). This is the conclusion applying to the whole area.

2.4.6 In respect of Randall’s Field which is the only part of the sites separately assessed, PBA conclude that: “However, the north western part is less sensitive – it is set back from the exposed slopes and edge of the ridge and benefits from significant containment provided by a substantial tree belt along Upshot Lane just beyond the ridge top. Whilst the existing Green Belt boundary is well defined, sound alternative boundaries exist along the Upshot Lane and Pyrford Common Road. However, if this area is to be released from the Green Belt for development purposes, consideration will need to be given to the avoidance of any impact on the setting of the Registered Park and Garden at Pyrford Court on the other side of Pyrford Common Road. A small area of development may also be possible in the narrow field between the field and Tegg’s Lane to the north, although safeguarding the tree belt will be an important consideration in achieving an acceptable scheme.” (paragraph 4.3.10).

2.4.7 PBA go on to advise that “in terms of its potential sustainability, site WGB009a is well located in close proximity to local community facilities. It lies adjacent to a village hall and scout hut, and close to a school, church and nursery. It is also within 500m from the local centre of Pyrford. Our information shows no internal site constraints. In terms of strategic accessibility the parcel scored towards the middle of all those considered. Overall, this site is therefore considered to be suitable in sustainability terms (paragraph 4.3.11).

2.4.8 Based on the analysis that we have undertaken and the conclusion that most of the site within the land parcel east of Upshot Lane is above the defined Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance, and mindful of PBA’s landscape and sustainability conclusion in respect of Randall’s Field, we contend that had PBA undertaken a finer grain analysis of land east of Upshot Lane, the conclusion would have been to support release of the land from the Green Belt and allocation for development now.

2.4.9 WBC used the outcome of the Green Belt boundary review to inform the Draft Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD), to allocate specific sites for various types of development. The sites are considered under Policy GB 12 which covers Randall’s Field (Land rear of 79-95 Lovelace Drive, Tegg’s Lane) and Policy GB 13 which covers Land at Upshot Lane. Both sites are safeguarded to meet long term development needs from 2027-2040.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 6 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

2.4.10 Core Strategy Policy CS24 Woking’s landscape and townscape (which amongst others replaces Local Plan Policy NE6 and NE7) relates to strategies aimed at protecting local landscape and townscape character in order to minimize negative impact from new development ‘… especially key landscapes such as heathlands, escarpments and the canal/river network and settlement characteristics…’’

2.4.11 Woking has a topography with relatively minor variation and as a result the sandy escarpments which rise above the shallow river valleys are relatively distinct and a significant landscape feature which dominates the skyline from the south. The site to the east of Upshot Lane is located within the Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance policy area. The justification for Policy CS24 Para 5.251 states; ‘Development will not normally be permitted on the slopes of the escarpments which are shown on the Proposals Map, or which would result in a significant reduction in the amount of tree cover. Development on the top of the escarpments will only be permitted where it would not adversely affect the character of the landscape.’

2.4.12 The river and canal corridor of the River Wey meanders below the Pyrford Escarpment to the south and east of the sites and are subject to Policy CS24. The River Wey and Wey Navigation has a wide shallow valley that influences much of the southern and eastern areas of the Borough. This policy recognises the value of canals, rivers and their valleys as an important attribute that can add considerably to the character of an area including the Valley of the Wey and Wey Navigation. Para 5.253 states that ‘Policy CS24 will prevent development which would harm this visual quality by protecting water courses, their immediate banks and wider setting’. The Wey river and canal corridor are a distinct landscape feature of the local area and are also an important source of open space and form valuable links between habitats. The important habitats along parts of the river valley are designated for their nature conservation importance through CS7 Biodiversity and Nature Conservation and its importance as an open space is recognised in CS17 – Open Space, Green Infrastructure, sport and recreation. The Wey Navigation has been designated as a Conservation Area and so is also subject to Policy BE9 General Policy on Conservation Areas.

2.4.13 A Tree Preservation Order (TPO) covers the whole of Randall’s Field, including the hedgerow running along the west side of Upshot Lane. Saved Local Plan Policy NE8 Tree Preservation Orders relates to strategies for the protection of significant trees, groups of trees or woodlands by tree preservation orders if they are in good health and their removal would have a significant impact on the environment and its enjoyment by the public. The

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 7 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

large amount of tree cover Woking enjoys is regarded as an important and valuable landscape feature.

2.4.14 The eastern half of the site, land east of Upshot Lane, is not covered by a TPO but Saved Policy NE9 Trees Within Development Proposals applies to the site as a whole: ‘…when considering development proposals on sites which contain trees the council will not normally permit development proposals which would result in the loss of trees or groups of trees of significant amenity value…’

2.4.15 Policy CS24 Woking’s Landscape and Townscape. Para 5.254 also relates to the protection of trees and planting of new ones; ‘Trees form an important part of the landscape fabric of the Borough… The Council will seek the retention of existing quality trees (except where they are dead, dying or dangerous) and encourage the planting of new ones where it is relevant to do so. New trees must have sufficient root volume availability, appropriate root management, irrigation, drainage and aeration.’

2.4.16 Although the sites are not located within any other designated areas, other policies from the Local Plan relevant to this assessment are set out below due to the potential for landscape and visual impact.

2.4.17 CS21 Design applies to the sites and states that development should make a positive contribution to the environment and strengthen the character and distinct identity of the area; ‘Incorporate landscaping to enhance the setting of the development, including the retention of any trees of amenity value, and other significant landscape features of merit, and provide for suitable boundary treatment/s.’

2.4.18 Pyrford Common which runs either side of Pyrford Common Road, immediately to the west of the sites, is a Site of Nature Conservation Importance and is subject to Policy CS7 Biodiversity and Nature Conservation which considers measures to enhance, manage and protect these areas. There is also an extensive area of the River Wey corridor subject to this policy.

2.4.19 Aviary Road Conservation Area lies immediately to the north of the site and is subject to saved Policy BE9 General Policy on Conservation Areas. This policy states that: ‘… proposals within or clearly visible from a conservation area to be of a high standard of design, harmonising with or, where appropriate, enhancing existing development in the conservation area having regard to height, form, massing, scale, detail and materials.’

2.4.20 Policy CS20 Heritage and Conservation states that new development must respect and

enhance the character and appearance of the area in which it is proposed; ‘Development will

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 8 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

be required to demonstrate that it will preserve and/or enhance the special features of the

Conservation Areas.’

2.4.21 Pyrford Neighbourhood Forum have produced a draft Neighbourhood Plan 2015 to 2027 (2014) covering their views on the future of the village including Village Open Spaces.

The draft Neighbourhood Plan includes reference to the ‘Pyrford Escarpment’ but does not provide any justification for this and certainly does not justify extending this beyond the area suggested by WBC’s defined Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance. The extent of this area is shown on OX5363 Figure 08 as a green line.

Based on the detailed analysis we have undertaken, we contend that Randall’s Field should continue to be excluded, and the boundary should move to align along Sandy Lane. This is the perceived top of the slope as indicated in the photographs on OX5363 Figures 09 and 10.

2.4.22 The land gradually rises from Warren Lane through to the footpath to the east of Sandy Lane (location of viewpoints 12 and 14), where there is a break in the slope, and it starts rising more steeply to Sandy Lane. It also rises higher south west along Sandy Lane to where it meets Church Hill at around 42m AOD, strengthening the impression that this is the top of the slope.

2.4.23 Within land east of Upshot Lane, the field has a high point close to Church Hill then drops away north towards Pyrford, and therefore the field area is not visible to the eastern flank of the hill.

3 Landscape Baseline

3.1 Study Area

3.1.1 The wider landscape with the potential to be affected by landscape and visual effects from the proposed development was identified using desk top analysis and fieldwork. The extent of the study areas is shown on OX5363 Figure 01. As noted this study area and viewpoints were agreed with the planning officer at WBC.

3.2 Designations

3.2.1 OX5363 Figure 02 National Designations shows the national landscape designations within the Study Area. The sites currently lie within the Green Belt. The fundamental aim of

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 9 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

the Green Belt is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. However, as explained above in Paragraph 2.4.3, after the Woking Green Belt was reviewed in 2014, it is proposed that the sites are removed from the Green Belt and are safeguarded to meet long term development needs under the Draft Site Allocation DPD.

3.2.2 Pyrford Court lies immediately to the south of the sites and is a Registered Park and Garden (Grade II). The purpose of the Register is to celebrate designed landscapes of note, and encourage appropriate protection. There are about 8 ha of early 20th century gardens in the grounds of Pyrford Court, which were designed by Lady Iveagh but strongly influenced by the writings of Gertrude Jekyll, surrounding a contemporary country house. The Royal Horticultural Society's Gardens at Wisley is also a Registered Park and Garden (Grade II*) and is located approximately 2.5km east of the sites.

3.2.3 Newark Priory, a medieval Augustinian priory, lies approximately 1.3km south of the sites, on the banks of the Wey Navigation and is a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

3.2.4 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI’s) are protected under section 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act and are natural habitats or sites of wildlife and geological heritage of national importance. Two areas of SSSI are located approximately 1.5km south of the sites along the Wey Navigation near Papercourt Lock. The canal banks are rich in wildlife which is relatively undisturbed. However these areas of the River Wey corridor below the Pyrford escarpment have no intervisibility with the sites and are not considered further in this assessment.

3.2.5 Sites of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI). Pyrford Common, Roundbridge Farm, Grayshott Fields, Wheelers Meadow (South), Warren Farm Meadows, Pyrford Place Lake, the Hoe Stream and River Wey were designated as SNCI's to protect the important meadow, marsh, pasture, heathland and water course habitats.

3.2.6 The Thames Basin Special Protection Areas (SPA) are classified under the EC Bird Directive and include areas of heathland in Southern England that support important bird populations. There are two areas within the 3km study area designated as part of the Thames Basin Heaths, including Horsell Common to the north of Woking and Oakham and Wisley Common to the east of the sites. These are considered to be of European significance, however, given the distance of these SPAs from the sites, there is no intervisibility and therefore no landscape or visual impacts. The sites will be subject to the Thames Basin Heaths SPA Avoidance Strategy 2010-2015 but this is outside the scope of this assessment.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 10 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

3.2.7 OX5363 Figure 03 Local Plan Designations shows the local landscape designations within the study area.

3.2.8 As mentioned above, the sites is covered by the local plan designation Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance the extent of which is shown in OX5363 Figure 06 Topography.

3.2.9 Randall’s Field is subject to a Tree Preservation Order which covers all trees within the field and along its boundaries.

3.2.10 There are four Conservation Areas (CAs) within the 1.5m study area. The closest, Aviary Road lies immediately north of land at Upshot Lane.

3.2.11 Aviary Road CA is described in The Heritage of Woking. An Historic Conservation Compendium (2000):

‘Aviary Road contains high quality Edwardian suburban housing which has remained virtually intact with only some very limited infilling at its eastern end adjacent to Sandy Lane path. The development which dates from 1910-1912 is very distinctive in character and is a good example of Edwardian period housing. Although all the properties are of individual design, the suburban form of the estate is very unusual for the Pyrford…’

The intervisibility between Aviary Road CA and the sites is assessed below.

3.2.12 Pyrford Village CA lies approximately 750m to the south. The Wey and Godalming Navigations CA lies approximately 1.2km to the south and was one of the first rivers in the country to be made navigable and opened in 1653. The area also includes the remains of the Newark Priory. There is no intervisibility between the sites and Pyrford Village CA or Wey and Godalming Navigations CA, so these CAs are not considered further in this assessment.

3.2.13 There are numerous Listed Buildings within the study area. The majority of these are concentrated around Pyrford village and Ripley village.

3.2.14 An assessment of the setting of heritage assets within the vicinity of the sites is not included in this assessment as it is beyond the scope of a LVIA.

3.3 Existing Landscape Character Assessments

3.3.1 At the national and regional level, landscape character assessment is defined by Natural England who divide England into 159 distinct National Character Areas (NCAs). The sites

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 11 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

are located within NCA 129: Thames Basin Heaths. The description for this NCA is included in Appendix 3.

3.3.2 NCA: 129 Thames Basin Heaths stretches westwards from Weybridge in Surrey to the countryside around Newbury in Berkshire. The London Green Belt incorporates countryside around Chobham and the rivers Wey and Mole. West of the Green Belt, 20th-century development has given rise to large conurbations. Among these conurbations, gardens amount to a significant area of greenspace. This is a densely settled area with a major road network including the M25 and M3.

3.3.3 At a county level, the landscape character assessment for Surrey 'The Future of Surrey's landscape and woodlands’ (1997) ( Ref.iv ) places the sites in the Lower Wey Landscape Character Area (LCA) as shown on OX5363 Figure 04 Local Character Areas. This character area is described as a flat bottomed valley with gently sloping sides through which the River Wey and the Wey Navigation meanders, creating an intimate, small scale, yet open landscape. The key characteristics include farmed land with small to medium sized fields, riparian trees and woodland belt on the line of the river and traditional riverside features such as locks, bridges and mills. Views of churches are important local focal points, including the church at Pyrford and Newark Priory, whereas important parks and gardens, such as Pyrford Place, are hidden from view. The ‘Future of Surrey's landscape and woodlands’ Landscape Assessment description of Lower Wey LCA is included in Appendix 3.

3.3.4 The 1997 landscape character assessment has now been updated with a new assessment which covers Woking: Surrey Landscape Character Assessment: Woking Borough, which was published on their website in March 2016. It places the sites in the SS10: Woking to Byfleet Settled and Wooded Sandy Farmland. It also provides guidance on future land management and the built environment. The relevant characteristics it highlights are indicated in para 3.3.13.

3.3.5 At a district level WBC has published an urban character study in 2010 which covers the built up areas of the Borough.1 The sites are not assessed within this study but lie adjacent to Pyrford, which is mostly a residential area and is described in Character Area 24 and 26 within the Woking Character Study;

1 Woking Character Study for Woking Borough Council (September 2010) Landscape Partnership

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 12 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

‘Much of the development within this Character Area dates to the early 20th century, with much of the land remaining as common land until this time. It was developed as a series of small estates along private roads, many of which remain private today, from Edwardian times but generally around the inter-war period.’ 2

3.3.6 The study notes that there is very little open space within Pyrford but the houses have both front and rear gardens which can be large and contain large amounts of mature tree planting, in keeping with the ‘Arcadian’ nature of much of the development. The dense vegetation of the area creates a sense of visual unity; ‘There are relatively few landmarks within the area, despite several listed and locally listed buildings being present, mainly due to the hidden and secluded nature of many parts of the Character Area. The dense vegetation in most of the area creates a noticeable sense of enclosure.’3

3.3.7 Guildford Borough Council, published ‘Guildford Landscape Character Assessment & Guidance’ in 2007.4 This study provides a useful reference point for the landscape character in the vicinity of the sites. The landscape to the south of the River Wey in Guildford Borough reflect similar characteristics the landscape to the north of the Borough boundary. However, the finer grain of the Guildford Landscape Character Assessment (LCA), which is at Borough rather than County level, gives a greater level of detail of the local landscape character which is missed in the larger scale assessment in the Surrey County Council Landscape Character Assessment. In a similar area, which is covered by the Surrey’s Lower Wey LCA, the Guildford Landscape Character Assessment has divided the landscape into four landscape character areas.

3.3.8 LCA A1 Lower Wey Valley Floodplain is a narrow band of land following the course of the River Wey and its multiple channels, and the Wey Navigation. It is a flat low lying floodplain mainly below 30m AOD. This is a peaceful, unsettled, pastoral landscape with views across the water meadows. The ruins of Newark Priory is a picturesque landmark in the level landscape of the floodplain. Woodland lining the river and on the edge of the area create a semi-enclosed secluded landscape and views to settlements outside the area are usually

2 Woking Character Study (September 2010) Character Area 24. page 96 3 Woking Character Study (September 2010) Character Area 24. Page 97 4 http://www.guildford.gov.uk/media/1007/Rural-Urban-Fringe-Assessment---Master-Copy/pdf/Rural-Urban_Fringe_Assessment_- _Master_Copy.pdf

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 13 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

screened. The Wey Navigation, built in the 17th century is historically important and designated as a Conservation Area.

3.3.9 LCA H1 Send Gravel Terrace is a gently shelving landscape fringing the southern edge of the flood plain of the River Wey. It is a fragmented landscape with large open water bodies, pastures and mixed woodland plus substantial villages, such as Ripley and scattered farmsteads. A dense network of rural roads, many of them lined by settlement giving a suburban character and a main railway line. This is an enclosed area with intermittent views across pastoral farmland.

3.3.10 Further south again are LCA G2 Wisley Wooded and Settled Heath and LCA E2 Ockham & Clandon Wooded Rolling Clayland. LCA G2 is a secluded, enclosed landscape dominated by woodland and crossed by major transport corridors. LCA E2 is a gently undulating lowland which is predominantly pastoral with areas of woodland. Small historic villages are overlaid with substantial areas of 20th century development extending along the railway and the rural roads.

3.3.11 A series of photographs are provided on OX5363 Figures 12 to Figure 32 which illustrate the character of the local area in the vicinity of the sites. They include the agreed viewpoints that have been selected for the assessment of visual impacts. The location of the viewpoints can be found on OX5363 Figure 11 Viewpoint Locations.

3.3.12 Although the sites are included within Surrey County Council’s Lower Wey LCA, this is a broad, county level, LCA which does not provide the finer grain of analysis of a local landscape character assessment. The majority of the characteristics listed for the Lower Wey LCA are not applicable to the sites, which sit on the escarpment above the Wey river valley on the northern edge of the Lower Wey LCA and on the settlement edge of Pyrford. The detailed analysis is now in the revised landscape character assessment Surrey Landscape Character Assessment: Woking Borough.

3.3.13 The key landscape characteristics identified for the area in the vicinity of the sites are:

Undulating landscape, underlain by Bagshot Formation Sand solid geology. Generally falls south towards the Wey, increasing low lying, with a number of water bodies, including restored gravel pits, to the east adjacent to the river floodplain.

Consists of arable, and occasionally pastoral farmland, with paddocks and a considerable number of golf courses.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 14 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

Woodlands vary in size, with larger areas adjacent to the Built Up Areas. There is Hanger woodland west of Pyrford village. There are smaller blocks of mixed woodland elsewhere, and tree groups are a characteristic part of the golf courses within the character area.

A few relatively small areas of woodland are recorded as ancient woodland.

Some of the larger arable fields have no hedgerow structure, but most field boundaries are generally well vegetated with hedges and trees.

Vegetation, including that along roads and field boundaries often limits views, but gaps in vegetation allow pleasant views across fields.

A dense network of public rights of way within the character area provide numerous walking routes, including links between the Built Up Area to the north and west, and the Wey Navigation long distance path to the south and east.

There is a scattering of farmsteads, traditional buildings at Pyrford Village. There is a mobile home park at Warren Farm hidden within the woodland at the southern tip of the character area.

In the western part of the character area, the historic wooded grounds of Pyrford Court are grade II listed, and a Conservation Area covers Pyrford Village. Pyrford Common is designated as a Site of Nature Conservation Interest.

Tree cover largely obscures or filters settlement surrounding the character area, including the Built Up Areas to the north, but glimpses of settlement and activity associated with the extensive golf courses, limits the sense of remoteness. However, the enclosed farmland, experienced from the public rights of way network, give the area a rural feel despite the close proximity of large Built Up Areas to the north and east.

Some of the key landscape attributes they list include varied woodlands including small belts and copses and pastoral farmland with intact field patterns, within peaceful rural areas. Some of the pressures the report identifies are increased urbanisation of rural roads and the merging of villages. Their landscape strategy is to conserve the mosaic pattern of the landscape, restock hedgerows and consider the impact of future development in the area.

The guidelines for land management in relation to the sites include:

Raise awareness of the historic dimension of the landscape to landowners including the commons, parklands and woodlands.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 15 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

Encourage sustainable and multi-purpose woodlands and promote traditional woodland management techniques with local landowners and the farming community.

Promote the use of locally appropriate species such as oak, birch and Scots pine.

Enhance the hedgerows by replanting and consistent management and resist development that will result in further loss/fragmentation of hedgerows and hedgerow trees.

With regards to the built environment they highlight in the report the following guidelines:

Retain the pattern of villages, hamlets, isolated farmsteads and short rows of houses facing onto roads or commons set within the matrix of woodland, heathland and open farmland.

Ensure that new development is designed to retain tree cover that is essential to the character of this area and consider opportunities for new woodland planting to enhance existing and new development and integrate it within the landscape.

Improve understanding of the general pattern of settlements and their relationship to the landscape and maintain development control to ensure that new development is sympathetic to the wider pattern of settlement.

Conserve the rural roads minimising small-scale incremental change such as signage, fencing or improvements to the road network or bridges which would change their character.

Resist urbanisation of roads within settlement through encouraging appropriate surfacing of existing pavements, enhancing the immediate landscape setting and ensuring minimum clutter.

Ensure that lighting schemes are assessed for visual impact and encourage conservation of existing areas of ‘dark skies’. Promote the use of traditional signage features with particular regard to local style and materials.

This guidance will be considered in the development of the masterplan and design for the sites.

3.4 Site Appraisal

3.4.1 The sites are located adjacent to the settlement edge of Pyrford, approximately 3.5km from the centre of Woking. (OX5363 Figure 01 Site Location).

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 16 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

3.4.2 The sites measure approximately 22.78 hectares (ha) in area and are separated into two medium sized fields by Upshot Lane. Randall’s Field to the west is approximately 11.64 ha and the eastern field, Land at Upshot Lane is approximately 11.14 ha in area.

3.4.3 The sites are currently in agricultural use. Boundary hedgerows of varying heights border the edge of the fields on all sides. The hedgerow planting along both sides of Upshot Lane is particularly high. The southern boundary hedgerow along Pyrford Common Road is more open.

3.4.4 There are substantial tree belts in the narrow field adjacent to Tegg’s Lane to the north of Randall’s Field and along Sandy Lane public bridleway along the south east boundary of the field east of Upshot Lane. Three mature oak trees stand in the field east of Upshot Lane and are Category A and B trees.

3.4.5 The sites are situated on the higher slopes of the Pyrford escarpment. The land rises approximately 17m from its lowest point at the north east corner adjacent to Aviary Road at approximately 29.5m AOD to the south west corner at 46.5m AOD. Land at Upshot Lane has a rise in level of 13.5m from north to south from 29.5m AOD to 43m AOD. Randall’s Field has a rise in level from north east to south west of 10.5m from 36m AOD to 46.5m AOD.

3.4.6 As noted a tree survey was carried out by Hayden’s Arboricultural Consultants in December 2015 and is included in Appendix 4. In Randall’s Field the survey identified mostly Category B trees within the site, some Category C trees and some U. In the land East of Upshot Lane there are 5no. Category A trees, with the remainder mostly Category B and some Category U trees and hedges. Category A trees are those identified as being of high quality (BS 5837: 2012) and Category B trees are those identified as being of moderate quality. All other vegetation on the sites are considered to be of low quality and value (Category C) or having no retention value (Category U).

3.4.7 Randall’s Field is subject to a TPO. A copy of the TPO is included in Appendix 4. The TPO trees within the site include trees at Category B and C and U but no Category A trees.

3.4.8 A Public Right of Way (PRoW), Sandy Lane, runs along the eastern boundary of the site east of Upshot Lane from Pyrford Common Road to Aviary Road. It is designated as a bridleway. A substantial hedgerow runs along the west of Sandy Lane with oak and hazel hedgerow trees. At its northern end, oak woodland also encloses the bridleway to the eastern side.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 17 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

3.4.9 The sites border the settlement edge of Pyrford to the north and west. To the west of Randall’s Field are the residential gardens of Lovelace Drive which consists of high density inter-war and immediately post-war housing. To the north of the sites the housing is classified as an ‘Arcadian’ by the Woking Townscape Character Assessment. These large detached Arts and Crafts properties have large plots, with high levels of tree cover, particularly to rear gardens. The development is low density with the houses set back from wide streets. The high quality Edwardian suburban housing along Aviary Road north east of the land east of Upshot Lane, form the Aviary Road Pyrford Conservation Area. The development is virtually intact, with very little infilling along the road except at its eastern end adjacent to Sandy Lane.

3.4.10 In the north-west corner of Randall’s Field is a strip of land, running south of Tegg’s Lane and on the eastern end of this is a community facility with a car park. It is separated from the remainder of the site by a belt of trees, mostly Scots Pine.

3.4.11 Pyrford Common Road runs along the southern boundary of the sites, linking Ripley and Woking. Upshot Lane (B367) runs north to south, through the middle of the sites, linking Pyrford with old Pyrford Village. Both these roads are narrow with limited pedestrian access.

Landscape in the vicinity of the sites

3.4.12 To the north of the sites, are the residential areas of Pyrford. As described in para 3.6.10 Pyrford includes both early 20th century residential development and extensive inter-war and post-war development. These residential areas extend to the main London to Southampton railway and beyond, merging into the residential areas of Sheerwater and West Byfleet which form part of a continuous urban area that extends from Byfleet in the east, across the M25 to Woking and Knaphill in the west.

3.4.13 To the east of the sites, beyond Sandy Lane, the Pyrford escarpment falls sharply down to the Wey river valley floodplain. The northern slopes of the Wey Valley in the vicinity of the sites consists of large open arable fields and an oak woodland, Rowley Bristow Wood. The fields are bounded by scrappy hedgerows. There is a well-used network of PRoWs from which there are extensive views, across the wooded floodplain, to the south east towards the North Downs. Settlement is limited to individual farms and the historic village of Pyrford with its landmark church tower. There are two lines of pylons running across the valley sides.

3.4.14 The Wey valley floodplain, below Warren Lane, is a narrow band of secluded land following the course of the River Wey and its multiple channels (the Hoe, the Bourne and Abbey Stream) and the Wey Navigation. It is a flat low lying floodplain mainly below 25m AOD with

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 18 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

extensive areas of wetland and meadows. It is largely unsettled except for the mobile home park at Warren Farm which is enclosed by woodland. On the level landscape of the floodplain, woodlands line the river and the Wey Navigation, creating a semi-enclosed secluded landscape. The ruins of Newark Priory to the south of the sites are a picturesque landmark in the level landscape of the flood plain. Views outside the area from here are screened by woodland which results in the area retaining its rural undisturbed character. Pyrford Golf Course lies between Warren Lane and the Wey Navigation adds a suburban feel to this stretch of the river valley. It has numerous ponds and interconnecting water channels, and areas of woodland which filter views up to the Pyrford Escarpment.

3.4.15 Pyrford Court, which lies immediately south of the sites, has been included on the National Register of Parks and Gardens of Historic Interest. The Grade II gardens occupy an elevated position on the Pyrford escarpment and extend southwards down the Wey valley slopes, with far reaching southerly views. The park and gardens are secluded by extensive tree cover and have no intervisibility with the sites to the north.

3.4.16 Pyrford Common is an area of heathland to the west of the sites. It is designated as a SNCI (Site of Nature Conservation Interest) for its surviving heathland but in the vicinity of the sites, the area is heavily wooded with both deciduous and coniferous trees and so has no intervisibility with the sites. The Common extends to the junction of Pyrford Common Road and Old Woking Road where there is a car park giving access to a small grassed area and recreation ground maintained by WBC. Pyrford Common Road represents a barrier to access to the Common from residential areas within Pyrford.

3.5 Baseline Summary

Summary of the sites

 Two medium sized parcels in agricultural use;

 Hedgerow boundaries and tree belts enclose much of the sites;

 Residential development encloses the sites to the north and west;

 Views to the south east towards the Surrey Hills AONB from the edge of the sites along Sandy Lane ; and

 Upshot Lane separates the two sites.

Summary of landscape in the vicinity of the sites

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 19 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

 The sites are surrounded to the north and west by the residential areas which form part of a continuous urban area that extends across the Borough from east to west;

 East of the sites are areas of open farmland with arable fields and oak woodlands;

 Dense woodland encloses the sites to the west on Pyrford Common and south around Pyrford Court;

 East of the sites, there are extensive views to the North Downs from the PRoWs on the edge of the Pyrford escarpment which falls to the Wey river valley; and

 The Wey river valley to the south and south east of the sites contains Pyrford Golf Course and the visually secluded floodplain landscape along the River Wey and Wey Navigation.

3.6 Landscape Value

3.6.1 The landscape in the vicinity of the sites is currently located within the Green Belt. However, WBC’s Core Strategy states that areas within the Green Belt have been identified as a potential future direction of growth to meet housing need and the Draft Site Allocation DPD has safeguarded the sites to meet long term development needs.

3.6.2 The landscape on Land at Upshot Lane forms part of the local designation of Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance. The Draft Pyrford Neighbourhood Plan also values the landscape in the vicinity of the site for the ‘extensive rural views the escarpment provides’.

3.6.3 The Aviary Road CA lies adjacent to the site to the north of the land east of Upshot Lane.

4 Visual Baseline

4.1 Visual Context

4.1.1 The sites are visually enclosed by the residential development to the north and west and dense woodland to the west on Pyrford Common and south around Pyrford Court. The key views are within the immediate vicinity of the sites, particularly to the east, although many of these are filtered by the extensive boundary hedges around the sites against the existing housing areas on the south side of Pyrford.

4.1.2 Long distance viewpoints are theoretically possible from the higher ground to the east but being located at a distance of 1.5km, it is difficult to discern the sites.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 20 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

4.2 Visual Receptors

4.2.1 The visual assessment looks at identified viewpoints where the proposals may potentially result in some changes to the existing visual amenity.

4.2.2 Three categories of visual receptors were identified:  Users of the Public Rights of Way (High Sensitivity)

 Road users (Moderate Sensitivity) along Upshot Lane and Pyrford Common Road and Church Hill

 Local Residents (High Sensitivity) to the north of the sites

4.2.3 Table 1 below shows the viewpoints that were considered:

Table 1: Potential Viewpoints

Viewpoint Location Sensitivity 01 PRoW, Pyrford Sites not visible due to thick woodland on the Common Common 02 Lovelace Drive Sites not visible due to intervening woodland buffer to the back of the gardens along Lovelace Drive 03 Tegg’s Lane Limited filtered views of the sites due to intervening woodland south of the PRoW 04 Upshot Lane, south of The sites are entirely screened by the existing overgrown Engliff Lane hedgerows on either side of Upshot Lane Sensitivity : Low 05 Aviary Road Sites not visible due to intervening residential properties on the south side of Aviary Road Sensitivity: High 06 Pyrford Court The gap in the boundary vegetation to the south of Randall’s Field entrance, Pyrford allows views across the sites. Common Road Sensitivity: Low/Medium 07 Pyrford Common Views into the sites through a farm gate from this busy road. Road, Southern end of Sensitivity: Low Sandy Lane 08 PRoW south of Sandy Due to the sharply rising escarpment there are only partial views of Lane the sites. Sensitivity: High 09 PRoW between Sandy Gaps in the field boundary vegetation of Land at Upshot Lane, Lane and Elveden allow partial views towards the sites. Close (west) Sensitivity: High 10 PRoW near Lady Sites are not visible due to the escarpment. Place Farm Sensitivity: High 11 Crossroads on PRoW A partial view of the sites due to the rising topography which will be between Church Hill filtered by existing vegetation. and Warren Lane and Sensitivity: High Pyrford Village and Pyrford 12 PRoW between Sandy Views of the sites are largely obscured by the rising escarpment and Lane and Elveden existing boundary vegetation. Close (east) Sensitivity: High 13 PRoW FP79 west of Sites are not visible due to rising topography and intervening

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 21 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

Viewpoint Location Sensitivity Elveden Close vegetation Sensitivity: High 14 PRoW FP75 near Partial views of the western boundary of the sites. Warren Lane Sensitivity: High 15 PRoW crossing Sites are not visible due to distance, vegetation and topography. Pyrford Golf Course Sensitivity: Medium 16 Pyrford Golf Club Hole Partial views of the western boundary of the sites. 18 Sensitivity: Medium 17 Track off Warren Lane Sites are not visible due to intervening vegetation. Sensitivity: Low/Medium 18 River Wey Navigation Sites are not visible due to distance, vegetation and topography. Tow path at Newark Sensitivity: High Lock 19 River Wey Navigation Sites are not visible due to distance, vegetation and topography. at Pyrford Lock Sensitivity: High

4.3 Assessed Viewpoints

4.3.1 Views of the sites were photographically recorded in autumn and selected winter views, and are included in OX5363 Figures 12 to 33.

4.3.2 The location of all assessed viewpoints is shown on OX5363 Figure 11. Viewpoint locations marked in red are public locations from which the proposed housing might be visible and thus have been assessed in detail and have also had winter photographs included. The existing visual context for each viewpoint is described in Appendix 01 Visual Assessment Schedule.

4.3.3 In assessing the effects on the landscape and the visual impact of allowing residential development on the sites having established baseline conditions, the next step involves us assessing in broad terms the form of development envisaged in the illustrative masterplan. This is set out in the next section.

5 Assessment of Landscape Effects

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 This section assesses the potential effects on landscape elements and character, which would result from the proposed development shown on the illustrative masterplan. The first

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 22 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

step in assessing the landscape effects is to determine the susceptibility of the landscape receptors (on the sites and in the wider landscape) to the proposed development.

5.1.2 GLVIA3 defines the susceptibility of the landscape to change as the ability of the landscape receptor to accommodate the proposed development, without undue consequences for the maintenance of the baseline situation and/or the achievement of landscape planning policies and strategies. The landscape receptor can include the overall character or quality/condition of a particular landscape type or area, or an individual element and/or feature, or a particular aesthetic or perceptual aspect of the landscape. The susceptibility identified is therefore specific to the proposed development and will not necessarily represent the susceptibility of the site to other forms of development.

5.1.3 Landscape sensitivity is derived from combining judgements about the susceptibility of the landscape to change arising from the specific proposals, with judgements about the value attached to the landscape.

5.2 Susceptibility to change

5.2.1 The susceptibility of the landscape to the proposed change is determined by considering the key changes that are likely to take place and how they will affect the key characteristics/ elements within the existing landscape.

5.2.2 The key components of the sites are listed in paragraphs 3.4 above. The key characteristics of the landscape in the vicinity of the sites are listed in paragraph 3.5 above.

5.2.3 Construction effects are the temporary effects that occur as a result of construction activities. Effects that are related to the operational use of the sites, such as the removal of vegetation, are considered as operational effects even though they may occur during the construction period.

5.2.4 The potential landscape effects from construction activities have been identified as:-  Impacts on the landscape character due to the presence of cranes and scaffolding, and other effects associated with a construction site.

 Construction traffic movement to, from and on the sites.

5.2.5 Overall it is considered that the sites have low susceptibility to the proposed construction activities because :  The site clearance works are temporary. The earth moving works, fencing, vehicle movement, cranes and other works associated with construction are short term.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 23 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

Due to existing traffic levels on the road network that surround the sites, vehicle movement associated with construction activities will result in a low magnitude of change on the character of the sites. As a result, site clearance and construction works will not have a significant effect on the existing local landscape character and are not considered further under landscape effects.

5.2.6 The potential landscape effects during operational phase have been identified as:-  Loss of landscape features and vegetation on the site including hedgerows and trees subject to TPOs;

 Impacts on the existing landscape character due to the loss of landscape features;

 Impacts on the landscape character due to the introduction of residential development, and

 Indirect impact on the character of the wider landscape.

5.2.7 The key landscape features that are susceptible to impacts from the proposed development are;  the areas of native hedgerow and hedgerow trees on the periphery of the sites, including the TPO trees in Randall’s Field, which contribute to the landscape character of the landscape in the vicinity of the sites;

 The landscape character of the sites is susceptible to the loss of these features as they are representative of the local landscape character;

 The landscape character of the sites is susceptible to the introduction of residential development where currently there is none; and

 The wider landscape is susceptible to the introduction of residential development, although as the sites are generally isolated from the wider landscape, owing to residential development on the western and northern boundaries, this is limited.

5.2.8 The loss of trees and hedgerows within the sites and the arable fields will result in a loss of the existing character of the sites. However, some boundary hedgerows and trees will be retained and planting enhanced as a key design element in the future development of the sites.

5.2.9 Overall it is considered the landscape character of the sites has medium susceptibility to the proposed development because:

 These are arable fields with no public access;

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 24 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

 The sites are located on the settlement edge of Pyrford and residential development will be appropriate in this residential context;

 Boundary hedgerows and trees will mostly be retained which will largely maintain the existing visual enclosure; and

 The orientation of the residential development area and the well-designed landscape strategy will create an appropriate setting for the proposed development.

5.3 The susceptibility of the landscape character of the wider landscape is low as the sites are generally isolated from the wider landscape by both topography and intervening vegetation.

5.4 Sensitivity

5.4.1 The landscape of the sites have no national landscape designations and there is no public access across the sites.

5.4.2 The sites have local value in terms of hedgerows and trees within it, particularly Randall’s Field which has a TPO on all trees on this part of the site.

5.4.3 The eastern half of the site is locally designated as part of the Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance and as a wooded escarpment of local value the sites make a contribution to the setting of the Wey river valley to the south east. This designation values the extensive rural views afforded from the edge of the Pyrford Escarpment, however, such views are not possible from the sites.

5.4.4 This represents local value and does not affect the conclusions reached above regarding the susceptibly of the landscape receptors. Therefore the sensitivity of these landscape receptors to the proposed development during the operation are as follows:  The landscape character of the sites have medium sensitivity

 The landscape character of the wider landscape has low sensitivity

5.5 Detailed Assessment of Effects on Landscape Features and Character of the site during Operation

5.5.1 Effects on Landscape Features

5.5.2 Landscape features of high value within the sites includes the mature trees both within the sites and along the hedgerows which surround the fields within the sites. There are TPO trees on Randall’s Field.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 25 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

5.5.3 The proposals have been designed to retain, where possible, and manage the landscape elements of value within the site which are:  The existing mature trees, particularly the three oak trees in the Land at Upshot Lane; and

 The existing hedgerow trees around the periphery of the site to the south of Randall’s Field, and east/south of land at Upshot Lane.

5.5.4 The proposed development on Randall’s Field will result in the loss of a number of mature trees (see Appendix 3 Arboricultural Report) in the W002 woodland grouping on the eastern boundary to allow access and the creation of a footpath. These trees are part of the TPO which covers Randall’s Field. This includes Category B trees. The remaining TPO trees will be retained.

5.5.5 The proposed development on Land at Upshot Lane will mean the loss of some hedgerow on the western boundary for access but these are category U and the Arboricultural report recommends removal.

5.5.6 The landscape strategy has been designed to mitigate the loss of these trees through planting of appropriate native broad-leaved species which will help to integrate the development into the existing landscape and enhance the urban edge of Pyrford. The retention of existing trees where possible, particularly north and west of Randall’s Field and the retention of trees and hedgerow on the western half of the sites, will maintain existing elements of landscape value.

5.5.7 The loss of high value TPO trees at Randall’s Field represents a medium magnitude of change and a major/moderate adverse impact in terms of loss of landscape features on the sites.

Effects on the Landscape Character of the Sites

5.5.8 The key change to the character of the sites will be as a result of the introduction of built development where currently there is none. This will result in a loss of undeveloped land in part of the sites and a consequent loss of existing landscape character within the development area. This is inevitable with any development on currently undeveloped land. The development will result in an extension southwards of the residential settlement of Pyrford, up to Pyrford Common Road which is a strong existing boundary.

5.5.9 The existing overgrown hedgerow along the boundary of the sites will be reinforced through new planting along the boundary (see Carter Jonas Concept Masterplan

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 26 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

1013212.009.REV1). Tree and shrub planting within the housing areas will help to separate the proposed development from the existing residential areas to the north and west. Areas of native tree and shrub planting within the sites and on the boundaries of the development area will also enhance the settlement edge and integrate the proposed development within the existing landscape and its character.

5.5.10 Due to the change in character within the development areas, the loss of trees including those with a TPO, the magnitude of change on the landscape character of the sites will be high. The sites are judged to have medium sensitivity to the proposed development and initially these changes will have a moderate adverse impact because of the loss of openness and loss of mature vegetation.

5.5.11 The landscape strategy for the sites has been designed to mitigate the loss of high value landscape resources within the sites through the proposed planting scheme and to help to integrate the new development into the existing landscape.

5.5.12 Proposed additional tree planting as part of the development will provide an appropriate setting for the development as detailed on the Concept Masterplan.

5.5.13 The retention of existing hedgerows and trees which contribute to the character of the sites will help to integrate the proposed development into the wider landscape.

5.5.14 After 10 years, the proposed planting will have become established. The trees and planting around the sites boundaries will have reached early maturity and will consist of a well- designed landscape and provide an appropriate setting for the proposed development. The proposed hedge planting will have matured and will help to reinforce the visual separation between the development and the wider landscape.

5.5.15 After 10 years, the proposed development will appear appropriate to its location adjacent to the urban edge and will become part of the urban fabric of Pyrford. The development will be sympathetic to the townscape character of Pyrford through the well-designed buildings and complementary landscape. However there will remain a loss of the existing open character and the overall effect after 10 years will be minor adverse.

Effects on the Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance Designation

5.5.16 The part of the sites that is located to the east of Upshot Lane is within this policy area. The objectives of the designation are set out in para. 2.4.5.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 27 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

5.5.17 In a borough with relatively minor topographical variety, the Pyrford escarpment is a distinct landscape feature. Development is permitted on the top of the escarpment where it will not adversely affect the character of the landscape or lead to a significant reduction in the existing tree cover. Development will not normally be permitted on the slopes.

5.5.18 The existing Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance designation is crudely expressed and not adequately justified. The designation refers to a topographical feature, but the designation boundary line bears no relation to the existing contours or visual impact but instead follows non-topographical features, such as roads, public rights of way and field boundaries. The designation refers to the ‘top’ of the escarpment and the ‘slopes’ but does not define where this division falls. The eastern extent of the designation follows Warren Lane, which is largely below the 25m AOD contour, yet much of the Wey Valley floodplain lies between the 20 – 25m AOD. The highest point on the escarpment between Pyrford Court, Fox Hill and Monument Hill lies between 35m and 45m but other areas at the same elevation, including Randall’s Field and parts of Pyrford Common are not included in the designation.

5.5.19 Randall’s Field which lies between 35m and 45m AOD, is not within the designation. Woking Draft Site Allocation regards the site as ‘discretely situated, set back beyond the prominent ridge to the east’ and yet land to the east is actually lower which is illogical. Pyrford Neighbourhood Forum have suggested the alignment should be further north-west, which as we have explained is completely without justification.

5.5.20 Land at Upshot Lane straddles the 35m AOD contour – the southern half of the field lies, like Randall’s Field, above the 35m contour line, a height that should be regarded as the top of the escarpment. From viewpoints lower down the escarpment (Viewpoint 04) there are no views into the southern half of the field because of the rising topography. The northern half of the field, is lower than 35m AOD but is set back from the top of the escarpment and is not visible from the fields on the escarpment slopes to the east due to visual containment from Rowley Bristow Wood.

5.5.21 We propose that the line of the Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance designation should be revised and we show this proposal on OX5363 Figure 08. We have also highlighted WBC‘s alignment as well as the suggested alignment by Pyrford Neighbourhood Forum (PNF).

5.5.22 The proposed re-alignment by PNF basically follows the field boundary around Randall’s Field and therefore does not fulfil a topographical solution or visual expression which

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 28 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

logically should be the outcome as part of a topographical designation. Our proposal for the re-alignment of the boundary is to follow the visual the top of the escarpment along Sandy Lane, as indicated on OX5363 Figure 08. This would allow the logical expression of the escarpment along the visual ‘edge’ of the slope from Rowley Bristow Wood to Church Hill.

5.5.23 We note that within the Woking 2027 Development Management Policies currently going through Regulation 19 consultation it is not anticipated there would be any change made to the Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance proposals map. However for the purposes of this LVIA it is evident that both WBC’s designation of the Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance and PNF’s Pyrford Escarpment that housing development on the sites would be acceptable.

5.6 Effects on the Aviary Road CA

5.6.1 The land East of Upshot Lane are located adjacent to the Aviary Road CA. The character and appearance of the CA is derived from the high quality and intact nature of the Edwardian suburban housing. There is no mention in the CA description of any individual landscape elements that contribute to the character of the area. The Woking Character Study describes the ‘Arcadian’ urban character area as having ‘dense vegetation’ in front and rear gardens which ‘creates a noticeable sense of enclosure’. The proposed development will have no direct impact on the integrity of the Aviary Road CA. Furthermore, the CA is visually self-contained and there are no views from public viewpoints within the CA to the wider landscape (Viewpoint 02), and only filtered views from outside the area towards to the CA (Viewpoint 07).

5.6.2 Views of the proposed development from public viewpoints in the CA will be screened by the houses that lie to the south of the CA. Views will be limited to the south facing elevation and back gardens of the 9 houses on the south side of Aviary Road. As these are private residential views, they are considered in the next section.

5.6.3 During construction it is considered that the magnitude of change on the character and appearance of the Aviary Road CA will be low and the overall effect during construction will be minor adverse.

5.6.4 Upon commencement of building the proposed development, it will be visible from the south facing elevation windows and back gardens of the houses on the south side of Aviary Road, and would introduce a modern development into the setting of the CA. However, the CA will be screened by the proposed landscape buffer indicated on the Concept Masterplan and at completion the magnitude of change will be High and the effect moderate adverse.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 29 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

However, once the landscape buffer has matured, at year 10, the magnitude of change will reduce to Medium and the overall effect will be minor adverse.

5.7 Effects on the Wider Landscape (Wey valley etc)

5.7.1 Adverse effects on the wider landscape in the vicinity of the sites are principally due to the loss of openness through the introduction of built elements and their visibility. The urban edge of Pyrford will, at this location move closer to the Wey river valley, however development this close to the River Wey is not uncharacteristic and the open slopes of the escarpment already creates a significant sense of separation between the sites and the river valley.

5.7.2 Due to the lack of connectivity between the site sand the wider landscape (Wey Valley) the mitigation provided by the well designed landscape strategy for the site, the proposed development will result in a low magnitude of change. The effect on the wider character of the landscape will be negligible.

5.7.3 After 10 years when the proposed planting has become established, the development will appear part of the urban fabric of Pyrford and the impact on the wider landscape will reduce still further.

5.8 Summary of landscape Effects

5.8.1 Table 2 below sets out the overall significance of landscape effects on each of the landscape receptors identified. It is based on a consideration of the value, susceptibly and sensitivity of landscape receptors and the magnitude of change.

Table 2: Significance of Landscape Effects

bility

i

Magnitude of Change

Landscape Receptor Year of Operation Value Suscept Sensitivity Significance of Effects Trees and Completion Local Medium Medium Medium Moderate hedgerows Adverse 10 Years Medium Medium Medium Minor/Mod

Adverse

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 30 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

Landscape Completion Local Medium Low/ High Moderate Character Medium Adverse of the sites 10 Years Low Low/ Low/ Medium Minor

Medium Adverse Landscape Completion Local Medium Medium Medium Minor Character Landscape Adverse of the wider Designation landscape 10 Years Medium Medium Low/Medium Minor

Adverse Landscape Completion Local Medium High Low/Medium Minor character of Landscape Adverse Escarpment Designation 10 Years Medium High Low Minor

Adverse

5.9 Compliance with Landscape Planning Polices and Strategies

5.9.1 The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the NPPF and NPPG as it takes account of the character of the area and contributes to enhancing the natural and local environment.

5.9.2 Although both sites are currently located within Green Belt in the Draft Site Allocations DPD WBC is proposing to allocate both for residential purposes, and so is compliant with this emerging policy.

5.9.3 The sites are partially located within The Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance. Although there will be residential development on a small part of the policy area as shown in Figure 03 the impact is considered to be Minor Adverse.

5.9.4 The sites are located adjacent to part of a Site of Nature Conservation (SNCI) at Pyrford Common. The proposed development will have no adverse effect on the character of the SNCI due to the retained and enhanced hedgerow between the proposed built development and the SNCI.

5.9.5 The proposed development on Randall’s Field necessitates the removal of a number of Category B mature trees subject to TPOs and part of a mature hedgerow (Category U) within the site. The loss of these features has been assessed and a high quality landscape scheme proposed in which the majority of the hedgerows and hedgerow trees around the site boundaries will be retained and extensive tree planting proposed which includes native trees which will offset the loss of existing vegetation.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 31 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

5.9.6 With a suggested highways /access solution that includes a pedestrian footpath along the western boundary of Upshot Lane, this option would involve the loss of stretches of mature hedgerow. There is a variation that aligns the footpath behind the existing hedgerow, thereby reducing the loss of hedgerow. Although loss of any part of the hedgerow or trees would be contrary to Local Plan policy CS24 and NE8.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 32 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

6 Assessment of Visual Effects

6.1 Introduction

6.1.1 This section assesses the potential effects on visual receptors as a result of the proposed development.

6.1.2 Key visual receptors have been identified as:  Local residents to the north of the sites;

 Users of the PRoW to the east of the sites; and

 Road users along Upshot Lane and Pyrford Common Road.

6.1.3 Local residents in their homes and users of PRoWs are considered to have high sensitivity to visual changes. Pedestrians will generally have medium sensitivity. Road users will have low sensitivity.

6.1.4 The visual assessment considers identified viewpoints where the proposals may potentially result in some changes to the existing visual amenity. The viewpoints are intended to be representative. The location of the assessed viewpoints is shown on OX5363 Figure 11 and the Viewpoints themselves are shown on OX5363 Figures 12 to 33. The viewpoint locations represent the extent of the visual influence of the development; that is the extent of the public locations from which the proposed housing development will be visible.

6.2 Overview of Viewpoint Assessment

6.2.1 Construction

6.2.2 The site clearance works and earthworks are temporary. Upshot Lane and Pyrford Common Road, are already subject to a significant level of traffic. The increase in construction vehicles accessing the sites, on site and on roads in the vicinity of the sites will be temporary and not inappropriate in the context of the existing road network.

6.2.3 The sites will be fenced during construction which will reduce the potential for views of construction activities within the sites although it will itself be visible. Views of cranes on the sites will be possible during the construction period in the vicinity of the sites. Lighting of proposed development during operating hours in winter and vehicle movements are also likely to be visible.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 33 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

6.2.4 Effects on visual amenity during the construction phase were considered for each viewpoint described below, where there is assessment provided for the viewpoints that potentially have views of the site. However the assessment concluded that effects on visual amenity during the construction phase would be minor adverse at most and a separate assessment is not provided for each viewpoint.

6.2.5 Operation

6.2.6 The assessment of visual impacts during operation has considered the impacts of the proposed development in the opening year 0 and after 10 years when the landscape proposals will be established. Where there is a difference in the assessment between impacts in the summer and winter, it has also been noted.

6.2.7 As noted above, the sites are visually enclosed on all sides by existing boundary hedgerows and tree belts. As a result, there are limited views into the sites, particularly into Randall’s Field to the west of Upshot Lane. The majority of views of the sites are from the east of the sites, from the network of PRoWs running across the Pyrford escarpment. From Viewpoint 09 on the 35m contour AOD there are views into the sites, although these are filtered by the Rowley Bristow Wood to the north and by the mature hedgerow trees along Sandy Lane. However, from Viewpoint 08, further south at around 37m AOD, the topography of the escarpment which rises sharply in this area, begins to obscure views into the sites. From views further down the escarpment, Viewpoints 13 and 14, both below the 25m contour AOD, the topography of the escarpment and lines of hedgerow vegetation, increasingly obscuring views into the site resulting in a negligible impact on visual amenity. The proposed additional 10m landscape buffer planting on the boundaries of the site along Sandy Lane and to the east of Sandy Lane will provide additional visual screening from these areas. At year 10, as the proposed landscape develops, the proposed boundary planting will increasingly screen the proposed development from viewpoints on the escarpment resulting in a minor adverse impact on visual amenity from these viewpoints.

6.2.8 From Sandy Lane, the bridleway that runs to the east of the sites, (Viewpoint 09) there are extensive views to the east towards the North Downs, but only occasional filtered views into the site. The bridleway is sunken below the level of the adjoining fields and whilst boundary vegetation along the site boundary largely screens views, particularly in summer. The proposed additional 10m native landscape buffer planting on the eastern boundary of the sites along Sandy Lane will provide additional visual screening from this PRoW. At year 10, as the proposed landscape develops, the proposed boundary planting will increasingly screen the proposed development from viewpoints on the bridleway.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 34 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

6.2.9 From Upshot Lane (Viewpoint 01) and the junction of Upshot Lane and Pyrford Common Lane (Viewpoint 06), there will be some noticeable changes as the proposed development will be visible within its new setting due to changes in the road layout. Visual receptors on these busy roads will be motorists, who have low sensitivity to the proposed changes. For these visual receptors the change will not be incongruous in the existing context of the road network and the effect on the visual amenity of these receptors will be minor adverse.

6.2.10 From Pyrford Common to the west of the sites intervening vegetation prevents views into the site. From the residential areas to the north and west (Viewpoint 02) existing development screens views into the sites from roads and pathways.

6.2.11 From areas further to the east, in the floodplain of the River Wey, on Pyrford Golf course (Viewpoint 15) or along footpaths within the Wey Navigation (Viewpoint 18 & 19), the intervening vegetation and topography of the area prevents any views of the sites.

6.3 Residential Visual Amenity

6.3.1 From the residential areas to the west and north of the sites on Lovelace Drive and Aviary Road, there will be limited views of the proposed development from the rear elevation windows and gardens.

6.3.2 For the residents to the south of Aviary Road there will be views into this part of the site from the south facing frontages of the houses and from the back gardens. The houses are screened by an existing hedgerow but otherwise have retained an open aspect into the site into lane at Upshot Lane. The proposed additional 20m of landscape buffer and understorey planting along the northern boundary of the site in this area will screen the proposed development from view. As a consequence there will be only filtered views of the proposed development through the proposed vegetation during the winter. This will result in a medium magnitude of change in the outlook from the houses resulting in a major/moderate adverse impact. After 10 years, once the proposed trees and screen planting along the south of Newtown Road have established, the effects will be reduced to moderate adverse.

6.3.3 The houses on Lovelace Drive are screened by an existing wide tree belt. The proposed additional landscape buffer and understorey planting along the back of the houses on Lovelace Drive will screen the proposed development. This will result in a minor magnitude of change in the outlook from the houses resulting in a moderate adverse impact.

6.3.4 After 10 years, once the proposed trees and screen planting along the western boundary have established, the effects will be reduced to minor adverse.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 35 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

6.4 Viewpoint Assessment

6.4.1 A detailed assessment from each viewpoint is provided in Appendix 01 Visual Assessment Schedule. The sensitivity of potential receptors at each of the identified viewpoints is considered, followed by a description of the changes to visual amenity and an assessment of effects. Table 3 below summarises the conclusions on visual effects.

Table 3: Significance of Visual Effects Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Year of Significance of Effects Location of Change operation Viewpoint 03: Low 0 Minor Tegg’s Lane Medium

10 Negligible Viewpoint 04: 0 Moderate Adverse Upshot Lane south Low Medium Minor of Engliff Lane, 10 looking south Moderate Adverse in Viewpoint 06 Winter/Minor Adverse in Pyrford Court 0 Low/ Summer Entrance on Medium Medium Pyrford Common Minor Adverse in Winter. Road 10 Negligible in Summer Moderate Adverse in Viewpoint 07 0 Winter/Minor Adverse in Pyrford Common Summer Low Medium Road, Southern end of Sandy Lane Minor Adverse in Winter. 10 Negligible in Summer Year 0: Major/Moderate Viewpoint 08 0 Adverse in Winter. Moderate PRoW south of High Medium Adverse in Summer Sandy Lane Year 10: Moderate Adverse in 10 Winter. Minor in Summer Year 0: Major/Moderate Viewpoint 09 0 Adverse in Winter. Moderate PRoW between High Medium Adverse in Summer Sandy Lane and Year 10: Moderate Adverse in Elveden Close 10 Winter. Minor in Summer Viewpoint 11 Moderate Adverse in Crossroads on Winter/Minor Adverse in 0 PRoW between Summer Church Hill and High Low Warren Lane and Minor Adverse in Winter. Pyrford Village and 10 Negligible in Summer Pyrford Moderate Adverse in Winter/Minor Adverse in Viewpoint 12 0 Summer PRoW between

Sandy Lane, and High Low Minor Adverse in Winter. Elveden Close Negligible in Summer looking west (east) 10

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 36 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Year of Significance of Effects Location of Change operation Moderate Adverse in Viewpoint 14 0 Winter/Minor Adverse in PRoW near Warren High Low Summer Lane Minor Adverse in Winter. 10 Negligible in Summer Viewpoint 16 Pyrford Golf Club. Medium None 0 Minor Adverse 18th Hole.

Residential Visual

Amenity High Medium Year 0: Major/Moderate 0 Adverse in Winter. Moderate Viewpoint 05 Adverse in Summer Aviary Road Year 10: Moderate Adverse in 10 Winter. Minor in Summer High Low Moderate Adverse in Winter/Minor Adverse in 0 Viewpoint 02 Summer Lovelace Drive Minor Adverse in Winter. 10 Negligible in Summer

7 Mitigation and Enhancement Measures

7.1 Construction Phase

7.1.1 Trees that are to be retained will be protected with the appropriate tree protection measure according to BS 5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction. Please refer to the Arboricultural Assessment (Middlemarch Environmental August 2014) (Appendix 1A.C).

7.2 Operational Phase

7.2.1 The landscape proposals have been developed alongside the identification of potential landscape and visual effects. Consequently the measures identified to address these potential effects are design interventions which have been described in Section 6 above rather than mitigation measures.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 37 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

8 Summary and Conclusions

8.1.1 The sites lie within NCA 129: Thames Basin Heaths and within the Lower Wey LCA. Both are currently within the Green Belt. The sites are within SS10: Settled and Wooded Sandy Farmland.

8.1.2 At a local level Land East of Upshot Lane is within Policy CS24 Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance. Randall’s Field is subject to a TPO.

8.1.3 The sites are identified in the WBC Policy GB 12 and GB 13 as safeguarded sites for potential Green Belt removal.

8.1.4 Both fields are currently used for agricultural purposes, and are part of a transitional landscape from the built environment of the village to the valley down to the River Wey.

8.1.5 Sensitive landscape receptors are identified as the existing trees and hedges around the fields, and the PROW along Sandy Lane.

8.1.6 Several categories of visual receptors have been identified; users of the surrounding roads, PRoWs, residents to Aviary Road and Lovelace Lane.

8.1.7 Design interventions have been proposed as screen planting to the boundaries, either re- enforcing existing planting and new planting to create deep belts of native trees and hedge planting. A path will be provided along the busy Upshot Lane connecting the sites and the rest of Pyrford.

8.1.8 Analysis of the predicted effects on landscape character conclude that there would be moderate adverse on completion lessening to minor adverse after 10 years. The development will extend the built development edge of Pyrford into agricultural land, but clearly in a contained and defined area. Tree planting will enhance the PRoW on Sandy Lane, and new tree and hedge planting will replace the hedge on the eastern field which needs to be removed as recommended by the arboriculturist.

8.1.9 Analysis of the predicted visual impacts indicated they extend approximately 1.5km from the site. Of the viewpoints assessed the majority have limited or no visibility. The more sensitive viewpoints are from the PRoWs close to the site at viewpoints 7, 8, 9, 11 and 14 where there

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 38 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

are views into the sites. Most of these are partial or filtered views, and in summer will have very limited visibility due to trees and hedge screening.

8.1.10 The planting as a design intervention doesn’t completely screen the development, but will filter views and help integrate the development into the surrounding landscape pattern of trees and hedges.

8.1.11 It is concluded that the proposed development is not in conflict with the aims of Escarpment and Rising Ground of Landscape Importance policy as Randall’s Field is not within the policy area. The Land East of Upshot Lane is within the policy, but as we have indicated we contend there is a strong case that the policy designation should be moved south eastwards, such as then all the land within the sites would be removed from it.

8.1.12 In summary this analysis has demonstrated that there is a robust case to remove both sites from the Green Belt and that both sites can be developed with limited landscape and visual impacts.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 39 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS

AONB Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Cumulative Cumulative effects are the summation and or additional effects that result from changes effects caused by a development in conjunction with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions.

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

ES Environmental Statement

GLVIA Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Third Edition, published jointly by the Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2013.

HLC* Historic characterisation is the identification and interpretation of the historic dimension of the present-day landscape or townscape within a given area. HLC is the term used in England and Wales, HLA is the term used in Scotland.

Indirect effects* Effects that result indirectly from the proposed project as a consequence of the direct effects, often occurring away from the site, or as a result of a sequence of interrelationships or a complex pathway. They may be separated by distance or in time from the source of the effects.

Key Landscape* Those combinations of elements which are particularly important to the current character of Characteristics the landscape and help to give an area its particularly distinctive sense of place.

Landscape A distinct and recognisable pattern of elements that occurs consistently in a particular type of character* landscape and how this is perceived by people. It reflects particular combinations of geology, landform, soils, vegetation, landuse and human settlement. It creates the particular sense of place of different areas of the landscape.

Landscape Areas protected by law or through planning policies for reason of their landscape qualities designations e.g. National Parks, AONB and Local Landscape Designations.

Landscape Effects on the landscape as a resource in its own right. Change in the elements, effects characteristics, character, and qualities of the landscape as a result of development.

Landscape A component part of the landscape, such as trees, hedges, buildings and ponds. elements

Landscape Prominent eye-catching elements, e.g. tree clumps, wooded hill tops, and church features towers/spires.

Landscape Based on judgements about the physical state of the landscape, and about its intactness, quality (or from visual, functional, and ecological perspectives. It also reflects the state of repair of condition)* individual features and elements which make up the character in any one place.

Landscape Term used to describe the aesthetic or perceptual and intangible characteristics of the qualities landscape such as scenic quality, tranquillity, sense of wildness or remoteness. Cultural and artistic references may also be described here.

Landscape The combination of elements that contribute to landscape context, character, and value. resource

Landscape The relative value that is attached to different landscapes by society. A landscape may be value* valued by different stakeholders for a wide variety of reasons.

LCA Landscape Character Area – single unique areas that are the discrete geographical areas of a particular landscape type.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 40 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

LCT Landscape Character Type – distinct types of landscape that are relatively homogeneous in character. They are generic in nature may occur in different areas in different parts of the country.

LVIA Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment.

Magnitude* A term that combines judgements about the size and scale of the effect. The extent of the area over which is occurs, whether it is reversible or irreversible and whether it is short or long term in duration.

Mitigation Measures including any process, activity, or design to avoid, reduce, remedy or compensate for adverse environmental impact or effects of a development.

NCA National Character Areas. Landscape character areas as defined for the whole of England.

Photomontage* A visualisation which superimposes an image of a proposed development upon a photograph or series of photographs.

Receptor Physical or perceptual landscape resource, special interest, viewer group or individuals that may be affected by a proposal.

Residual effects Potential environmental effects, remaining after mitigation.

Residential A collective term describing the views and general amenity of a residential property, relating Visual Amenity* to the garden area and main drive, views to and from the house and the relationship of the outdoor garden space to the house.

Scale Indicators* Landscape elements and features of a known or recognisable scale such as houses, trees and vehicles that may be compared to other objects where the scale of height is less familiar, to indicate their true scale.

Sense of Place The essential character and spirit of an area: genius loci literally means ‘spirit of the place’. (genius loci)*

Sensitivity* A term applied to specific receptors, combining judgements of the susceptibility of the receptor to the specific type of change or development proposed and the value related to that receptor.

Susceptibility The ability of a defined landscape or visual receptor to accommodate the specific proposed development without undue negative consequences.

Temporary or Effects may be considered as temporary (limited duration and reversible) or permanent permanent (irreversible). Some development may also be reversible. effects

Tranquillity* A state of calm and quietude associated with peace, considered to be a significant asset of landscape.

Type or Nature Whether an effect is direct or indirect, temporary or permanent, positive (beneficial), neutral of Effect or negative (adverse) or cumulative.

Visual amenity* The overall pleasantness of the views people enjoy of their surroundings which provide an attractive visual setting or backdrop for the enjoyment of activities of the people living, working and recreating, visiting or travelling through an area.

Visual effect* Effects on specific views and on the general visual amenity experienced by people.

Visualisation* A computer stimulation, photomontage, or other technique illustrating the predicted appearance of a development.

ZTV –* Zone of Theoretical Visibility. A map, usually digitally produced, showing areas of land within which a development is theoretically visible.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 41 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

Note: Descriptions marked with an asterisk are identical to those provided in the Third Edition Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment glossary or text

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 42 Randall’s Field & Land at Upshot Lane

REFERENCES

i Landscape Institute (LI) and Institute of Environmental Management Assessment (IEMA) (2013) Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Assessment ii Natural England (2014) An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment iii Name of Local Plan adopted Date iv Name of County Landscape Assessment