Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

IG/2

Proof of Evidence of Ian Grimshaw on Landscape and Views

Daw Mill Colliery, Tamworth Road, Arley For the Appellant, Harworth Estates

PINS ref no: APP/R3705/W/16/3149827

5781.003 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5781.003 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 Introduction ...... 1 2.0 Scope of Evidence ...... 3 3.0 Description of the Appeal Proposals and Alternative Restoration Proposals ...... 5 4.0 Planning Policy ...... 9 5.0 Assessment of Anticipated Effects on Landscape ...... 16 6.0 Assessment of Anticipated Effects on Views ...... 47 7.0 Assessment of Effects on Openness of the Green Belt ...... 71 8.0 Compliance with Relevant Planning Policy ...... 73 9.0 Third Party Representations ...... 87 10.0 Conclusions ...... 89

APPENDICES (Each Bound Separately)

APPENDIX 1: Figures (IG3)

APPENDIX 2: Photographs (IG4)

APPENDIX 3: Visual Impact Assessment Tables (IG5)

Endorsement

The evidence which I have prepared and provide for this appeal in this proof of evidence is true and has been prepared and is given in accordance with the guidance of my professional institutions and I confirm that the opinions expressed are my true and professional opinions.

Ian Grimshaw

5781.003 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5781.003 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

1.0 Introduction 1.1 My name is Ian Jeffrey Grimshaw. I am a Chartered Landscape Architect and Chartered Town Planner. I have been engaged by Harworth Estates Limited to prepare evidence on the anticipated effects on landscape character and on views of the proposed development before the appeal. 1.2 I have around 25 years' experience in assessing the effects of development on the landscape and on visual amenity. I have worked on many infrastructure projects and have been involved in other projects with rail depots and based around rail freight distribution.

1.3 I have given evidence at public inquiries and hearings relating to planning appeals, development consent orders, applications for consent under the Electricity Act 1989 and also relating to compulsory purchase and rights acquisition.

5781.003 Page 1 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5781.003 Page 2 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

2.0 Scope of Evidence 2.1 My evidence addresses matters related to the landscape and visual effects of the appeal proposals.

2.2 In preparing my evidence I have undertaken a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA). This considers the anticipated effects of the appeal proposals using a method derived from the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Third Edition (GLVIA3) published by the Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment. I am aware that the Secretary of State has issued a Screening Opinion directing that the appeal proposals do not comprise EIA development. However I have prepared the LVIA in the same way as I would have done had the appeal proposals been deemed EIA development so that the significance of effects in my judgement has been reported.

2.3 I acknowledge that there is a difference in opinion between the appellant and the Council with regard to what should be considered as the 'baseline' for the assessment of anticipated effects. I have read the evidence of Mr Rolinson on behalf of the appellant and concur that the appropriate baseline for my assessment is the appeal site as it presently exists. However I acknowledge that the Council differs in this regard and considers that the baseline should be considered as with a restoration scheme for the former colliery in place. I consider the anticipated effects on landscape and on views in my LVIA of each of these two baseline scenarios.

2.4 My evidence is structured as follows.

2.5 In Section 3.0 I give a brief description of the appeal proposals with specific reference to the aspects of which I consider have potential to give rise to material effects on landscape character and on views.

2.6 In Section 4.0 I set out the relevant aspects of planning policy related to landscape and views. I refer to national and local planning policy.

2.7 In Section 5.0 I set out my assessment of anticipated effects on landscape, considering first the existing environment and then a baseline of the restoration scheme having been undertaken. 2.8 In Section 6.0 I set out my assessment of anticipated effects on views and, as for landscape, I first consider the existing environment and then a baseline presuming the restoration scheme has been implemented.

2.9 In Section 7.0 I consider the likely effects of the appeal proposals on openness of the Green Belt

2.10 In Section 8.0 I set out the extent to which I consider the appeal proposals comply with the relevant planning policy I identified at Section 4.0 of my evidence.

2.11 In Section 9.0 of my evidence I consider the third party representations made regarding effects on landscape and on views, referring where appropriate to any which have been addressed in planning policy.

5781.003 Page 3 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

2.12 I draw conclusions in Section 10.0 in light of my analysis.

5781.003 Page 4 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

3.0 Description of the Appeal Proposals and Alternative Restoration Proposals 3.1 Mr Rolinson describes the context of the appeal site and sets out what it presently comprises in relation to remnants of the former colliery. I acknowledge above that there is a difference in opinion as to what should be considered as the 'baseline environment' with the Council considering that a proposal for restoration shown in the Estell Warren Drawing 2043.1 Revision B.

3.2 In this section of my evidence I set out a description of the proposed development which includes aspects relevant to landscape and views and a description of the alternative restoration shown on the drawing. Description of Appeal Proposals 3.3 The appeal proposals have been amended to omit an option which was in the planning application, as set out in the appellant's Statement of Case. The appeal proposals comprise outline planning application (with all matters reserved for the subsequent approval other than access) for the redevelopment of the site for a maximum of 24,652 sqm (265,345 sqft) of built floor space for employment uses comprising wholly B2 (General Industry) development: ancillary open storage areas, associated car parking, servicing yards, gantry crane, infrastructure and utilities, retention and use of existing infrastructure including rail head and sidings, site vehicular access, grid connection, electricity sub-station and reconfigured surface water drainage infrastructure.

3.4 In considering the effects of the appeal proposals on landscape character and on views, I have had regard to the Landscape/Biodiversity Parameter Plan (with Illustrative Masterplan) prepared by RPS and labelled Figure Number LBPP2 dated October 2015. Also I have considered options for development identified by Mr Clarke in his evidence. Each of the options identified by Mr Clarke would fall within the 'envelope' identified in the Landscape/Biodiversity Parameter Plan (with Illustrative Masterplan). I do not consider that implementing any of the options rather than another would make an appreciable difference to the conclusions I draw. I have noted that the options described by Mr Clarke with references to his drawings show that in each case there would be undeveloped land ('white land') which might be available for further planting and landscape works than that shown on the Landscape/Biodiversity Parameter Plan (with Illustrative Masterplan).

3.5 I set out below the important aspects of the proposals for landscape character and views shown on the Landscape/Biodiversity Parameter Plan (with Illustrative Masterplan). It sets out that the great majority of boundary vegetation is on land which is under the control of the appellant and will be retained. This includes substantial swathes to the north, east and west of the site comprising boundary vegetation to which I make reference in my assessments later in my evidence.

5781.003 Page 5 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

3.6 These are proposed to be supplemented by further extents of planting inside the boundaries of the site, notably to the north and east. The existing vegetation at the site access will be supplemented by additional planting with will run alongside the main access road and cloak the corners of the first development plots. The new substantial planting belts will continue along the majority of the sites' central access road.

3.7 There will be areas of meadow interspersed between the retained planting and the closest areas of new planting in the site. There will be some smaller tree groups or copses planted in some of the meadow areas. 3.8 The appellant owns a substantial area of land to the northwest of the appeal site which formerly was used for stages of treatment of mine water. Existing ponds and trees will be retained in this area. There will be substantial areas of new tree planting and a large extent of meadow with further tree copses. The existing public rights of way in this area of land will be retained. 3.9 The Landscape/Biodiversity Parameter Plan shows a possible footpath system to the north of the site which would run through the landscaped areas and connect to the existing rights of way in the extreme northwest of the site which give connections to the wider rights of way network.

3.10 The appeal proposals are described in Mr Rolinson's evidence with reference to the Landscape/Biodiversity Parameter Plan LBPP2. Area 1 will remain as existing. In Area 2, the security lodge building and the electricity substation will be retained but the two steel-framed and clad buildings will be removed. The landscape at the entrance will be supplemented by planting to reinforce screening and this planting will continue along the edge of land identified for open storage and along the 'spine road' heading southwest and then northwest into Area 3. Landscape works in Area 2 will incorporate the memorial garden, retaining it and improving its setting.

3.11 In Area 3, landscape works will continue along the access road, with breaks to allow access to open storage and buildings. Three buildings or blocks of buildings are shown on the Parameter Plan and comprise four blocks in Area 3. The maximum height of the buildings will be 15m and they will comprise steel frames with cladding in a finish to be approved by the planning authority. In my assessment I have assumed that this will be a recessive colour such as a light or goosewing grey. 3.12 The spine road will terminate in Area 3 where replacement and additional railway sidings will be installed. Narrow belts of trees will be planted to the south of the railway line as space allows.

3.13 A modern lighting scheme will be installed so that lighting is directed where needed and light spillage is avoided where possible. This will replace the former tall lighting masts which are present on the site although no longer in use. Mr Clarke explains in his evidence that lighting generally will operate on the basis that it will function 'as-needed', through devices such as motion detectors, rather than being 'on all night' by default.

5781.003 Page 6 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

3.14 There will be further additional planting and the introduction of management to the woodlands in Area 4, mainly outside the application site but within the appellant's ownership. This will look to open some of the area to more glades and meadows with more diverse landscape which also will bring biodiversity benefit as explained by Mr Hesketh. Increasing the amount of daylight experienced around the existing water bodies by carefully thinning the copses will benefit them and make them a more apparent part of the local landscape. 3.15 These works will ensure that existing rights of way are protected and their surrounds in this locale will be enhanced by opening views. The overall site landscape proposals include a possible footpath system running from the site access to join the existing rights of way in Area 4 outside the appeal site. Description of Restored Landscape 3.16 Consideration has been given to the landscape and visual effects which would arise as a result of the proposed development, if compared with the restored landscape which the Council considers should comprise the baseline. This scenario is considered with reference to the restoration plan, which was prepared by Estell Warren (Drawing reference 2043.01 Revision B).

3.17 The restoration scheme comprises the de-culverted River Bourne and its tributary (Ballard Brook), which would meander through the site and would be widened at points to form ponds. The opened watercourses would flow through a new landform, graded to re-form a valley bottom, but with localised variations in topography (mounds and hollows) which together with the proposed exposed rock faces are likely to indicate the restored nature of the site, when compared with the simpler valley landform elsewhere. 3.18 The part of the former colliery site which extends up to the tree belt adjacent to the B4098 Tamworth Road would be restored to agricultural grassland. This would be in contrast to the adjoining geometric arable fields to the north of the site and south of the B4114 Nuneaton Road. The remainder of the site would be planted with woodland belts or seeded with meadow or amenity grassland. The restoration proposals also include occasional alder or willow tree planting along the watercourses and beyond woodland planting areas. This pattern of vegetation cover would be consistent with the existing narrow tract of grassland and tree belts associated with the River Bourne downstream of the former colliery site, although the proposals within the site would occupy a more extensive tract of land and would extend onto higher made-ground. 3.19 The restoration proposals make provision for public access, with possible small car parks indicated off Daw Mill Lane (adjacent to the southeast edge of the former colliery site), and connected to the existing site access off the B4098 Tamworth Road. There is a potential picnic area shown on the restoration plan close to the possible car parks, and viewpoints are indicated. Further to this an additional possible footpath network is shown that would supplement the existing public rights of way PRoWs within and adjacent to the former colliery site. These are not shown as definite or as public rights of way.

5781.003 Page 7 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

3.20 For the purposes of considering the landscape and visual effects of the proposed development against the baseline of a restored landscape, I have assumed that restoration planting has been in place for approximately 10 years.

Off-Site Highway Works

3.21 There are four locations where off-site highways works would take place. These are described by Mr Cummins. They comprise works at the following locations:

 Coleshill Crossroads (ADC Infrastructure Drawing ADC1085/007C)  Fillongley Crossroads (ADC Infrastructure Drawing ADC1085/004C)  Furnace End Crossroads (ADC Infrastructure Drawing ADC1085/003D)  Tamworth Road and Nuneaton Road Junction (ADC Infrastructure Drawing ADC1085/005A)

3.22 I summarise these works and the potential they may have for effects on landscape, townscape and views when I consider the potential effects on landscape character in Section 5.0 of my evidence.

5781.003 Page 8 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

4.0 Planning Policy 4.1 I set out in this section the aspects of national and local planning policy I consider relevant to landscape and views. I do not consider the relative weight to be attached to planning policy; I leave that to Mr Rolinson in his evidence. Local Planning Policy 4.2 The local planning documents forming the development plan for the consideration of the appeal proposal comprise the North Warwickshire Local Plan Core Strategy 2014 and the Saved Policies from the North Warwickshire Local Plan 2006 (including The Proposals Map) together with Supplementary Planning Documents. I address each of these in turn below.

North Warwickshire Local Plan Core Strategy NW3 Green Belt

4.3 This policy notes that Green Belt covers over two thirds of the Borough. The primary aim is to maintain the open nature of the area and there is a general presumption against development that is inappropriate, except in very special circumstances. NW10 Development Considerations 4.4 There are fourteen considerations set out in this policy. The most relevant to the scope of my evidence are: 1. Development should be targeted at using brownfield land in appropriate locations; 11. Manage the impacts of climate change through the design and location of development, including sustainable drainage, water efficiency measures, use of trees and natural vegetation and ensuring no net loss of flood storage capacity; and NW12 Quality of Development 4.5 This policy states that all development proposals must:

 Demonstrate a high quality of sustainable design that positively improved the individual settlement's character; appearance and environmental quality of the area; and  Create linkages between green spaces and wildlife corridors. 4.6 The policy also states that development should protect the existing rights of way network and where possible contribute to its expansion and management.

5781.003 Page 9 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

NW13 Natural Environment 4.7 This policy aims to protect and enhance the quality, character, diversity and local distinctiveness of the natural environment. It states that within identified landscape character areas development will conserve, enhance and where appropriate, restore landscape character as well as promote a resilient, functional landscape able to adapt to climate change. Specific landscape, geo-diversity, wildlife and historic features which contribute to local character will be protected and enhanced. NW16 Green Infrastructure 4.8 This policy sets out that Green Infrastructure (GI) is a strategically planned and delivered network of high quality green spaces and other environmental features. This policy aims to steer development proposals to maintain and enhance the GI network. It further states where new GI cannot be provided on site, contributions will be sought towards wider GI projects and improvements within the district. North Warwickshire Local Plan 2006 ENV4: Trees and hedgerows

4.9 This policy explains that the Council will not permit development if it would result in the loss of trees, woodland or hedgerow that in terms of their historical, ecological, townscape or landscape significance make a positive contribution to the quality of the local environment. ENV12: Urban design

4.10 This policy sets out a number of criteria to achieve appropriate urban design. Development will be permitted only if these are met. Those most relevant to my evidence are: (i) All the elements of the proposals are well related to each other and harmonise with both the immediate setting and wider surroundings to present a visually attractive environment.

(v) Any external illumination includes measures to minimise sky glow, glare and light trespass. ENV14: Access Design 4.11 The Council states that development will only be permitted where vehicular access to the site is safe and the local road network is able to accommodate traffic to and from the development without problems of congestion, danger or intimidation caused by the size or number of vehicles, and, relevant to the scope of my evidence, without adversely affecting the character of the surrounding environment.

5781.003 Page 10 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Arley Neighbourhood Plan 4.12 Mr Rolinson explains that the Arley Neighbourhood Plan became part of the statutory Development Plan on the 7th December 2016. A small part of the Parish includes the southeastern part of the former Daw Mill Colliery. Arley Neighbourhood Plan does not include proposals for the Daw Mill Colliery site and mentions it only in relation to history of the parish and to explain that its future is under consideration by the local planning authority.

4.13 I have identified three policies in the Arley Neighbourhood Plan that have relevance to the appeal proposals and their effects on landscape and on views.

ANP1: Maintain the Rural Character of the Parish

4.14 The discussion of the policy sets out in its heading that this policy represents the over-riding goal to 'retain the peaceful and quiet countryside of the Parish of Arley together with its diversity of agricultural businesses and woodland'. ANP3: Maintain the balance between the natural and built environment that has evolved to give us Arley as it is today 4.15 The discussion of the policy explains that limiting development to the settlement boundary is the best way of maintaining a human scale. It refers to strong support for Green Belt policy and new housing generally being limited to brownfield land. It notes that there are exceptions to development being avoided in the Green Belt. The focus of the policy is on the effect on Arley village. ANP5: Ensure the built developments in Arley meet the highest current standards

4.16 The heading below this policy states 'New building in the parish should be built to high standards and in an appropriate style'. The discussion focuses primarily on housing design and standards. Relevant Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) A Guide for the Design of Lighting Schemes (2003)

4.17 The introduction to the SPD explains that lighting can often be seen as intrusive and indicative of increasing 'urbanisation'. The SPD aims to provide guidance so that lighting schemes better respect their surroundings in North Warwickshire.

4.18 The SPD provides general advice which should be followed in all proposals where lighting is likely to be needed. At Paragraph 2.4 of the SPD, this general guidance explains that 'in order to protect the dark skies of the countryside lighting schemes in open countryside will be unlikely to be supported unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed scheme is the minimum needed for security and/or working purposes, and that obtrusive light is minimised to an acceptable level.'

5781.003 Page 11 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

4.19 Paragraph 2.5 of the SPD explains that 'to protect the amenity of residential areas in our towns and villages, lighting proposals that are within or adjoining residential areas, will be unlikely to be supported unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed scheme is the minimum needed for security and/or working purposes, and that obtrusive light is minimised to an acceptable level.'

4.20 Paragraph 2.7 of the SPD states that 'where the location of lighting schemes would be likely to impact on Conservation Areas or Listed Buildings, they will be expected to respect and enhance these assets.'

4.21 The SPD refers to the Institution of Lighting Engineers' guidance on acceptable levels of illumination, which the Council will require applications to adhere to. The SPD provides some guidance on the design of lighting schemes, which highlights the need to minimise the use and levels of lighting, as well as ensure that lighting is directed on the site, and is designed to minimise glare and spread.

4.22 Section 3 of the SPD gives some more specific advice for different lighting scenarios, including security lighting, commercial developments and car parks.

4.23 Section 4 of the SPD provides some guidance on the requirements for planning applications where lighting is concerned and if consent is granted the likely nature of planning conditions regarding lighting. The guidance explains that planning applications involving artificial lighting should include the following information:

 'A statement of why the lighting is required; the proposed frequency of use, and the hours of illumination.  A site plan showing the area to be lit relative to the surrounding area, indicating parking or access arrangements where appropriate, and highlighting any significant existing or proposed landscape or boundary features.  A technical report, prepared by a qualified lighting engineer, setting out the types of lights, intended angles of the light units and any proposed shields, their performance together with the height and spacing of lighting columns, the light levels to be achieved over the intended area, and the site boundaries.  An assessment of the likely impact of the lighting scheme on the surrounding area, by that qualified engineer.' North Warwickshire Green Space Strategy 2008-2018

4.24 The strategy defines green space as a 'range of green areas, which are used by the public, and includes parks, landscaped spaces in and around housing estates, sports pitches, children’s play areas, wildlife and countryside areas, allotments, cemeteries and churchyards.' The strategy highlights the positive social, economic and environmental benefits of green space, which has the potential to improve overall quality of life. 4.25 The SPD also explains that at a local level, the promotion of quality green space for all will help the Council deliver its corporate policies, which include:  'Protecting and improving our environment;  Defending and improving our countryside and rural heritage; and 5781.003 Page 12 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

 Tacking health inequalities through improving well-being and providing leisure opportunities to all our citizens.'

4.26 The strategy includes an Open Spaces, Sports and Recreation Study, which was primarily focused on designated green spaces and identified some key overarching priorities. 4.27 In addition, some area priorities were identified through the study. These mainly relate to improved services and facilities at specific designated green spaces. However the area priorities for the Arley and Whitacre ward area (which includes Old Arley, New Arley, Over Whitacre, Furnace End and Devitt's Green along with the majority of the appeal site), include 'improved access to the countryside through the promotion of footpaths and routeways through the area.'

4.28 The SPD concludes with consideration of how the strategy can be delivered, with policy objectives for resources and monitoring. National Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Section 7: Requiring Good Design

4.29 The Government emphasises the importance of the design of the built environment. The NPPF outlines that good design is an important aspect of sustainable development and should contribute to making places better for people. It sets requirements that developments should achieve including the need to:  Function well and add to the overall quality of the area;  Establish a strong sense of place;  Optimise the potential of the application site to accommodate development;  Respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, whilst not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation;  Create safe and accessible environments; and  Be visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping.

4.30 The document includes guidance on design and landscape character in and around settlements.

4.31 In relation to design the guidance states that development should be properly integrated into the landscape and existing landscape features.

4.32 In relation to landscape character it states that design should address landscape elements such as key approaches into a settlement, inward and outward views, woodland, trees, river corridors and open spaces.

5781.003 Page 13 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Section 9: Protecting Green Belt Land 4.33 The application site is in the Green Belt. The NPPF makes clear that the Government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.

4.34 Local planning authorities should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in Green Belt although exceptions include:

 the extension or alteration of a building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building;  the replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces; and  limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development. 4.35 Section 9 of the NPPF sets out the functions of Green Belt. These are addressed in the appellant's Statement of Case and in the evidence of Mr Rolinson. In my evidence, I consider only the aspect of openness of Green Belt insofar as that relates to landscape and visual amenity. Section 11: Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment

4.36 Paragraph 109 in Section 11 specifies that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by, amongst other objectives, protecting and enhancing valued landscapes.

4.37 Paragraph 115 stresses that 'great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty.'

4.38 Paragraph 125 of Section 11 states that through good design the impact of light pollution from artificial light on local amenity should be limited.

Planning Practice Guidance 4.39 Online Planning Practice Guidance generally reinforces the policy set out in the NPPF with regard to Green Belts and landscape. It confirms that a core principle of the NPPF is that planning should recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. It affirms that local plans should include strategic policies for the conservation and enhancement of the natural environment, including designated landscape and also the wider countryside.

5781.003 Page 14 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

4.40 It explains that, where appropriate, landscape character assessments should be prepared to complement Natural England’s National Character Area profiles to help understand the character and local distinctiveness of the landscape and identify the features that give it a sense of place (Paragraph: 001 Reference ID: 8-001- 20140306).

5781.003 Page 15 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.0 Assessment of Anticipated Effects on Landscape 5.1 This part of my evidence sets out the assessment of anticipated effects on landscape character and on views if the appeal proposals were implemented. Landscape Assessment Method 5.2 The following method has been used to provide an assessment of effects on landscape character and on views, as a result of the proposed development during the construction, and operation stages.

The method for the landscape and visual assessment is based on the guidance contained in the ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment - Third Edition’, Landscape Institute/Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2013 (GLVIA3). Paragraph 1.20 of GLVIA3 explains that the guidance: 'concentrates on principles while also seeking to steer specific approaches where there is a general consensus on methods and techniques. It is not intended to be prescriptive, in that it does not provide a detailed ‘recipe’ that can be followed in every situation. It is always the primary responsibility of any landscape professional carrying out an assessment to ensure that the approach and methodology adopted are appropriate to the particular circumstances.' 5.3 There are five stages to the method of assessment of landscape and visual effects as detailed in GLVIA3, Chapters 5 and 6. These comprise:  scope;  establishing the landscape and visual baseline;  predicting and describing landscape and visual effects;  assessing the significance of landscape and visual effects; and  judging the overall significance of landscape and visual effects. 5.4 The five stages identified above are discussed below for the landscape assessment. I consider the visual assessment in Section 6.0 of my evidence. Scope of the Landscape Assessment

5.5 In accordance with paragraph 5.2 of GLVIA3 'Scoping should…identify the area of landscape that needs to be covered in assessing landscape effects. This should be agreed with the competent authority, but it should also be recognised that it may change as the work progresses, for example as a result of fieldwork, or changes to the proposal. The study area should include the site itself and the full extent of the wider landscape around it which the proposed development may influence in a significant manner. This will usually be based on the extent of Landscape Character Areas likely to be significantly affected either directly or indirectly. However, it may also be based on the extent of the area from which the development is potentially visible, defined as the Zone of Theoretical Visibility, or a combination of the two.'

5.6 The physical scope of this landscape assessment has been informed by consideration of the following:

5781.003 Page 16 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

 Published Landscape Character Areas and landscape designations;  the approximate extent of visibility for the proposed development; and  field assessment. 5.7 The study area within which landscape effects have been considered is shown at Appendix 1, Figure 4. The landscape study area has principally been guided by the potential visibility of the proposed development in the surrounding landscape how the development may influence the landscape.

Establishing the Landscape Baseline Desk Based Assessment

5.8 A review of relevant information, guidance and planning policy relating to the proposed development and the landscape (and views) has been undertaken including:  National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF);  North Warwickshire Borough Local Plan Policies;  Published Landscape Character Assessments;  Published walking and cycling routes;  Designated heritage assets;  Ecological designations; and  Ordnance Survey mapping and aerial photography. Site Assessment

5.9 Desk study and field survey work was undertaken by TEP in June 2016 to gather landscape baseline information to inform and assess the proposed development.

5.10 Site assessment of landscape character and of the proposed development has involved visits to the area by car and on foot. In accordance with GLVIA3 Paragraph 5.15 fieldwork has been used to check the applicability of published character assessments within the study area, identifying variations in character at a more detailed scale. The landscape within the study area has been experienced, and landscape characteristics and features recorded from publicly accessible locations with reference to the latest guidance provided in Natural England’s ‘An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment’ (October 2014). Reporting on the Baseline Situation 5.11 Following desk based and site assessments the landscape baseline has been described and supported with illustrations where necessary, including maps illustrating published landscape character areas, and topography.

5.12 National and local level published landscape character assessments have been used as the basis for establishing the baseline environment for the landscape assessment. In accordance with GLVIA3 Paragraphs 5.15 and 5.16, these existing assessments have been reviewed and have been supplemented with more detailed survey of the site itself and immediate surroundings, noting any differences or refinements when compared to the key characteristics of the published assessments.

5781.003 Page 17 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.13 The landscape baseline has been informed by published historic landscape characterisation and Conservation Area Appraisals (where available and relevant), and the presence of designated heritage assets such as Listed Buildings and Scheduled Ancient Monuments, although the landscape assessment does not consider effects on the historic landscape or heritage assets. This information is provided in Ms Kelly’s Proof of Evidence.

5.14 GLVIA3 paragraph 5.33 states that “individual elements and aesthetic and perceptual aspects of the landscape” should be identified and described, with a particular emphasis on any key characteristics that contribute to the distinctive character of the landscape. GLVIA3 paragraph 5.33 also states that “the condition of the landscape, including the condition of elements or features such as buildings, hedgerows or woodland” should be identified. Landscape Value

5.15 As part of establishing the baseline situation the value of the landscape potentially affected is evaluated. This is in accordance with paragraph 5.44 of GLVIA3. Landscape value is also referred to below as part of the method for ‘Assessing the Significance of Landscape Effects’.

5.16 Highly valued landscapes typically are identified by national level designations such as National Parks and AONB. Landscapes of local value may be identified by designations in the local planning process such as Areas of Great Landscape Value and Special Landscape Areas, although Planning Policy Statement 7 (now superseded and replaced by the NPPF) advised against local designations and advocated a ‘criteria-based’ approach to landscape protection and enhancement (now advised in the NPPF at paragraph 113). 5.17 Undesignated landscapes and features are also valued. Paragraph 5.19 of GLVIA3 identifies that following a review of existing landscape designations “the value attached to undesignated landscapes also needs to be carefully considered and individual elements of the landscape – such as trees, buildings or hedgerows – may also have value.” 5.18 GLVIA3 also states in Box 5.1 under paragraph 5.28, those factors that can help in the identification of valued landscapes include;  landscape quality (condition);  scenic quality;  rarity;  representativeness;  conservation interest;  recreation value;  perceptual aspects; and  associations. 5.19 These factors have been considered when determining landscape value. Local landscape character assessments have also been reviewed to inform judgements made on landscape value.

5781.003 Page 18 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.20 Paragraph 5.19 of GLVIA3 states that 'landscapes or their component parts may be valued at the community, local, national or international levels.' This word-scale is used to define the level of landscape value in the baseline assessment. Table 5.1 provides typical criteria for judgements on landscape value. Table 5.1

Landscape Value Typical Example

Land within a World Heritage Site where the scenic qualities of the particular landscape in question contributes to the designation. International A landscape closely associated with an artist or writer of international renown (for example, Monet’s garden at Giverny).

Land within a National Park or AONB where the scenic qualities of the particular landscape in question are consistent with the designation. A landscape closely associated with an artist or writer of National national renown (many such landscapes are also designated a National Park or AONB, for example Constable’s connections with the Dedham Vale AONB or Wordsworth’s connections with the Lake District National Park).

A landscape which has a scenic quality and rarity, or Regional recreational or tourist offer, which results in its renown at a regional or county-level.

A landscape which has scenic quality and rarity, or a recreational or tourist offer, which results in its renown at a borough or district-level. Local A landscape with a local plan designation which relates to landscape quality, or a local plan designation which relates to a conservation interest (historic or wildlife) where the landscape contributes to the designation.

Landscapes which are valued by residents and workers Community within the community, but for which there is no particular indication of a higher value.

Predicting and Describing Landscape Effects 5.21 Once the landscape baseline has been established, baseline information is combined with an understanding of the components of the development proposed that would potentially be introduced into the landscape, to identify and describe the landscape effects. This is in accordance with paragraph 5.34 of GLVIA3.

5781.003 Page 19 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.22 Paragraph 5.34 of GLVIA3 refers to two steps when predicting landscape effects. These are summarised below:

5.23 The first step is to identify the components of the landscape that are likely to be affected by the scheme; and

5.24 The second step is to identify interactions between these landscape receptors and the different components of the development at all its different stages.

5.25 Landscape effects in this assessment have been predicted based on the above approach. The description of landscape effects has been presented as appropriate for this assessment. The type of landscape effects predicted as a result of the proposed development include, where relevant, effects that are direct, indirect, short, medium and long-term, permanent and temporary, positive (or beneficial) and negative (or adverse). These are discussed further below. Assessing the Significance of Landscape Effects

5.26 The following method for the assessment of the likely significant effects of the proposed development on the landscape is in accordance with the guidelines at paragraph 5.38 to 5.52 of GLVIA3. Assessing the significance of identified landscape effects requires an assessment of the sensitivity of the landscape affected (its susceptibility to change and value), and an assessment of the magnitude of the effect (size or scale, geographical extent, nature of the effect (adverse or beneficial), and its duration and reversibility on the landscape). Landscape Sensitivity

5.27 In accordance with paragraph 5.39 of GLVIA3, landscape sensitivity sequentially combines judgements of the landscape’s susceptibility to change to the type of development proposed (i.e. the degree to which the landscape can accommodate the proposed change without suffering detrimental effects on its character), and the value attached to the landscape.

Susceptibility to Change

5.28 The susceptibility of a landscape to change is dependent on the characteristics of the receiving landscape and the type and nature of the development proposed. Landscape character types or areas have varying sensitivity to the types of development they are able to accommodate. In accordance with paragraph 5.42 of GLVIA3, the assessment of susceptibility is tailored to the development proposed, and is considered as part of the assessment of effects, and is not recorded as part of the landscape baseline. 5.29 The judgement on the susceptibility of a landscape to the change proposed is recorded as high, medium or low. The susceptibility of the landscape to the proposed development has been assigned to the landscape in the project study area, where one or more of the typical criteria in Table 5.2 below applies.

Table 5.2

Susceptibility to Change Typical Criteria

5781.003 Page 20 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Susceptibility to Change Typical Criteria

There are no existing large-scale buildings in the landscape; or there is limited or no screening by trees, woodland, hedgerow, landform, and or built form; High or the landscape cannot accommodate the operation (and construction) of the proposed development without suffering substantial detrimental effects on its character.

There are some large-scale buildings in the landscape; or there is some screening provided by trees, woodland, hedgerow, landform, and or built form; Medium or the landscape generally is able to accommodate the operation (and construction) of the proposed development without suffering substantial detrimental effects on its character.

There is already large-scale built development present in the landscape; or there is screening by trees, woodland, hedgerow, landform, and or built form; or Low the landscape is able to accommodate the operation (and construction) of the proposed development without suffering detrimental effects on its character.

Value of the Landscape 5.30 As I explain above, the value of the landscape potentially affected by a development proposal is evaluated when establishing the landscape baseline. Landscape Sensitivity

5.31 Landscape sensitivity considers the landscape’s susceptibility to change to the development proposed, and the value attached to the landscape potentially affected. The assessment of landscape sensitivity has been assigned to the landscape within the study area, with consideration to the typical criteria identified in Table 5.3 below.

Table 5.3

Landscape Sensitivity Typical Criteria

5781.003 Page 21 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Landscape Sensitivity Typical Criteria

The landscape has a high susceptibility to change and has regional, national or international value; or High The landscape has a medium susceptibility to change and has national or international value.

The landscape has a high susceptibility to change and has community or local value; or The landscape has a medium susceptibility to change Medium and has local or regional value; or The landscape has a low susceptibility to change and has national or international value.

The landscape has a medium susceptibility to change and has community value; or Low The landscape has a low susceptibility to change and has community, local or regional value.

5.32 I have considered paragraph 5.46 of GLVIA3, where it states that there can be complex relationships between the value of a landscape and the landscape’s susceptibility to change, which are noted as being especially important when considering change within or close to designated landscapes. GLVIA3 provides the following examples:  'an internationally, nationally or locally valued landscape does not automatically, or by definition, have high susceptibility to all types of change;  'it is possible for an internationally, nationally or locally important landscape to have relatively low susceptibility to change resulting from the particular type of development in question, by virtue of both the characteristics of the landscape and the nature of the proposal;  'the particular type of change or development proposed may not compromise the specific basis for the value attached to the landscape.'

5.33 In accordance with paragraph 5.42 of GLVIA3, I consider landscape sensitivity as part of the assessment of effects, where the judgements on susceptibility to change are identified. 5.34 Magnitude of Effect

5.35 In accordance with paragraphs 5.48 to 5.52 of GLVIA3, I consider the magnitude of effect on the landscape with regard to the size or scale of change in the landscape likely to be experienced as a result of a development; the geographical extent of the area influenced; and the duration and reversibility of the effect.

5781.003 Page 22 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.36 More weight usually is given to effects that are greater in scale and long-term in duration. In assessing the duration of the effect, I consider the effectiveness of mitigation, particularly where planting is proposed as part of the works which would change the scale of the landscape effect. The following aspects are taken into consideration in determining the magnitude of effects on landscape character. Size or Scale 5.37 Determining the size or scale of landscape effect takes account of the loss or the addition of features in the landscape and the changes anticipated in its composition as a result of the proposed development. Changes in composition have the potential to affect aesthetic or perceptual aspects of the landscape. Consideration is also given to whether the predicted landscape effect changes the key characteristics of the landscape that influences the distinctive character of the landscape. Geographical Extent

5.38 The geographical area over which the size or scale of landscape effects will extend also forms part of the magnitude of effect judgement. Within a landscape study area particular landscape effects might be experienced at the site level (i.e. within the proposed development site), at the level of the immediate setting of the site; within the landscape type or character area within which the proposed development is; and also at a larger scale where the proposed development would influence several landscape types or character areas. Duration and Reversibility of Landscape Effects

5.39 These are separate but linked considerations. I have judged duration on a scale of:

 short-term: 0 to 5 years including the construction period and on completion;  medium-term: 5 to 15 years including growth of planting proposed after it has been implemented; and  long-term: 15 years onwards for the life of the proposed development. 5.40 Reversibility is a judgement about the prospects and the practicality of the landscape effects being reversed. For example, while some forms of development such as housing can be considered permanent, others such as electrical infrastructure can be considered as reversible since they have a limited life and could eventually be removed and the land reinstated. Reversibility is particularly relevant to construction effects as works will cease and land and most landscape features will be reinstated in the short-term.

5781.003 Page 23 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Direct and Indirect Effects 5.41 In this landscape assessment, both ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ effects have been considered. At paragraph 3.22 of GLVIA3, direct effects are defined as those arising ‘directly from the development itself’ whereas an indirect effect is described as the ‘consequential change resulting from the development.’ In relation to indirect effects, the example is provided of the proposed development altering drainage, which could result in landscape effects as a result of changes to vegetation downstream. Other examples given relate to the requirements for associated development, such as the upgrade of utilities. Magnitude of Effect

5.42 The magnitude of effect considers the scale of change (i.e. whether it is high, moderate, low or negligible); its nature (adverse, beneficial or neutral); and its duration (short, medium or long-term) and its reversibility. 5.43 I set out in Table 5.4 below describes the magnitude criteria for the landscape assessment, which can be adverse or beneficial. Table 5.4

Magnitude of Effect Typical Criteria

Major alteration to key features or characteristics in the existing landscape and, or the introduction of elements considered totally uncharacteristic. High Typically this would be where there would be a great scale of change to the character of the landscape for the long or medium-term.

Partial alteration to key features or characteristics of the existing landscape and, or the introduction of prominent elements.

Moderate Typically this would be where there would be a notable scale of change to the character of the landscape for the medium and long- term; or where there would be a great scale of change on the landscape for the short-term.

Major alteration to key features or characteristics in the existing landscape and, or the introduction of elements considered totally uncharacteristic. Low Typically this would be where there would be a great scale of change to the character of the landscape for the long or medium-term.

5781.003 Page 24 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Magnitude of Effect Typical Criteria

A very minor alteration to key features or characteristics of the existing landscape.

Negligible Typically this would be where in the short, medium or long-term the scale of change on landscape character would be barely perceptible.

Judging the Overall Significance of Landscape Effects

5.44 GLVIA3 paragraph 5.53 states that:

'to draw final conclusions about significance the separate judgements about the sensitivity of the landscape receptors and the magnitude of the landscape effects need to be combined, to allow a final judgement about whether each different effect is significant or not.' 5.45 I am aware that the proposed development subject to this landscape assessment is not EIA development (refer to the Secretary of State’s direction in letter from The Planning Inspectorate to North Warwickshire Borough Council dated 17th June 2016). However, the separate magnitude and sensitivity judgements have been combined to reach an overall level of, or degree of effect. This accords with the guidance provided in the GLVIA3 Statement of Clarification 1/13. In this assessment, the overall level or degree of effect is referred to as the ‘significance of effect’. 5.46 The assessment of the significance of the effect of the proposed development on the landscape is not an absolute scale. GLVIA3 paragraph 3.23 states that the assessment of significance 'is an evidence-based process combined with professional judgement', and that the basis of these judgements 'is transparent and understandable, so that the underlying assumptions and reasoning can be understood by others.'

5.47 Paragraph 5.56 of GLVIA3 states that it is reasonable to say that the effects of the greatest significance are likely to be those which would result in 'major loss or irreversible negative (adverse) effects, over an extensive area, on elements and/or aesthetic and perceptual aspects that are key to the character of nationally valued landscapes.'

5.48 At the other end of the spectrum effects that could be determined as being less significant would relate to 'reversible negative (adverse) effects of short duration over a restricted area, on elements and/or aesthetic and perceptual aspects that contribute to but are not key characteristics of the character of landscapes of community value.'

5781.003 Page 25 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.49 The significance of effect on landscape character is determined through the sequential combination of judgements on the landscape sensitivity and magnitude of effect. The significance of effect on landscape character can be beneficial (enhance the landscape) or adverse (at odds with or harmful to the landscape’s key features or character) consider the typical criteria presented in Table 5 below.

5.50 The typical criteria do not represent every assessment scenario which may be encountered. There always will be an element of professional judgement needed, which must be applied on a case-by-case basis. Generally each of the typical criteria I have considered and present in Table 5.5 would not on their own result in the level of significance of effect judgement attributed to it. Rather the overall significance of effect judgement is based on a combination of factors, which influence the magnitude of effect and landscape sensitivity. Table 5.5

Significance Typical Criteria

An effect of major adverse significance is generally recorded where a high adverse magnitude of effect occurs to a high or medium sensitivity landscape receptor.

For example, when the proposed development would: Major adverse  be at complete variance with the landform, scale and pattern of the landscape;  would permanently degrade, diminish or destroy the integrity of valued characteristic features and/or their setting; or  would substantially damage a high quality part of a landscape of regional or greater value.

An effect of moderate adverse significance is generally recorded where a moderate adverse magnitude of effect is experienced by a landscape receptor of high or medium sensitivity. For example, when the proposed development would: Moderate adverse  be at considerable variance with the landform, scale and pattern of the landscape;  would degrade, diminish or destroy the integrity of some characteristic features and/or their setting; or  would cause damage to the character of a landscape of local or greater value.

5781.003 Page 26 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Significance Typical Criteria

An effect of minor adverse significance generally relates to a low adverse magnitude of effect on the landscape. For example, when the proposed development would: Minor adverse  result in short-term landscape effects;  not quite fit into the landform, scale and pattern of the landscape; or  have an adverse effect on an area of recognised landscape character (of community or greater value).

An effect of negligible significance is recorded where a negligible magnitude of effect occurs. For example, when the proposed development would: Negligible  be in keeping with the scale, landform and pattern of the existing landscape; or  maintain the existing landscape quality.

An effect of minor beneficial significance generally relates to a low beneficial magnitude of effect on the landscape. For example, when the proposed development would:  fit with the scale, landform and pattern of the Minor beneficial landscape; or  have a beneficial effect on an area of recognised landscape character (of community value or above), for example through the restoration of a characteristic feature partially lost through other land uses.

An effect of moderate beneficial significance is generally recorded where a moderate beneficial magnitude of effect is experienced by a landscape receptor of high or medium sensitivity. For example, when the proposed development would: Moderate beneficial  fit well with the existing scale, landform and pattern of the landscape; or  improve the quality of a landscape of local or greater value, for example through the removal of damage caused to landscape features and or their setting by previous or existing land uses.

5781.003 Page 27 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Significance Typical Criteria

An effect of major beneficial significance generally is recorded where a high beneficial magnitude of effect occurs to a high or medium sensitivity landscape receptor. For example, when the proposed development would:  completely fit with the existing scale, landform and Major beneficial pattern of the landscape;  enhance and redefine the landscape character in a beneficial manner; or  substantially repair or restore a high quality part of a valued landscape (typically regional or greater value), which was badly damaged or degraded through previous or existing land uses.

5.51 As I explain in Section 2.0 of my evidence, I concur with Mr Rolinson that the appropriate baseline from which to consider the changes which would occur is the existing environment and I present that assessment below. However I consider too the changes which would occur if a restoration scheme had been implemented on the former colliery site as the Council maintains should be the case.

5.52 I refer throughout to Figures presented in my Appendix 1 and to Photographs presented in my Appendix 2. Assessment of Effects on Landscape against Existing Baseline Summary of Published Landscape Assessments 5.53 The following narrative summarises the findings of the desk-top review of published landscape character assessments relating to the appeal site and the surrounding area. The following documents have been reviewed:

 Natural England National Character Area 97, Arden, December 2014 (CD19);  Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines: Arden, November 1993 (CD20); and  North Warwickshire Landscape Character Assessment, August 2010 (CD21).

5.54 Figure 2 presents the published landscape character areas. National Character Area 97: Arden (December 2014) (CD19) 5.55 The site is within the north eastern part of National Character Area (NCA) 97: Arden. Land use throughout the area is mainly residential, agricultural and industrial, including coal mining, which is still active in the north-east of the NCA. This NCA is described as containing many local biodiversity assets and has strong cultural links with William Shakespeare and his 'Forest of Arden'.

5781.003 Page 28 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.56 The Arden NCA is described as an area of farmland and former wood-pasture to the south and east of Birmingham. To the north, this NCA falls to the open landscape of the Mease/Sence Lowlands, (NCA 72). The eastern part of this NCA abuts and surrounds Coventry, with the Leicestershire Vales (NCA 94) and Dunsmore and Feldon NCA (NCA 96), beyond.

5.57 NCA 97 includes a major part of the city of Birmingham and is bordered by Cannock Chase and Cank Wood (NCA 67) to the north. The Arden NCA comprises higher ground to the west, including the Clent and Lickey Hills, with the Mid Severn Sandstone Plateau (NCA 66) to the west. Together these NCAs make up the 'Midlands Plateau'. The Severn & Avon Vales (NCA 106) also forms part of the western boundary.

5.58 In the central part of the Arden NCA, the River Arrow runs south and joins the River Avon near Bidford on Avon, in the Severn and Avon Vales. Moving south, the River Avon flows into Dunsmore and Feldon then on into the Severn and Avon Vales (NCA 106), in the south-west.

5.59 There are open views from the summit of Walton Hill (the highest point in Arden) looking south-west towards the Shropshire Hills, Malvern Hills, and Teme Valley, and south towards the Cotswolds. There are also views from the Heart of England Way near Meriden, across this NCA and comprising the southern fringes of Birmingham.

5.60 The key characteristics of NCA 97: Arden are:  Well-wooded farmland landscape with rolling landform.  Geologically diverse with rocks ranging from the Precambrian to the Jurassic and overlain by superficial Quaternary deposits.  Mature oaks, mostly found within hedgerows, together with ancient woodlands, and plantation woodlands that often date from the time of enclosure. Woodlands include historic coppice bound by woodbanks.  Narrow, meandering clay river valleys with long river meadows; the River Blythe SSSI lying between the cities of Coventry and Birmingham is a good example of this.  Numerous areas of former wood-pasture with large, old, oak trees often associated with isolated remnants of more extensive heathlands. Village greens/commons have a strong association with remnant lowland heath.  Fragmented heathland persists on poorer soils in central and northern areas.  Diverse field patterns, ranging from well hedged, irregular fields and small woodlands that contrast with larger semi regular fields on former deer park estates, such as, Packington Hall and Stoneleigh Park.  Complex and contrasting settlement pattern with some densely populated where traditional settlements have amalgamated to form the major West Midlands conurbation while some settlements remain distinct and relatively well dispersed.  North-eastern industrial area based around former Warwickshire coalfield, with distinctive colliery settlements. North-western area dominated by urban development and associated urban edge landscapes 5781.003 Page 29 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

such as managed greenspace, for example allotments, gardens, parks, golf courses (rough areas) and public open spaces; playing fields, churchyards, cemeteries and institutional grounds (schools, hospitals).  Transport infrastructure, the M42, M40, M6 and M5 are major transport corridors that sit within the landscape of this NCA.  Shakespeare's 'Forest of Arden', featured in‘As You Like It, is still reflected through the woodland cover, mature oaks, small ancient woodlands and former wood pasture.

Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines: Arden (November 1993) (CD20)

5.61 The site is within the Arden Pastures Landscape Character Area (LCA), as identified by the Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines for Arden. The former Daw Mill Colliery site is identified as industrial land within the Arden Pastures LCA, and is on the edge of land to the south which is identified for enhancement. 5.62 The Arden Pastures LCA is a small scale, enclosed landscape, often pervaded by suburban influences and characterised by small fields, typically bordered by mature hedgerow trees. This LCA comprises:

 A gently rolling topography.  A well-defined pattern of small fields and paddocks.  Abundant mature hedgerow oaks creating a sense of enclosure.  Permanent pasture often grazed by horses.  A network of minor lanes often with ribbon development.  Many place names ending in Heath or Common.  Strong unified landscape with suburban development. 5.63 The landscape guidelines for the Arden Pastures LCA which are identified as high priority are:  Conservation of pastoral character.  Restoration of permanent pasture.  Management of roadside vegetation.  Habitat creation.  Conservation of historic field pattern.  Conservation of primary field boundaries.  Conservation of mature trees.  Regeneration of hedgerow tree cover. North Warwickshire Landscape Character Assessment (August 2010) (CD21)

5.64 The site is within the central part of Landscape Character Area (LCA) 7: Church End to Corley – Arden Hills and Valleys, as defined by the North Warwickshire Landscape Character Assessment. The key characteristics of the Church End to Corley LCA are identified below;

 A broad elevated basin with numerous rolling hills and valleys.  Mixed agricultural landscape with an ancient pattern of small fields, winding lanes and dispersed, isolated hamlets and farmsteads, particularly notable to the west of Fillongley Hall. 5781.003 Page 30 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

 Heavily wooded character due to presence of large woodland blocks on hilltops and associated with these numerous areas of former wood pasture with large, old oak trees and field ponds, often associated with heathland remnants.  Wooded escarpments at the northern, eastern and southern boundaries;  In places a more open network of large arable fields.  To the east and south, towards Coventry, the area is permeated by a number of larger settlements with modern expansion with increasingly busy roads.  The M6 motorway and rows of pylons cut through the south and are highly visible locally from elevated slopes.  Long views from western slopes across the Blythe Valley to Birmingham. 5.65 Low, rounded hills, steep scarps and small incised valleys, combined with extensive hilltop woodlands and tree cover, are described as creating an intricate and small scale landscape. Numerous scattered farms, and hamlets are noted. 5.66 The majority of the character area is described as being 'deeply rural', and the tranquil Ancient Arden landscape is described as being apparent in the complex pattern of woodland, former wood pasture and heath, winding, frequently sunken hedged lanes and scattered farms and hamlets, most notable in close proximity to the hilltop woodland blocks and to the west of Fillongley. 5.67 Throughout much of the area, the landscape is noted as having a well wooded character, due to a mix of woodlands, spreading hedgerow and field oaks, small parks and strongly wooded streamlines. Within the area, landform, tree cover and the field pattern provide enclosure.

5.68 The North Warwickshire Landscape Character Assessment states that in the more intimate pastoral areas views tend to be restricted by thick roadside hedgerows and are often short, overlooking two or three fields to a wooded skyline. Elsewhere there are local views across small valleys, often to wooded skylines. Occasional distant views are also noted from hilltops and ridgelines across a varied, wooded topography. 5.69 The North Warwickshire Landscape Character Assessment states that the Daw Mill Colliery, nestled in a valley adjacent to a railway line, has little influence on the wider landscape (page 46).

5.70 One of the landscape and management strategies for the Church End to Corley LCA (LCA7) states that restoration plans for the active colliery site at Daw Mill should be in keeping with the area's unique character. This is not explained further and I take it to mean that restoration plans should consider the tree cover and field patterns that provide enclosure in the wider landscape and also should take account of how the colliery presently has little influence on the wider landscape as described in the document. Landscape Designations 5.71 There are no designations relating to landscape quality, across the site or the surrounding area.

5781.003 Page 31 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.72 The Daw Mill Colliery site is in the Green Belt. 5.73 There is an ancient woodland 580m to the south-west of the site (see Figure 1).

Landscape Character of the site and its immediate surroundings

5.74 The following description of the landscape character of the site and its immediate surroundings should be read in conjunction with Figures 3 and 4, which show the topography and landscape features within the study area for the landscape assessment. The description includes references to photographs presented in Figures 7.1 to 7.6. The photograph viewpoint locations are provided at Figure 6. The Site 5.75 The former Daw Mill Colliery site is in the River Bourne valley. The river flows broadly east to west for approximately 11.0km across North Warwickshire, between the western edge of Nuneaton (where it is known as the Bourne Brook) and the river's confluence with the River Tame near Coleshill, which is close to the eastern edge of Birmingham and the M6, M6 Toll and M42 motorway network. 5.76 Whilst the river broadly flows east to west, initially the watercourse flows southwest from the western edge of Nuneaton until it reaches a large bend in the river approximately 1.5km to the southeast of the appeal site. The river then flows northwest past the appeal site until it flows west past Shustoke Reservoirs (which it feeds), approximately 2.0km east of Coleshill. 5.77 The appeal site is on the lower valley slopes on the northeast side of the Bourne Valley and is some 5km east of Coleshill. The appeal site is approximately 31.12 hectares and is comprised of former operational land within the colliery landownership. The appellant's wider landholding extends up to 44.25 hectares and this additional land includes mature tree belts and other ancillary land which is described in relation to the appeal site boundaries below.

5.78 I have identified 5 areas of the former colliery based on the landscape characteristics of each area. These are shown at Figure 4. To the southeast the site is bounded by Area 1 comprising a narrow tract of fenced land within the appellant's ownership. This mainly comprises rough grassland containing water treatment facilities (see Photograph 1 in Appendix 2). This land separates the rest of the former colliery site from Daw Mill Lane (a single track minor road). This intervening land is bound by tall hedgerow or tree belts on both sides (that is on the boundary between the former active site and rough grassland, and on the boundary between rough grassland and Daw Mill Lane - see Photograph 2 in Appendix 2).

5781.003 Page 32 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.79 The site is accessed through a gap in the tree belt along the B4098 Tamworth Road at the eastern corner of the appeal site. This is a substantial two-way entrance with brick walls, piers and security fencing, signage, lighting and some ornamental planting (see Photograph 7 in Appendix 2). The security lodge building close to the entrance is 2m high to the eaves and 4m high to the ridge. It is a brick building with large windows (presently boarded) rising from the bricks at angle meaning that the area of its roof is greater than the floor enclosed by the walls. Its approximate footprint is 6m x 4m. The site entrance leads directly into the rest of Area 2 shown on Figure 4 which is the former service and administration area on higher ground off the main vehicular site entrance in the southeast part of the site. The footprints of former buildings are visible on the ground and there is a security 'portakabin' and the brick single storey and flat-roofed electricity substation building which is 4m high. It is an irregular shape enclosing some space for outdoor equipment. The largest part of the building is approximately 21m x 12m. There also is the remaining small memorial garden with a wheel from the colliery mining gear and trees with plaques dedicated to the memory of miners who died at the colliery. 5.80 Area 2 also contains two steel framed and clad buildings. The former Dry Store is to the south. It has a footprint of approximately 21m x 34m although it is not completely regular in shape. It is 5m high to the eaves and 10m to the ridge.

5.81 The Long Term Dry Store is to the northwest of Area 2 and is approximately 14m wide by 38m long with a height to eaves of 10m and a height to ridge of 13m.

5.82 The majority of the site is within Area 3 shown at Figure 4. This the former working and storage area to the northwest which is generally on lower ground. Land has been levelled to create plateaux areas of hardstanding or colliery spoil. This results in some steeper partially vegetated spoil slopes where land has been excavated along the northeastern edge of the site (see Photograph 8 in Appendix 2). Elsewhere level changes across the site are less pronounced but in general land falls from higher ground in the north and east toward lower ground to the south and west.

5.83 The appeal site is bounded to the southwest by the Birmingham to Nuneaton railway line. In the southern corner of the site, where the railway line passes over Daw Mill Lane and the River Bourne, the railway is on an embankment and set higher than the appeal site (see Photograph 22 in Appendix 2). There are sections of hedgerow and tree belts lining parts of the railway line at the southwestern site boundary. A Public Right of Way (PRoW) runs from Daw Mill Lane and along the southern boundary of the appeal site (see Photograph 8 in Appendix 2), adjacent to the railway line then passing through the woodland and rough grassland to the northwest of the appeal site (see Photograph 9 in Appendix 2) and continuing to the northwest along the valley bottom. A further PRoW extends northeast from woodland at the northwest of the appeal site and connects with the B4114 Nuneaton Road on the northern valley side.

5781.003 Page 33 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.84 The River Bourne flows underneath the appeal site entering a culvert to the immediate north of the railway line and on the southern edge of the site. Ballard Brook flows from the northeast toward the appeal site, entering a culvert under the B4098 Tamworth Road and meeting the River Bourne beneath the site. The River Bourne re-emerges to the immediate northwest of the appeal site (within land in the appellant's ownership) and continues northwest along the valley.

5.85 Area 3 contains concrete hardstanding laid out along the former spine road and other access roads and storage areas. Floodlighting on tall columns remain in this part of the site. These are located along the edge of the rail sidings, which run adjacent to the southwestern boundary of this part of the appeal site, and along what was the main spine road. There is a single large steel-clad industrial building within this part of the site and toward the northwest boundary of the appeal site. This is the Coal Storage Building which is approximately 62m long and 24m wide although it has a smaller additional part. There also is a modest-sized two storey brick building in the centre of the space comprising the weigh bridge building. This is approximately 14m by 7m with a height to eaves of 10m and ridge height of 14m. Other built elements include the remnants of concrete walls and the lower end of one of the enclosed conveyors, which emerges from the ground (see Photograph 8 in Appendix 2).

5.86 Area 4 is to the northwest with the majority outside the appeal site although within the appellant's ownership. It comprises woodland, rough grassland and water storage lagoons on land in the valley bottom.

5.87 The northern edge of the appeal site is flanked by small woodland blocks and tree belts within the appellant's ownership, with agricultural land on the valley side beyond (see Photograph 10 in Appendix 2). The appeal site is bounded to the northeast by mature woodland belts which run between the appeal site and the B4098 Tamworth Road. There is an unoccupied detached house adjacent to the B4098 Tamworth Road and within the tree belt which forms the site's northeastern boundary. These woodland blocks and tree belts comprise Area 5 on Figure 4.

5.88 The Appeal Site is mainly comprised of hard standing and colliery spoil, with some stockpiles of coal waste, demolition waste and other materials. Some sections of tree belt run between the two areas extending north and south from the edges of the appeal site. 5.89 The appeal site has been despoiled by previous mining activity. Whilst the appeal site is largely buffered from surrounding agricultural land by mature vegetation belts the large areas of hardstanding and colliery spoil, remaining buildings and lighting columns means that the site is clearly perceived as a previously developed industrial site. Surrounding Landscape

5.90 As previously described the appeal site is within a valley landscape. As well as the main Bourne Valley, the tributary valley which Ballard Brook flows through extends to the northeast of the appeal site and forms part of the valley landscape included in the study area for the landscape impact assessment (see Figure 4).

5781.003 Page 34 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.91 The agricultural land within the valley landscape surrounding the former colliery is mainly in arable use. Arable fields range in size from small to large (where fields have been enlarged) and many are irregular in shape (see Photograph 23 in Appendix 2). There are some small pastoral fields, which are associated with farmsteads or settlement edges.

5.92 There is a relatively high proportion of tree cover within the landscape surrounding the appeal site. The River Bourne and Ballard Brook are tree lined and in places there are some more substantial pockets of broadleaved woodland associated with watercourses. There are also broadleaved woodland blocks on higher ground within the Bourne Valley, such as Withy Wood to the southwest of the appeal site and Shawbury and Mordic's Wood to the south (see Photograph 23 in Appendix 2). Mature tree groups and parkland trees on higher ground near and between Over Whitacre and Over Whitacre House and the tree belts around the edge of the appeal site add to the wooded-feel (see Photograph 12 in Appendix 2). Whilst some arable field boundaries are open, in general field boundaries are defined by dense hedgerows with a fair proportion of hedgerow trees, particularly along the minor roads (see Photograph 3 in Appendix 2). These features add to sense of enclosure within the valley landscape. 5.93 Settlement within the area surrounding the appeal site is well dispersed and comprises small hamlets and small villages, such as Devitts Green (approximately 1.0km to the east of the appeal site), Over Whitacre (approximately 0.5km to the north), and Church End and Furnace End (both approximately 1.0km to the northwest), as well as small groups of or individual houses at intervals along the roadsides, which include farmsteads. The red sandstone spires of the churches at Over Whitacre and Church End are landmarks in the valley (see Photograph 12 in Appendix 2). 5.94 Larger villages are found further afield, such as Shustoke which is approximately 3.0km to the west of the appeal site and Old and New Arley which are approximately 2.0km to the east of the appeal site.

5.95 This area is served by a network of B-roads which generally run parallel to watercourse and on the valley sides, although these routes cross the valleys in places. These include the section of the B4114 between Furnace End and the bend near Over Whitacre House and the B4098, which runs southeast of this and past the appeal site. Southeast of the appeal site the B4098 crosses the valley at the point where the river bends (to flow from the northeast) and continues southeast to Fillongley (approximately 3km southeast of the appeal site). The B-roads are supplemented by minor roads, which follow a similar pattern. These include Daw Mill Lane which crosses the valley near the southern corner of the appeal site and then runs northwest and parallel to the river on the valley side opposite the site. A network of PRoWs extend between the roads running along and crossing the valleys.

5781.003 Page 35 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.96 The Nuneaton to Birmingham railway line follows the river along the valley bottom, and both passenger and freight trains are a regular feature within the valley landscape. There is also a high voltage overhead line on lattice steel pylons which runs broadly east - west along the southern valley side, passing approximately 1.0km to the south of the appeal site on higher ground (see Photograph 10 in Appendix 2). Distant views from higher ground on the northern valley slopes include high rise development in Birmingham (see Photograph 20 in Appendix 2). Night-time Landscape

5.97 I visited the site in mid-December and stayed until approximately one hour after sunset to consider the site at night. I drove surrounding roads, stopping occasionally to view towards the site and to look at the surrounding area. The only sources of light on or close to the site are railway signals. There were bright security lights on the outside of farm buildings visible on the valley sides, although these may be turned off later in the evening or may be triggered by motion-sensors. There are lights from houses on the valley sides in the evening, presumably whilst people are still awake and using lights in rooms. There are outside lights visible on some residential properties (less bright than security lights). 5.98 The B4098 is not lit by street lights although cars using that road and the wider B road network have lights showing. Looking to the east from close to the site, there is some 'glow' perceptible from the urban development of Arley and Old Arley where there is street lighting along the main roads. Looking to the west, there is a 'glow' above the trees and valley side from the lights of the conurbation of Birmingham. Landscape Character Summary

5.99 The characteristics of the site and the surrounding area can be summarised as:

 A distinct valley landscape, with rounded valley slopes enclosing views.  Agricultural land is mainly in arable use with good proportion of tree cover and dense hedgerows, which heightens the sense of enclosure within the valley.  Settlement within the landscape close to the appeal site is limited to small hamlets or villages, and small groups of or individual houses at intervals along the road network, which include a number of farmsteads. The red sandstone church spires at Over Whitacre and Church End are landmark features within the valley.  The former colliery occupies a large site within the valley. Whilst tree cover at the site boundaries provide buffering this is clearly perceived as previously developed with the majority of land under hardstanding or colliery spoil, and with some built form remaining. The tall lighting columns are a distinctive element in the valley landscape.  Whilst predominantly a rural agricultural landscape, the presence of the former colliery, active railway, high voltage overhead line and distant views from higher ground toward Birmingham comprise aspects of development in the wider landscape.

5781.003 Page 36 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Value of the Existing Landscape 5.100 As previously identified, whilst the appeal site and surroundings are in Green Belt there are no landscape designations relating to landscape quality in the vicinity of the appeal site.

5.101 There is a good proportion of intact hedgerows, tree belts and woodland in the valley landscape, although there is evidence of the alteration of historic field patterns, through the enlargement of arable fields with some loss of hedgerows. The derelict nature of the appeal site also affects the perceived condition and quality of the local landscape, which overall is considered to be fair.

5.102 In relation to scenic quality, the former colliery site is situated in a pleasant valley landscape. Mature hedgerows, hedgerow trees and woodland, and the church spires are attractive features. The tree belts around the appeal site help to lessen the influence of the derelict site on the surrounding valley landscape. 5.103 The valley landscape surrounding the appeal site does not contain any rare landscape elements or features. Its landscape character is generally representative of the County Arden Pastures LCA and District LCA 7: Church End to Corley – Arden Hills and Valleys. There is a low proportion of grazing land, which is a conservation priority for the Arden Pastures LCA. The landscape within the study area also lacks evidence of remnants of wood pasture and heathland, which are described as key characteristics in LCA 7.

5.104 In terms of conservation interests, there are no ecological designations at or near the appeal site. There are some listed buildings within the agricultural landscape, which include the Grade II listed Over Whitacre House (approximately 0.2km to the north of the appeal site), buildings at Slowley Green Farm (approximately 0.5km to the east of the appeal site), buildings at Dandy's Farm and Shawberry Farm (approximately 0.5km to the south of the appeal site), and Wagster Cottage (approximately 0.75km to the south of the appeal site). There are also listed buildings, at Over Whitacre (approximately 0.5km to the north of the appeal site) and Church End (approximately 1.0km to the northwest), which include the churches in both hamlets. The landscape around these listed buildings contributes to their setting, although the derelict appeal site does not. There are no aspects of historic environment interest that influence the landscape of the appeal site. 5.105 The valley is relatively tranquil, although there is frequent traffic using the B-road network and during site survey regular passenger and freight traffic on the railway line was noted.

5.106 In terms of cultural associations, as identified in the published landscape character assessments, there is a literary connection between the ancient Forest of Arden (of which the area around the former Daw Mill Colliery was part) and Shakespeare's 'As You Like It'. Ms Kelly explains in her evidence that there is no heritage asset in terms of an extant landscape which can be termed the Forest of Arden. There is no particular connection between the landscape within the study area and Shakespeare.

5781.003 Page 37 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.107 The recreational value of the landscape surrounding the former colliery site is limited to the PRoW network in the valleys. The Centenary Way and Heart of England Long Distance Routes are approximately 1.0km to the west and northwest of the appeal site and outside of the landscape study area (defined on Figure 4 at Appendix 1). Similarly there is a locally published 'North Arden Heritage Trail', which covers a large circular route around North Warwickshire and is approximately 1.0km to the southwest of the appeal site at its closest point, but is also outside the landscape study area.

5.108 With consideration of the factors described above, the landscape surrounding the appeal site and within the landscape study area is of community value.

Susceptibility to Change and Landscape Sensitivity of Existing Baseline 5.109 Consideration of susceptibility to change depends on the characteristics of the receiving landscape and the nature of the proposed development. The proposed re-development of the site would take place on land already occupied by a combination of hardstanding, colliery spoil and steel-clad buildings. The presence of these structures means that other built form on the site of a similar general and broad character would not comprise a large change.

5.110 The existing site levels and tree belts to the majority of the appeal site boundaries would help to accommodate the proposed development within the valley landscape. The North Warwickshire Landscape Character Assessment described that the active colliery is nestled in the valley with little influence on the wider landscape and site assessment has confirmed that is the case with good enclosure by tree belts and groups around the edges of the appeal site.

5.111 The appeal site generally is not prominent in the local landscape. Where it can be seen and its character appreciated, it is clear that it is a developed site with buildings and areas of hard standing present. The introduction of other forms of buildings and hard standing would be not be a substantial change in the character of the site.

5.112 The redevelopment of the site would result in activity taking place again on site, which would include some lighting of the site at night. The redevelopment would also result in increased traffic on roads and use of the rail sidings. Whilst, the surrounding landscape has previously accommodated high levels of activity at the colliery, the site is currently derelict and inactive.

5.113 Overall, the appeal site and valley landscape is able to accommodate the construction and operation of the proposed industrial development without suffering detrimental effects on its character, although the site is currently inactive. The appeal site and valley landscape is of low to medium susceptibility to change.

5781.003 Page 38 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.114 I have considered the value of the site, taking account of factors relevant to assessing value in paragraphs 5.47 to 5.55 of my evidence. There are no aspects which indicate that the appeal site and the immediately surrounding landscape have particular qualities or value which would elevate it to a 'valued landscape' in terms of the National Planning Policy Framework. I consider that the appeal site is of community value. Given the community value of the landscape and the low to medium susceptibility to change, the overall sensitivity of the landscape to the change which would arise from the appeal proposals is low.

Assessment of Landscape Effects During Construction - Existing Baseline 5.115 During construction there would be a partial alteration to the key features and characteristics of the site, which would influence the character of the wider valley landscape. Some existing trees and vegetation within the site (forming narrow belts dividing the administrative part of the former colliery from the operational part) would be cleared and other ground works would include the reconfiguration of surface water drainage across the site. Existing buildings would be removed and new buildings constructed. Some hardstanding areas and parts of the existing access road would be retained. Elsewhere areas of colliery spoil would be replaced by hardstanding, security fencing would be installed and the existing rail sidings extended. During the construction period a gantry crane would be installed over the railway sidings and a conveyor would be constructed, which would run between new industrial buildings and the sidings. The maximum height of these would be 20m.

5.116 During the construction period there would be relatively high levels of activity on the appeal site and increased activity on the nearby B-roads. If the construction works are carried out during the winter period then it is assumed that temporary lighting of working areas would be required at either end of the working day. Overall construction works would result in a perceivable scale of change to the character of the landscape in the short-term, with the potential introduction of prominent elements associated with aspects of at-height work. Given the short-term nature of construction effects, the magnitude of effect would be low adverse.

5.117 Given the low adverse magnitude of effect and low sensitivity of the valley landscape, the overall significance of effect on landscape character during construction would be minor adverse.

Assessment of Landscape Effects During Operation - Existing Baseline

5.118 In my assessment of landscape effects during operation, I consider areas of the developed site with lighting at night. As I describe at paragraph 3.13 of my evidence, Mr Clarke explains that the majority of lighting would operate only 'as- required'. Most of the effects of lighting I have described would be experienced for periods of time during the hours of darkness rather than during the whole of that time.

5781.003 Page 39 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.119 On completion of the proposed development the access into the site would principally be the same as existing and setting out hardstanding areas across the majority of the appeal site would be perceived as very similar to the combination of colliery spoil and hard standing at present. The extension of the existing rail sidings into the site and introduction of new security fencing (which would generally be screened by surrounding vegetation), would represent very minor alterations to the valley landscape. 5.120 The new and retained buildings within the site would occupy a greater extent of the site than the existing buildings. However the new buildings would not be totally uncharacteristic, as they would be of a similar height and steel clad type to some of the existing buildings on site, and the agricultural building in the valley to the southwest. The addition of the gantry crane, aggregate store at the rail sidings and conveyor to the rail sidings would represent new structures in the valley landscape and it is anticipated that the operation of the gantry crane would result in activity 'at- height' at this particular point on the site. The surrounding vegetation belts and site topography would help to accommodate these structures, together with the new buildings, preventing their prominence in the valley landscape.

5.121 During operation the majority of activity within the site would be at ground-level. The site topography and vegetation to site boundaries would limit the impact of moving vehicles and rail freight, the open storage of materials and manufactured product, and car parking within the operational site. In addition there would be some minor benefit on landscape character associated with the site no longer appearing derelict. 5.122 Overall the active use of the site (both during the daytime and night-time) and increased use of the B-roads and railway (during the daytime) would represent a partial alteration to the key features and characteristics of the landscape. The lighting of the site would represent a partial alteration to the valley landscape at night-time, and would increase the prominence of the proposed development at night.

5.123 Overall the magnitude of effect on the valley landscape during operation would be moderate to low adverse. Lighting in particular would result in higher, moderate adverse effects at night.

5.124 During operation, given the low sensitivity of the landscape and moderate to low adverse magnitude of effect, I judge that the overall significance of effect on the character of the valley landscape would be moderate to minor adverse.

Assessment of Effects on Landscape against Restored Baseline 5.125 The published landscape character assessments summarised in relation to the existing baseline at paragraphs 5.53 - 5.70 above apply equally to the notionally restored landscape of the former colliery. There would not be any landscape designations that would apply to the appeal site because it had been restored and it would remain as Green Belt. There would not be any change to the surrounding landscape as a result of the restoration scheme.

5781.003 Page 40 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Value of the Restored Landscape 5.126 As previously noted, there are no landscape designations relating to landscape quality in the vicinity of the appeal site. 5.127 There is a good proportion of intact hedgerows, tree belts and woodland in the valley landscape, although there is evidence of the alteration of historic field patterns, through the enlargement of arable fields with some loss of hedgerows. If the restoration scheme was implemented, the appeal site would not have a derelict nature and the perceived condition and quality of the local landscape would be good.

5.128 The former colliery site is in a pleasant valley landscape and if the site was restored, there would not be a derelict nature to part of this wider landscape. As described, the restoration proposals will not see the former colliery return to how the landscape would be anticipated had the mineral extraction not have taken place. However the appeal site would appear more consistent with the surrounding landscape, albeit that the tree belts around the appeal site would continue to mean that the appeal site would have a relatively small influence on the valley landscape. 5.129 The valley landscape surrounding the appeal site does not contain any rare landscape elements or features and restoration would not introduce any such aspects. Its landscape character would generally remain representative of the County Arden Pastures LCA and District LCA 7: Church End to Corley – Arden Hills and Valleys. There would remain a low proportion of grazing land, which is a conservation priority for the Arden Pastures LCA, although the restoration would result in some pockets of additional agricultural grassland. The landscape within the study area presently lacks evidence of remnants of wood pasture and heathland, which are described as key characteristics in LCA 7 and the alternative restoration would not substantially alter that perception.

5.130 There would be greater nature conservation interest in the restored site as Mr Hesketh sets out in his evidence, although there would remain no ecological designations at the appeal site or nearby. The listed buildings in the wider locale would remain as at present.

5.131 The valley would remain relatively tranquil, although the existing situation regarding frequent traffic using the B-road network regular passenger and freight traffic on the railway line would remain part of the baseline.

5.132 The tenuous connection with Shakespeare and the Forest of Arden, described in relation to the existing baseline landscape, would remain.

5.133 The restoration of the former colliery site envisages access being provided, in contrast to the relatively limited opportunities for recreation in the wider area at present (with no access to the appeal site). This would increase the value of the appeal site's landscape when restored.

5.134 Whilst the appeal site would have a greater landscape value when restored (compared to existing), overall the site and wider landscape within the study area would continue to be of community value.

5781.003 Page 41 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Susceptibility to Change and Landscape Sensitivity of Restored Landscape 5.135 The restored site would have had buildings removed and areas of hard standing broken out or covered so that they would no longer be apparent. Introducing buildings up to 15m high and areas of hard standing, albeit with large amounts of screening and filtering from the trees around the existing boundaries and from those which would be retained in the site, would be a notable change. 5.136 The redevelopment of the restored site would result in the introduction of activity on site, which would include periods of work requiring the lighting of the site at night. The redevelopment would also result in increased traffic on roads and use of the rail sidings. The introduction of activity on the restored site would be similar to the change that would occur if development occurred on the presently inactive site. 5.137 The restored appeal site and valley landscape would be less able to accommodate the construction and operation of the proposed development than in its present state without suffering detrimental effects on its character. It would be of medium susceptibility to change.

5.138 Given the community value of the landscape and the medium susceptibility to change, the overall sensitivity of the restored site and landscape within the study area would be low. Assessment of Landscape Effects During Construction - Restored Landscape

5.139 During construction there would be a partial alteration to the key features or characteristics of the existing landscape within the study area. Trees and other vegetation within the restored site would be cleared, land re-graded, watercourses culverted or diverted and new buildings and associated hard standing and access roads constructed. Security fencing would be installed and rail sidings would be constructed (on land where they have previously existed, along with a further area of sidings). A gantry crane would be installed over the railway sidings and a conveyor would be constructed between new industrial buildings and the sidings.

5.140 During the construction period there would be relatively high levels of activity on the appeal site and increased activity on the nearby B-roads. If the construction works are carried out during the winter period then it is assumed that temporary lighting of working areas would be required at either end of the working day. The mature tree belts in the vicinity of the site would help to limit landscape effects. Overall construction works would result in a perceivable scale of change to the character of the landscape in the short-term, with the potential introduction of prominent elements associated with aspects of at-height work. Given the short-term nature of construction effects, the magnitude of effect would be low adverse. 5.141 Given the low adverse magnitude of effect and low sensitivity of the valley landscape, the overall significance of effect on landscape character during construction would be minor adverse.

5781.003 Page 42 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Assessment of Landscape Effects During Operation - Restored Landscape 5.142 The restored landscape would appear similar to the wider landscape of the valley outside the appeal site. Whereas the proposed buildings, access roads, areas of hard standing for car parks and storage of freight, the rail sidings, gantry crane, and associated activity and night-time lighting would be uncharacteristic elements in the valley landscape. However the tree belts and topography would play a role in helping to accommodate these features in the landscape and limit their prominence.

5.143 The proposed development of the restored site would represent a partial alteration to the key features or characteristics of the existing valley landscape, with the introduction of prominent elements. Overall the magnitude of effect on the valley landscape during operation (in the daytime and night-time) would be moderate adverse.

5.144 During operation, given the low sensitivity of the landscape and moderate adverse magnitude of effect, the overall significance of effect on the character of the valley landscape if the appeal site was restored would be moderate adverse (during daytime and night-time). Assessment of Effects of Highways Works 5.145 Mr Cummins explains the off-site highways works in his evidence. I set out their context and their proposals insofar as they may affect landscape or townscape character below in turn, along with an assessment of anticipated effects. Coleshill Crossroads Proposed Works

5.146 The highway proposals at Coleshill are within Coleshill Conservation Area and relate to three roads at the centre of the town. These are: the B4117 High Street South, which forms part of the main street running north-south through Coleshill; the B4114 Blythe Road, which extends east from the B4117 at a cross-roads junction; and Church Hill, which runs east from the B4117 High Street and then turns north at Coleshill Parish Church, connecting with the B4114 Blythe Road (and avoiding the B4117 and B4114 crossroads). At present, Church Hill accommodates two-way traffic, although there are bans on vehicles over 7.5 tonnes from using High Street and so HGV traffic on Church Hill is limited. 5.147 The B4117 High Street South comprises a two-way asphalt surfaced carriageway, with concrete block pavements to each side. The buildings along this part of the High Street include a mix of styles, with some vernacular examples, as well as more modern infill. Retail land uses predominate at ground-level on this part of the High Street, with some office and residential development.

5781.003 Page 43 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.148 The section of the B4114 Blythe Road and Church Hill consists of a two-way asphalt surfaced carriageway, and in general asphalt surfaced pavements to each side of the road. Apart from the church, and occasional office building, land-use is mainly residential to both sides of Church Hill, and comprises a mixture of old vernacular buildings and more modern development. There is late 20th Century residential development to both sides of this section of the B4114 Blythe Road, with a mixture of building styles. These three roads typically are urban in character, and already contain a mixture of on-street parking arrangements, road markings, zebra crossings, road signage and street furniture.

5.149 The highway proposals at Coleshill comprise the following:

 The conversion of an existing zebra crossing on the B4117 High Street (between the junctions with the B4114 Blythe Road and Church Hill) to a pedestrian light-controlled (pelican) crossing.  Additional signage on the B4117 High Street (opposite the Church Hill junction) to direct drivers towards Shustoke, except for Heavy Goods Vehicles.  The installation of a new road sign on the B4117 High Street, approximately 100m to the south of the Church Hill junction (signposting the right turn into Church Hill, except for HGVs.  The re-alignment of the kerb line on the north side of Church Hill junction with the B4117 High Street to widen the carriageway to 7m.  The alteration of the existing parking arrangement at the southwestern end of Church Hill, where 12 echelon parking bays (including two disabled user bays) would be replaced by eight parallel parking bays.  The addition of yellow hatch box or white ‘keep clear’ road markings to the west bound lane on the B4114 Blythe Road on the section adjacent to the junction with Church Hill.

5.150 The highway proposals at Coleshill would be in keeping with the existing urban context and would not have a perceivable effect on townscape character.

Fillongley Crossroads 5.151 The crossroads at Fillongley are on the northwest edge of the village, where the B4102 Meriden and Nuneaton Roads, and B4098 Tamworth and Coventry Roads meet. There are residences and a primary school to the northeast, southeast and southwest of the crossroads. Development generally is set back beyond grass verges and there is a small greenspace to the southeast, between the school and the road junction, which comprises amenity grass with trees, a bench and memorial. The boundaries beyond the highway verges on these three sides of the crossroads comprise a mixture of timber garden fencing and hedge. To the northwest of the crossroads is hedgerow vegetation which borders a field containing large agricultural sheds.

5.152 These are all two-way roads, surfaced in asphalt and with asphalt surfaced pavements on at least one side. The existing junction includes directional and traffic signage, asphalt surfaced traffic islands with traffic bollards and beacons, street lighting, and road markings.

5781.003 Page 44 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.153 The highway proposals at the crossroads involve the installation of traffic signals and pedestrian crossings on all sides. This would require alterations to the arrangement of traffic islands, and the creation of demarcated refuges for motorists turning right when approaching the cross roads from the north or south. Double yellow line markings also would be added to the junction.

5.154 There would be a loss of grass verge to the northeast, southwest and northwest of the crossroads to allow the junction approaches to be widened to allow for two lanes approaching from the north and west. However, some grass verge would be retained and hedgerows and other boundary vegetation would be retained. The small greenspace to the southeast of the junction would be unaffected.

5.155 At Fillongley Crossroads, some of the landscape elements of grass verge, hedgerows and boundary vegetation would continue to contribute to the roadside environment. Traffic signals are found in both rural and urban environments, and the introduction of traffic signals into the context of the existing crossroads at this point in the village, and alterations to the highway design and junction geometry, would have a negligible effect on townscape character. There is a lot of signage in this area and the alterations to the highway will mean that some of these can be removed which will 'declutter' the approaches to the junction.

Furnace End Crossroads (ADC Infrastructure drawing ref. ADC1085/003D) 5.156 The village of Furnace End centres on the crossroads where the B4114 Coleshill Road and Nuneaton Road, meets the B4116 Atherstone Road and B4098 Tamworth Road. The junction is overlooked by two storey residential properties on all sides. To the northeast of the crossroads two storey houses are set back from the roads by an embankment of informal greenspace, comprising grass and trees. These are all two-way roads, surfaced in asphalt and with asphalt surfaced pavements on at least one side. There is also a small pocket green space at the southeast corner of the junction, which includes a bench set within a small area of amenity grass with a couple of trees. Other boundaries to the highway comprise low walls, garden fencing and hedgerow. The existing junction includes directional and other traffic signage, asphalt surfaced traffic islands with traffic bollards and road markings. There is also a short section of standard pedestrian guard rail outside residential terraced properties to the south of the junction which directly front onto the pavement. 5.157 The highway proposals at the crossroads involve the installation of traffic signals, with the incorporation of two pedestrian crossings (a north-south crossing and east- west crossing). This would require the removal of the traffic islands, which would allow a short section of two-lane approach to the crossroads from the south, and the creation of demarcated refuges for motorists turning right when approaching the cross roads from the north or south. Double yellow line markings also would be added to the junction.

5781.003 Page 45 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5.158 In general the extent of the carriageway and kerb alignments would be similar to existing, although the carriageway would be widened on the south side of a short section of the B4114 Nuneaton Road, to allow a two-lane approach to the crossroads when approaching from the east. This would result in the narrowing of the existing pavement on this side and a relatively small encroachment on the verge. The pocket greenspace at the southeast corner of the junction would be encroached on slightly, but would remain intact. In addition, the requirement to install traffic signals in the verge to the southwest of the crossroads would require the stepped low wall (within highway) to be removed and a single retaining wall built to coincide with the boundary to the residential property on the corner. 5.159 The highway proposals at Furnace End Crossroads would introduce traffic signals which are found in both rural and urban environments. The introduction of traffic signals into the context of the existing crossroads at this point in the village, and minor alterations to the highway design and junction geometry, would have a negligible effect on townscape character or views in the long-term. Tamworth Road and Nuneaton Road Junction

5.160 The existing junction is approximately 0.25km to the north of the appeal site. At present traffic on the B4114 Nuneaton Road has priority on the right-angled bend, where the B4098 Tamworth Road meets the B4114. The existing arrangement comprises a triangular island of grass at the centre of the junction, give way markings and signage, and chevron signs to highlight the bend. The highway proposal is to alter the priority at the junction, so that through traffic travelling along the B4114 Nuneaton Road from Furnace End continues in a southeasterly direction on the B4098 Tamworth Road (and vice versa). The section of B4114 Nuneaton Road which extends to the northeast will form the new junction. 5.161 The adjustment of road markings and signage at the junction between Tamworth Road and Nuneaton Road would not result in a perceivable effect on landscape character.

5781.003 Page 46 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

6.0 Assessment of Anticipated Effects on Views Visual Assessment Method 6.1 The following method has been used to provide an assessment of effects on views as a result of the proposed development during the construction, and operation stages.

6.2 As stated in relation to the landscape assessment, there are five stages to the method of assessment of visual effects as detailed in GLVIA3 (Chapter 6). These comprise:

 scope;  establishing the visual baseline;  predicting and describing visual effects;  assessing the significance of visual effects; and  judging the overall significance of visual effects. Scope of the Visual Assessment

6.3 In accordance with paragraph 6.2 of GLVIA3 “scoping should identify the area that needs to be covered in assessing visual effects, the range of people who may be affected by these effects and the related viewpoints in the study area that will need to be examined.” 6.4 The physical scope of this visual assessment has been informed by desk-based analysis of OS mapping and aerial photography; and field survey work to verify extent of visibility.

6.5 Land from where there may potentially be a view of the proposed development has been identified from desk-based analysis and at the outset in accordance with paragraph 6.6 of GLVIA3. During the subsequent site visit the approximate extent of visibility of the site and proposed development has been determined from publically accessible locations. This is shown at Appendix 1, Figure 5.

6.6 Figure 5 also identifies the visual receptors included in the visual assessment. These include a combination of:

 public viewpoints, including public rights of way (PRoW) and roads, where there are views experienced by motorists and any passengers, cyclists and pedestrians; and  private viewpoints, including residential properties and places where people work (such as in curtilages of farms).

Establishing the Visual Baseline Desk Based Assessment

 A review of relevant information, guidance and planning policy relating to the proposed development and the views has been undertaken including:  NPPF;  North Warwickshire Borough Local Plan Policies; 5781.003 Page 47 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

 Published Landscape Character Assessments;  Published walking and cycling routes;  Designated heritage assets;  Ecological designations; and  Ordnance Survey mapping and aerial photography. Site Assessment 6.7 Site assessment of the proposed development involved visits to the area by car and on foot in June 2016. Where the views from private properties have been considered, the assessment has been carried out from the nearest publicly accessible viewpoint. Site assessment work involved two Chartered Landscape Architects experienced in landscape and visual assessment. Reporting on the Baseline Situation

6.8 Following desk based and site assessments, the nature of existing views within the study area has been described as part of the baseline reporting. In addition, the baseline views have been described for the public and private visual receptors in the Visual Assessment Tables, which are provided at Appendix 3.

Predicting and Describing Visual Effects 6.9 In accordance with paragraphs 6.26 to 6.29 of GLVIA3 preparation of the visual baseline is followed by the systematic identification of likely effects on potential visual receptors. Site survey notes and desk based assessment are used to consider the different sources of visual effects alongside visual receptors that would be affected. This assists with the initial identification of likely significant effects for further study. In order to assist in the description and comparison of the effects on views, site survey notes generally include information on:

 the nature of the view of the proposed development with consideration of the angle of the view (direct or oblique); proportion of filtering or screening by vegetation, landform or built form; topography (looking down to, level or up to);  the proportion or extent of the view affected by the proposed development;  the distance of the receptor or viewpoint from the proposed development;  description of the baseline view and the value attached to the view; and  degree of change from the baseline view including scale and proximity, distance and extent of view affected, creation of a new visual focus in the view, introduction of new man-made objects, alteration of visual scale, and change to the degree of visual enclosure. 6.10 An informed professional judgement is then made as to whether the visual effects are beneficial or adverse (or in some cases negligible or no change) in their consequences for views and visual amenity. This is based on a judgement about whether the change will affect the quality of the view given the nature of existing views.

5781.003 Page 48 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Assessing the Significance of Visual Effects 6.11 The following method for the assessment of the likely significant visual effects of the proposed development is in accordance with the guidelines at paragraph 6.30 to 6.45 of GLVIA3, and considers receptor sensitivity (determined by susceptibility to change and value of the view), the magnitude of the effect (size or scale; geographical extent; adverse or beneficial nature of the effect and its duration and reversibility) resulting from the proposed change to the view and the overall significance of the effect. Receptor Sensitivity

6.12 Visual receptors are people who potentially would have a view of the proposed development. The sensitivity of a visual receptor depends on the susceptibility of the visual receptor to change and the value of the view. Susceptibility to Change

6.13 The susceptibility of different visual receptors to potential changes in views and visual amenity is mainly a function of:

 the occupation or activity of people experiencing the view at particular locations; and  the extent to which their attention or interest may therefore be focused on the views and the visual amenity they experience at particular locations. 6.14 The land use planning system considers that public views are of greater value than views from private property. This visual assessment considers the effects on both public views and private views.

6.15 Paragraph 6.33 of GLVIA3 advises that the visual receptors most susceptible to change generally are likely to include:

 residents at home;  people, whether residents or visitors, who are engaged in outdoor recreation, including use of PRoW, whose attention or interest is likely to be focused on the landscape and on particular views;  visitors to heritage assets, or to other attractions, where views of the surroundings are an important contributor to the experience; and  communities where views contribute to the landscape setting enjoyed by residents in the area.

6.16 Travellers on roads, rail or other transport routes tend to fall into an intermediate category of medium susceptibility to change. Where travel involves recognised scenic routes such as rural lanes and tourist routes, awareness of views is likely to be higher. Where travel involves main roads or motorways awareness of views is likely to be lower.

6.17 Paragraph 6.34 of GLVIA3 advises that visual receptors likely to be less sensitive to change include:

 people engaged in outdoor sport or recreation which does not involve or depend upon appreciation of views of the landscape; and 5781.003 Page 49 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

 people at their place of work whose attention may be focused on their work or activity, not on their surroundings, and where the setting is not important to the quality of working life (although there may on occasion be cases where views are an important contributor to the setting and to the quality of working life).

6.18 In visual assessment, lower storey views from residential properties generally are considered to be of greater susceptibility to change than upper storey views, as these are the rooms in which residents spend more time experiencing the view. There are exceptions to this as some residences have living rooms on upper storeys and this is taken into consideration if evident.

6.19 In accordance with paragraph 6.35 of GLVIA3 'each project needs to consider the nature of the groups of people who will be affected and the extent to which their attention is likely to be focused on views and visual amenity. Judgements about the susceptibility of visual receptors to change should be recorded on a scale (for example high, medium or low) but the basis for this must be clear, and linked back to evidence from the baseline study'.

6.20 When considering night-time operation, I have not considered users of public rights of way in the countryside around the site (ie where these rights of way are across fields). I have assumed that there is very little or no use of these rights of way during hours of darkness. I have considered road users (including users of pavements adjacent the vehicle carriageway) and also views from residences at night-time. 6.21 As for Landscape in the previous section, I consider the effects on views if the appeal proposals were allowed firstly against the existing landscape. I then consider the effects if a restoration scheme was in place. Assessment of Effects on Views against Existing Baseline Value of Views

6.22 My consideration of the value of views is provided in the text below. I have ascribed values to views in accordance with the criteria set out in Table 6.1 below.

Table 6.1

Value of View Typical Criteria

Public views experienced from a World Heritage Site, in recognition of the value likely to be placed on views, including International by tourists. (There are no World Heritage Site designations with a view of the appeal site.)

5781.003 Page 50 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Value of View Typical Criteria

Public views experienced from a National Park or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), in recognition of the scenic quality of views and the value likely to be placed on views, including by tourists, within a nationally designated landscape. National The views from national footpaths and cycle routes, in recognition of their wider recreational use (at a national level) and the value likely to be attached to views by visitors. (There are no National Park or AONB designations with a view of the appeal site.)

Views from walks, cycle routes or public open spaces publicised at a county or regional level, in recognition of their wider recreational use and the value likely to be attached to Regional views by visitors from the county or wider region. (I have not identified any views of the appeal site which are of Regional value.)

Views from walks, cycle routes, or public open spaces publicised at a local or borough level, in recognition of their recreational use and the value likely to be attached to views Local experienced by visitors from the local area. Public views from or within a local plan designation relating to landscape quality or a conservation interest (such as a Conservation Area or Local Nature Reserve).

Public or private views which are valued by residents and Community workers within the community, but for which there is no particular indication of a higher value.

6.23 I set out my judgement on the value of the view for each of the visual receptors I have identified in the Visual Assessment Tables at my Appendix 3.

6.24 I consider that the majority of views experienced within the visual study area surrounding the appeal site are of community value. These are views primarily valued by residents and workers within the community, where there is no indication of a higher value. 6.25 I consider that the views experienced from the Nuneaton to Birmingham railway line (Visual Receptor O) are of local value. This judgement acknowledges the wider use of this stretch of railway line and the relative importance of views as part of the passenger experience.

5781.003 Page 51 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Susceptibility to Change 6.26 The susceptibility to change in views as a result of the proposed development are set out in the Visual Assessment Tables in Appendix 3 of my evidence. For this assessment I have assigned Susceptibility to Change to visual receptors I have identified as shown in Table 6.2 below:

Table 6.2

Susceptibility Receptor to Change

Residential properties (Lower storeys and gardens) High

Residential properties (Upper storeys) Medium

Users of PRoW and other recreation routes High

Workers in their work place where setting not important to Low quality of working life

Workers on the land and in other situations where setting is Medium important

Motorists and passengers on B roads Low-Medium

Motorists, passengers, walkers and cyclists on rural lanes and Medium-High tourist routes

Rail Passengers Medium

6.27 Receptor sensitivity is presented in the Visual Assessment Tables at Appendix 3 and has been assigned to visual receptors in accordance with Table 6.2 above. 6.28 The majority of visual receptors are of medium sensitivity. Users of the B4114 Nuneaton Road (Visual Receptor D) and B4098 Tamworth Road (Visual Receptor E) are of low to medium sensitivity owing to the speed of travel and lower susceptibility to changes in views.

Assessment of Effects During Construction - Existing Baseline

6.29 I set out the assessment of visual effects on identified receptors in the Visual Assessment Tables at Appendix 3. Reference also should be made to the visual receptor plan provided at Figure 5 in my Appendix 1, the photographs in Appendix 2 and the photograph location plan provided at Figure 6 in Appendix 1. 6.30 In general the visual effects during construction are limited by the screening provided by landform and the existing vegetation belts adjacent to appeal site and associated with the river and railway line. Effects on public and private views during construction are no greater than minor adverse significance.

5781.003 Page 52 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Summary of Effects on Public Views During Construction 6.31 The greatest visual effect during construction would be experienced by PRoW users on the section of footpath which runs along the southern edge of the site (Visual Receptor Reference F). PRoW users would experience a mixture of open and filtered but near views of construction works during the daytime across the site. Overall construction activity would affect a moderate proportion of the view in the short-term from this section of PRoW and the magnitude of effect would be low adverse. The low magnitude of effect on views and medium sensitivity of PRoW users would result in a minor adverse significance of effect. 6.32 Rail passengers on the section of the Birmingham to Nuneaton railway line (Visual Receptor O) would experience a mixture of open and filtered near views of construction works during the daytime in the appeal site. However given the fleeting nature of views a small proportion of their view would be affected. Given the low adverse magnitude of effect on views and medium sensitivity of visual receptors, the significance of effect during construction would be minor adverse.

6.33 Footpath users on sections of PRoW in the valley (Visual Receptors G, H, I, and J) would experience a low adverse magnitude of effect on views during construction and in the short-term. This would result from a small proportion of the view being affected where intervening topography and or vegetation in the valley, would partially screen or filter views toward construction works during the daytime within the appeal site. The low magnitude of effect on views and medium sensitivity of PRoW users would result in a minor adverse significance of effect. 6.34 Users of the lanes on the southern valley side (Visual Receptor B) would experience a minor adverse to negligible significance during construction. In the main hedgerow vegetation lining lanes would screen or filter views toward the appeal site. However on some open sections of lane a small proportion of the view would be affected where vegetation in the valley bottom, would partially screen or filter views toward construction works during the daytime within the appeal site.

6.35 From other sections of PRoW (Visual Receptors K, L, M and N) the combination of intervening topography and or vegetation would partially filter or screen views of construction works within the appeal site to such an extent that a very small proportion of the view from these PRoWs would be affected and the overall significance of effect would be negligible.

6.36 Similarly, intervening vegetation (particularly the tree belts to the north and southeast of the site), would mean that overall the significance of effect on views during construction from nearby roads (Visual Receptors A, C, D and E) would be negligible.

5781.003 Page 53 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Summary of Effects on Private Views During Construction 6.37 Medium sensitivity residents in the vicinity of the appeal site (Visual Receptor 2: residents at Quarry Grange, Visual Receptor 3: residents at and near Dandy's Farm, Visual Receptor 5: residents at Wagster Cottage, and part of Visual Receptor 11: residents at Over Whitacre House) would experience a minor adverse significance of effect on views during construction. This would result from a low adverse magnitude of effect, where due to the distance of the viewer and or intervening vegetation a small proportion of the daytime view would be affected by construction works. Other residents in the valley (Visual Receptor 6: residents at 'The Highlands', Visual Receptor 8: residents at White House Farm and Devitts Green Farm) would experience a minor adverse significance of effect where they would have more distant but open glimpsed views of construction works within the appeal site.

6.38 Intervening vegetation screening and filtering the views experienced by residents at and near Wagstaff Farm and on higher ground to the south (Visual Receptor 4) would mean that a small to very small proportion of the view would be affected during construction. The low adverse to negligible magnitude of effect on views, would result in a minor adverse to negligible overall significance of effect on views.

6.39 From other residential properties in the valley (Visual Receptors 7, 9, 10, 12 and 13) a combination of intervening topography, vegetation and or the distance of the viewer would result in a very small proportion of residents' views being affected during construction. The magnitude of effect on daytime views during construction would be negligible and the overall significance of effect negligible.

6.40 There would be no view from Daw Mill Cottage (Visual Receptor 1) during construction as a result of the large degree of vegetation screening to the north of the property. There also would be no view of construction works from the small number of properties at Sadlers Meadow (part of Visual Receptor 11), which are adjacent to Over Whitacre House, due to mature tree belts to the south and east.

Assessment of Effects During Operation Summary of Effects on Public Views During Daytime Operation

6.41 The greatest visual effect during operation in the daytime would be experienced by PRoW users on the section of footpath which runs along the southern edge of the site (Visual Receptor Reference F). PRoW users would experience a mixture of open and filtered but near views of the proposed development and associated activity. Given the existing derelict nature of the previously developed site, overall the proposed development would result in the partial alteration of the view from the PRoW, with the introduction of prominent elements and the magnitude of effect would be moderate adverse. The moderate adverse magnitude of effect on views and medium sensitivity of PRoW users would result in a moderate adverse significance of effect during operation in the short, medium and long-term.

5781.003 Page 54 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

6.42 Other footpath users on sections of PRoW in the valley (Visual Receptors G, H, I, and J) would experience a low adverse magnitude of effect on daytime views during operation. This would result from a small proportion of the view being affected where intervening topography and or vegetation in the valley, would partially screen or filter views toward the proposed development and associated activity. The low magnitude of effect on views and medium sensitivity of PRoW users would result in a minor adverse significance of effect. 6.43 Rail passengers on the section of the Birmingham to Nuneaton railway line (Visual Receptor O) would experience a mixture of open and filtered near views of the proposed development and associated activity during the daytime in the appeal site. However given the fleeting nature of views a small proportion of their view would be affected. The low adverse magnitude of effect on views and medium sensitivity of visual receptors, would result in a minor adverse significance of effect on daytime views during operation.

6.44 Users of the lanes on the southern valley side (Visual Receptor B) would experience a minor adverse to negligible significance of effect on daytime views during operation. In the main hedgerow vegetation lining lanes would screen or filter views toward the proposed development in the appeal site. However on some open sections of lane a small proportion of the view would be affected where vegetation in the valley bottom would partially screen or filter views toward the proposed development and associated activity.

6.45 From other sections of PRoW (Visual Receptors K, M and N) the combination of intervening topography and or vegetation would largely filter or screen daytime views of the proposed development within the appeal site, such that a very small proportion of the view from these PRoWs would be affected. The overall significance of effect would be negligible. Similarly, intervening vegetation (particularly the tree belts to the north and southeast of the site), would mean that overall the significance of effect on daytime views during operation from nearby roads (Visual Receptors A, C, D and E) would be negligible.

6.46 Users of the PRoW south of Slowley Green Farm (Visual Receptor L) would have no view of the proposed development during the daytime, as views would be completely screened by intervening topography and vegetation. Summary of Effects on Private Views During Daytime Operation

6.47 Medium sensitivity residents in the vicinity of the appeal site (Visual Receptor 2: residents at Quarry Grange, Visual Receptor 3: residents at and near Dandy's Farm, Visual Receptor 5: residents at Wagster Cottage, and part of Visual Receptor 11: residents at Over Whitacre House) would experience a minor adverse significance of effect on daytime views during operation. This would result from a low adverse magnitude of effect, where given the distance of the viewer and partial screening and filtering by vegetation, and in some instances the previously developed site and oblique nature of views, the proposed development would affect a small proportion of daytime views. From these properties there would continue to be views of undeveloped land on higher ground beyond the site.

5781.003 Page 55 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

6.48 Other residents in the valley (Visual Receptor 6: residents at 'The Highlands' and Visual Receptor 8: residents at White House Farm and Devitts Green Farm) would experience a minor adverse significance of effect where residents would have a more distant, but open glimpsed daytime view of the proposed development within the appeal site.

6.49 Intervening vegetation screening and filtering the views experienced at and near Wagstaff Farm and on higher ground to the south (Visual Receptor 4) would mean that a small to very small proportion of residents' daytime views would be affected during operation. The low adverse to negligible magnitude of effect on views, would result in a minor adverse to negligible overall significance of effect on views.

6.50 From other residential properties in the valley (Visual Receptors 7, 9, 10, 12 and 13) a combination of intervening topography, vegetation and or the distance of the viewer would result in a very small proportion of residents' daytime views being affected by the proposed development. The magnitude of effect on daytime views during operation would be negligible, and the overall significance of effect negligible.

6.51 During operation there would be no view of the proposed development during the daytime from residential properties at Daw Mill Cottage (Visual Receptor 1) and of properties at Sadlers Meadow (part of Visual Receptor 11) due to intervening vegetation. Summary of Effects on Public Views During Night-time Operation (not including PRoWs)

6.52 During operation and at night-time the majority of public views from roads and the railway line (Visual Receptors A, B, D, E and O) would experience a minor adverse significance of effect as a result of the lighting of the site.

6.53 The views toward the site experienced from roads within the main valley (Visual Receptors A, B, D and E) generally would be largely screened or filtered from view by intervening vegetation (and some properties). However the lighting of the site using lower height lighting columns (compared to the existing lighting columns which would be removed) and low-level directional lighting within the site would result in a small proportion of the view experienced by medium and low to medium sensitivity road users being affected.

6.54 From the section of railway line adjacent to the site’s southwest boundary (Visual Receptor O) medium sensitivity railway passengers would experience a mixture of filtered and open fleeting views beyond the site security fence of activity across the site, which at night would be lit by lower height lighting columns (compared to the existing lighting columns which would be removed) and low-level directional lighting within the site. Overall, given the existing views of a previously developed site, the limited section of railway line affected, and the fleeting and partly filtered nature of views, the proposed development would represent a low alteration to the existing view and would affect no more than a small proportion of the night-time view from the railway line.

5781.003 Page 56 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

6.55 During operation medium sensitivity users of Devitts Green Lane (Visual Receptor C) would experience a minor adverse to negligible significance of effect on views during night-time. From the section of lane on higher ground there would be glimpsed and filtered views to the southwest of the upper part of new buildings, lit by lower height lighting columns (compared to the existing lighting columns which would be removed) and low-level directional lighting within the site. From lower ground night-time views toward the site would be largely obscured by intervening topography and vegetation. Overall a small to very small proportion of the view from the lane would be affected and the magnitude of effect would be low adverse to negligible.

Summary of Effects on Private Views During Night-time Operation

6.56 A small number of medium sensitivity residents within the valley would experience a moderate adverse significance of effect on night-time views during operation. These are:

 Visual Receptor 2: Residents at Quarry Grange;  Visual Receptor 3: Residents at and near Dandy's Farm; and  Visual Receptor 5: Residents at Wagster Cottage. 6.57 On completion and during the night-time there would be partial views from these properties of the proposed development lit by lower height lighting columns (compared to the existing lighting columns which would be removed) and low-level directional lighting within the site. The derelict site is not currently lit at night and during night-time the proposed development would be more prominent, affecting a moderate proportion of the view across the valley. During operation the magnitude of effect on night-time views would be moderate adverse.

6.58 A number of other medium sensitivity residents would experience a minor adverse significance of effect on night-time views during operation of the proposed development. These are:  Visual Receptor 6: Residents at 'The Highlands';  Visual Receptor 7: Residents at Overbarns;  Visual Receptor 8: Residents at White House Farm and Devitts Green Farm;  Visual receptor 9: Residents at and near Acorn Farm;  Visual Receptor 10: Residents at and near Slowley Green Farm;  Part of Visual Receptor 11: Residents at Over Whitacre House; and  Visual Receptor 13: Residents at Greenway's Farm, Shawlane House and properties which are also on higher ground off Mill Lane further to the east.

5781.003 Page 57 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

6.59 During operation, night-time views of the proposed development from these properties would be distant and lit by lower height lighting columns (compared to the existing lighting columns which would be removed) and low-level directional lighting within the site. Intervening vegetation would partially or largely filter or obscure views. In some instances the proposed development would be more apparent during night-time (than in the daytime). Overall given the distance and degree of intervening vegetation, a small proportion of the view would be affected during the night-time and the magnitude of effect would be low adverse.

6.60 Vegetation screening to the north of Daw Mill Cottage (Visual Receptor 1) would mean that a small proportion of the night-time views experienced by medium sensitivity residents would be affected by the lighting of the site. The significance of effect on night-time views during operation would be minor adverse. 6.61 During operation medium sensitivity residents at and near Wagstaff Farm and on higher ground to the south (Visual Receptor 4) would experience a minor adverse to negligible significance of effect on night-time views. In general night-time views from these residential properties of the proposed development (approximately 0.6 to 1.0km distant) would largely be filtered or obscured by intervening vegetation, and by other properties in places. Overall a small to very small proportion of the view would be affected and the magnitude of effect would range between low adverse and negligible. 6.62 The degree of vegetation screening to the south and east of a small number of properties at Sadlers Meadow (part of Visual Receptor 11) would mean that a very small proportion of the night-time views experienced by medium sensitivity residents would be affected by the lighting of the site. The significance of effect on night-time views during operation from these properties would be negligible. 6.63 Similarly, a negligible significance of effect would be experienced by residents at and near Slowley Hall (Visual Receptor 12). From this viewpoint (approximately 1.5km distant) the proposed development within the site would be screened from view by a combination of intervening landform and vegetation. However lighting of the site would result in a perceivable sky glow to the northwest, which would affect a very small proportion of the night-time view.

6.64 Table 6.2 below provides a summary of the visual effects (more detailed tables are presented in Appendix 3 of my evidence).

5781.003 Page 58 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Table 6.2 - Summary of Visual Assessment for Existing Landscape

Significance of effect on views Significance of Receptor during Visual Receptor Sensitivity effect on views Ref. construction during operation (in the daytime)

Users of Daw Mill Medium Negligible Negligible Lane to southeast (daytime)

of site A Minor adverse

(night-time)

Users of lanes on Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse to the southern valley to negligible negligible side (Daw Mill (daytime)

B Lane, Pump Lane, Minor adverse Newtown Lane, (night-time) Tower Lane and Shawbury Lane)

Users of Devitts Medium Negligible Negligible Green Lane (daytime)

(between B4098 Minor adverse to C Tamworth Road negligible (night- and Devitts Green) time)

Users of B4114 Low - Negligible Negligible Nuneaton Road Medium (daytime) D Minor adverse

(night-time)

Users of B4098 Low - Negligible Negligible Tamworth Road Medium (daytime)

E Minor adverse

(night-time)

PRoW users at the Medium Minor adverse Moderate southern edge of adverse (daytime

site (Warwickshire only) F County Council (WCC) Refs. M392 and M436)

5781.003 Page 59 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Significance of effect on views Significance of Receptor during Visual Receptor Sensitivity effect on views Ref. construction during operation (in the daytime)

PRoWs users to Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse northwest of site (daytime only) G (WCC Refs. M391 and M436)

PRoW network Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse users to south of (daytime only)

H site (WCC refs.

M370, M375, M376 and M377)

PRoW users near Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse Withy Wood (WCC (daytime only) I ref. M378)

Users of short Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse section of PRoW to (daytime only)

J the west of

Overbarns (WCC ref. M390)

PRoW network Medium Negligible Negligible users between (daytime only)

B4114 and Devitts K Green Lane (WCC refs. M427, M435 and M451)

Users of PRoW Medium Negligible No view (daytime south of Slowley only) L Green Farm (WCC ref. M374)

Users of short Medium Negligible Negligible section of PRoW (daytime only)

M near Ballard’s

Green (WCC ref. M437)

5781.003 Page 60 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Significance of effect on views Significance of Receptor during Visual Receptor Sensitivity effect on views Ref. construction during operation (in the daytime)

Users of short Medium Negligible Negligible section of PRoW (daytime only) (WCC ref. M372) N between Greenway’s Farm and Newtown Lane

Rail passengers on Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse Birmingham to (daytime and O Nuneaton to night-time) railway line

Residents at Daw Medium No view No view Mill Cottage (daytime) 1 Minor adverse (night-time)

Residents at Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse Quarry Grange on (daytime)

B4114 Nuneaton 2 Moderate Road adverse (night- time)

Residents at Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse properties at and (daytime)

near Dandy’s Farm 3 Moderate adverse (night- time)

Residents at Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse to properties at to negligible negligible 4 Wagstaff Farm and (daytime and

on higher ground night-time) to south

Residents at Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse Wagster Cottage (daytime)

on Newtown Lane 5 Moderate adverse (night- time)

5781.003 Page 61 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Significance of effect on views Significance of Receptor during Visual Receptor Sensitivity effect on views Ref. construction during operation (in the daytime)

Residents at ‘The Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse 6 Highlands’ on (daytime and

Shawbury Lane night-time)

Residents at two Medium Negligible Negligible semi-detached (daytime)

7 properties at Minor adverse Overbarns (night-time)

Residents at Medium Minor adverse Minor adverse properties at White (daytime and

8 House Farm and night-time) Devitts Green

Farm

Residents at Medium Negligible Negligible properties at and (daytime)

9 near Acorn Farm Minor adverse (night-time)

Residents at Medium Negligible Negligible properties at (daytime)

10 Slowley Green Minor adverse Farm and nearby (night-time) bungalow

Residents at Over Medium No view No view (daytime Whitacre House (Sadlers view from and a small Meadow) Sadlers number of adjacent Meadow) and Minor adverse properties at negligible (night- (Over Sadlers Meadow time view from Whitacre Sadlers 11 House) Meadow)

Minor adverse (day-time and night-time view from Over Whitacre House)

5781.003 Page 62 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Significance of effect on views Significance of Receptor during Visual Receptor Sensitivity effect on views Ref. construction during operation (in the daytime)

Residents at Medium Negligible Negligible properties at (daytime and

12 Slowley Hall night-time)

Residents at Medium Negligible Negligible Greenway’s Farm, (daytime) Shawlane House Minor adverse and properties 13 (night-time) which are also on higher ground off Mill Lane further to the east

Assessment of Effects on Views against Restored Landscape Sensitivity of Visual Receptors

6.65 The value of views and susceptibility to change judgements made for visual receptors in the main visual assessment are not influenced by the previously developed nature of the former colliery site. In the same way the restored landscape does not alter the value of views and susceptibility to change judgements made in the main visual assessment, and in turn the overall sensitivity of each visual receptor to changes in views as a result of the proposed development remains the same. Effects on Views During Construction

6.66 The visual effects of constructing the proposed development on the restored site, would result in a requirement to clear some woodland planting, level large parts of the site to accommodate vehicle access, hardstanding areas and buildings, and re- install the rail sidings. It is likely that the watercourses would need to be re- culverted or diverted along open channels.

6.67 The requirement to create level ground for new development would result in additional operations during the construction period, including the potential for excess spoil to be taken off site. It is considered unlikely that these additional works would extend the construction period beyond 5 years, and visual effects during construction would remain short-term.

6.68 Additional vehicle movements to prepare the restored site for development are unlikely to result in a noticeable change to the views experienced by road users and other nearby visual receptors.

5781.003 Page 63 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

6.69 For the majority of visual receptors, views of the proposed development site are limited by intervening landform and, or vegetation to the extent that a restored landscape baseline would not alter the magnitude and significance of visual effect judgements during construction. 6.70 For a few visual receptors (Visual Receptor H: PRoW network users to the south of site, Visual Receptor 2: Residents at Quarry Grange and Visual Receptor 3: Residents at and near Dandy’s Farm), the visual effects during construction would be greater, with up to a moderate proportion of the view affected when the restored landscape baseline is taken into account. However the short-term duration of the construction effects would limit the magnitude of effect to low adverse, and the resultant significance of effect on views would continue to be minor adverse (as per the existing baseline). 6.71 Passengers on the Nuneaton to Birmingham railway line (Visual Receptor O) would experience a greater adverse visual effect during the construction of the proposed development on the restored site. However the fleeting nature of views and overall length of the railway line between stations (Nuneaton to Coleshill Parkway) would mean that the significance of effect would continue to minor adverse during construction.

6.72 PRoW users at the southern edge of the site (Visual Receptor F) would experience a greater visual effect as a result of construction activity on the restored site. There would be near views of construction works, replacing views of the woodland and grassland within the restored site. A large proportion of the view would be affected in the short-term and the magnitude of effect would be moderate adverse. Given the medium sensitivity of the visual receptor and moderate adverse magnitude of effect, PRoW users would experience a moderate adverse significance of effect as a result of construction works on the restored site.

Effects on Night-time Views During Operation 6.73 The alteration of night-time views following the completion of the proposed development, replacing the restored landscape, would result in the same magnitude and significance of effect judgements as provided in the main visual assessment. The existing site is not lit at night and neither would the restored landscape be.

Effects on Daytime Views During Operation

6.74 For the majority of visual receptors, views of the proposed development site are limited by intervening landform and, or vegetation to the extent that a restored landscape baseline would not alter the magnitude and significance of visual effect judgements in the daytime during operation. 6.75 Passengers on the Nuneaton to Birmingham railway line (Visual Receptor O) in the daytime would experience a greater adverse visual effect during the operation of the proposed development, when compared to a restored site. However the fleeting nature of views and overall length of the railway line between stations (Nuneaton to Coleshill Parkway) would mean that the significance of effect on daytime views would continue to minor adverse during operation.

5781.003 Page 64 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

6.76 For a few visual receptors (Visual Receptor H: PRoW network users to the south of site, Visual Receptor 2: Residents at Quarry Grange and Visual Receptor 3: Residents at and near Dandy’s Farm), the visual effects in the daytime during operation would be greater when considered in relation to a restored landscape baseline.

6.77 Where views are more open from parts of the PRoW network on the valley side and south of the site (Visual Receptor H), a moderate proportion of the view would be affected where the restored site would be replaced with the proposed development. Elsewhere intervening vegetation would continue to provide filtering or screening of views, and from these locations a small proportion of the daytime view would be affected by the proposed development during operation. Overall the magnitude of effect on daytime views during operation would range between moderate adverse to low adverse and the significance of effect would be moderate adverse to minor adverse.

6.78 For residents at Quarry Grange (Visual Receptor 2) and at and near Dandy’s Farm (Visual Receptor 3), when the restored landscape baseline is taken into account a moderate proportion of the view would be affected during the operation of the proposed development. The magnitude of effect on daytime views during operation would be moderate adverse and the significance of effect would be moderate adverse. 6.79 PRoW users at the southern edge of the site (Visual Receptor F) would experience a greater visual effect in the daytime during the operation of the proposed development, when compared to baseline views of a restored landscape. There would be a mixture of open and filtered near views of the proposed development during the daytime, which would replace views of woodland, grassland and River Bourne within the restored site. A large proportion of the view would be affected in the short, medium and long-term and the magnitude of effect would be high adverse. Given the medium sensitivity of the visual receptor and high adverse magnitude of effect, PRoW users on this section of footpath would experience a major adverse significance of effect on daytime views, as a result of the proposed development on the restored site. 6.80 Table 6.3 below summarises the visual assessment in relation to the restored landscape. Where the significance of effect judgement differs from the visual assessment for the existing landscape this is shown in bold.

5781.003 Page 65 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Table 6.3 - Summary of Visual Assessment for Restored Landscape

Significance of Significance effect on views Receptor of effect on Visual Receptor Sensitivity during Ref. views during construction (in operation the daytime)

Users of Daw Mill Medium Negligible Negligible Lane to southeast (daytime)

of site Minor A adverse (night-time)

Users of lanes on Medium Minor adverse Minor the southern valley to negligible adverse to side (Daw Mill negligible

Lane, Pump Lane, (daytime) B Newtown Lane, Minor Tower Lane and adverse Shawbury Lane) (night-time)

Users of Devitts Medium Negligible Negligible Green Lane (daytime)

(between B4098 Minor Tamworth Road C adverse to and Devitts Green) negligible (night-time)

Users of B4114 Low - Medium Negligible Negligible Nuneaton Road (daytime)

D Minor

adverse (night-time)

Users of B4098 Low - Medium Negligible Negligible Tamworth Road (daytime)

Minor E adverse (night-time)

5781.003 Page 66 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Significance of Significance effect on views Receptor of effect on Visual Receptor Sensitivity during Ref. views during construction (in operation the daytime)

PRoW users at the Medium Moderate Major southern edge of adverse adverse site (Warwickshire (daytime F County Council only) (WWC) Refs. M392 and M436)

PRoWs users to Medium Minor adverse Minor northwest of site adverse G (WCC Refs. M391 (daytime and M436) only)

PRoW network Medium Minor adverse Moderate users to south of adverse to

site (WCC refs. minor H M370, M375, M376 adverse and M377) (daytime only)

PRoW users near Medium Minor adverse Minor Withy Wood (WCC adverse

I ref. M378) (daytime only)

Users of short Medium Minor adverse Minor section of PRoW to adverse

J the west of (daytime Overbarns (WCC only) ref. M390)

PRoW network Medium Negligible Negligible users between (daytime

B4114 and Devitts only) K Green Lane (WCC

refs. M427, M435 and M451)

Users of PRoW Medium Negligible No view south of Slowley (daytime L Green Farm (WCC only) ref. M374)

5781.003 Page 67 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Significance of Significance effect on views Receptor of effect on Visual Receptor Sensitivity during Ref. views during construction (in operation the daytime)

Users of short Medium Negligible Negligible section of PRoW (daytime

M near Ballard’s only) Green (WCC ref.

M437)

Users of short Medium Negligible Negligible section of PRoW (daytime (WCC ref. M372) only) N between Greenway’s Farm and Newtown Lane

Rail passengers on Medium Minor adverse Minor Birmingham to adverse O Nuneaton to (daytime and railway line night-time)

Residents at Daw Medium No view No view Mill Cottage (daytime)

1 Minor adverse (night-time)

Residents at Medium Minor adverse Moderate Quarry Grange on adverse

B4114 Nuneaton (daytime) 2 Road Moderate adverse (night-time)

Residents at Medium Minor adverse Moderate properties at and adverse

near Dandy’s Farm (daytime) 3 Moderate adverse (night-time)

Residents at Medium Minor adverse Minor properties at to negligible adverse to 4 Wagstaff Farm and negligible

on higher ground (daytime and to south night-time)

5781.003 Page 68 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Significance of Significance effect on views Receptor of effect on Visual Receptor Sensitivity during Ref. views during construction (in operation the daytime)

Residents at Medium Minor adverse Minor Wagster Cottage adverse

on Newtown Lane (daytime) 5 Moderate adverse (night-time)

Residents at ‘The Medium Minor adverse Minor Highlands’ on adverse 6 Shawbury Lane (daytime and night-time)

Residents at two Medium Negligible Negligible semi-detached (daytime)

properties at 7 Minor Overbarns adverse (night-time)

Residents at Medium Minor adverse Minor properties at White adverse

8 House Farm and (daytime and Devitts Green night-time) Farm

Residents at Medium Negligible Negligible properties at and (daytime)

near Acorn Farm 9 Minor adverse (night-time)

Residents at Medium Negligible Negligible properties at (daytime)

Slowley Green 10 Minor Farm and nearby adverse bungalow (night-time)

5781.003 Page 69 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Significance of Significance effect on views Receptor of effect on Visual Receptor Sensitivity during Ref. views during construction (in operation the daytime)

Residents at Over Medium Negligible No No view Whitacre House view (Sadlers (daytime and a small Meadow) view from number of adjacent Sadlers Minor adverse properties at Meadow) (Over Whitacre Sadlers Meadow and House) negligible (night-time view from 11 Sadlers Meadow) Minor adverse (day-time and night- time view from Over Whitacre House)

Residents at Medium Negligible Negligible properties at (daytime and

12 Slowley Hall night-time)

Residents at Medium Negligible Negligible Greenway’s Farm, (daytime) Shawlane House Minor and properties 13 adverse which are also on (night-time) higher ground off Mill Lane further to the east

5781.003 Page 70 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

7.0 Assessment of Effects on Openness of the Green Belt 7.1 As for my assessment of effects on landscape and on views, I address firstly the anticipated effects on openness of the Green Belt arising from the appeal proposals and subsequently the anticipated effects if the alternative restoration had taken place.

7.2 I have described the landscape and the views of the appeal site and the study area. The appeal site and study area do not comprise land that has visual connection between large urban areas and there is not visual connection between towns across the appeal site and study area. Assessment of Effects on Openness in Existing Landscape 7.3 The potential for openness of the Green Belt to be affected by the proposed development relates to the new built structures within the appeal site and their layout. As previously described, and as illustrated on Figure 7 in my Appendix 1, existing buildings would be removed from the site as part of the development proposals. These existing buildings occupy a combined footprint of 3,215m2. Some of these existing buildings are of a similar height to the proposed new buildings (which would be constructed to a maximum height of 15m), but the retained and proposed new buildings would occupy a larger combined footprint of 24,652m2. I explain that the assessment is based on the Landscape/Biodiversity Parameter Plan (with Illustrative Masterplan) and that the options for site development identified by Mr Clarke in his evidence are consistent with the 'envelope' set out in the 'parameters plan'. 7.4 The proposed development also includes a gantry crane on the rail sidings at the southern edge of the site, and a conveyor which would run from the new buildings in the central part of the site to the rail sidings. These built structures (up to a height of 20m) would be relatively slender structures employing a steel lattice design, which would minimise their impact on openness. 7.5 The openness of Green Belt within the valley landscape is principally experienced from higher ground on the valley sides. The site's position on lower ground means that a number of views toward the site are from a more elevated position, where the viewer would be looking down to the proposed built form within the site. In these instances and also where the viewer is looking across at a similar elevation, but on the south side of the valley, undeveloped land on higher ground would continue to form a backdrop to these views. These factors would assist in limiting effects on perceived openness.

5781.003 Page 71 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

7.6 The proposed development would not affect the vegetation belts associated with the site boundaries. The retention of these vegetation belts, and other vegetation along the river and railway line and in the wider valley, would limit the impact of the new buildings and structures on the perceived openness of the valley. In addition the site's position in the valley also means that in a number of views landform partially obscures views of the site. As set out in the visual assessment, the daytime effects of the proposed development from the majority of visual receptors within the valley is no greater than minor adverse significance owing to the screening or filtering effects of intervening topography and or vegetation (for example see Photographs 1-5, 9-17 and 20-21 in my Appendix 2). 7.7 There is an exception identified in the visual assessment, which is the view from the PRoW which runs along the southern edge of the site (Visual Receptor F). The proximity of this section of PRoW to the site would mean that there would be near views of new built development in the site, which would reduce the openness of the site and would largely obscure views of tree belts on higher ground to the north (see Photograph 8 in my Appendix 2). In the visual assessment a moderate adverse significance of effect is assessed on the daytime views from this section of PRoW. Whilst a similar view would be experienced from the short section of the Birmingham to Nuneaton railway line (Visual Receptor N), the fleeting nature of views means that the visual assessment records a minor adverse significance of effect on daytime views. 7.8 I consider that implementation of the appeal proposals on the appeal site as it presently exists would have a slight adverse effect on the openness of the Green Belt. Assessment of Effects on Openness in Alternative Restoration 7.9 If the alternative restoration was implemented, the buildings and hard standing which contribute to the appeal site's derelict nature and its appearance as previously developed land would not be present.

7.10 The extent of screening of the appeal site would remain largely as at present because this is formed by the boundary vegetation which would be retained.

7.11 As described the appeal site subject to the alternative restoration would have the character of land on which substantial intervention had occurred. However it would appear more 'open' than the existing appeal site.

7.12 I consider that implementation of the appeal proposals if the alternative restoration proposals had been implemented would have a moderate adverse effect on the openness of the Green Belt.

5781.003 Page 72 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

8.0 Compliance with Relevant Planning Policy 8.1 I now consider the extent to which the appeal proposals comply with relevant planning policy I identified in Section 4.0 of my evidence. I first address the extent of compliance considering the appeal proposals if constructed on the site as existing. Compliance of Appeal Proposals - Existing Environment Local Planning Policy North Warwickshire Local Plan Core Strategy NW3 Green Belt

8.2 I address the aspect of openness related to landscape and visual amenity with regard to the NPPF above. Other aspects of Green Belt policy are addressed by Mr Rolinson. NW10 Development Considerations

8.3 I set out at Section 4.0 the considerations in this policy relevant to the scope of my evidence. I conclude that the proposals are compliant with these aspects of policy and I present them in Table 8.1 below with my assessment of how the appeal proposals respond to them.

Table 8.1

Aspect of Policy NW10 Appeal Proposals' Response

The appeal proposals will be on 1. Development should be targeted at brownfield land and this has been using brownfield land in appropriate considered in the assessment of locations effects on landscape and on views.

The design of the development has 11. Manage the impacts of climate considered the existing vegetation on change through the design and the site and particularly the boundary location of development, including trees which assist in screening views of sustainable drainage, water efficiency the site in the wider landscape and measures, use of trees and natural new tree planting to supplement the vegetation and ensuring no net loss of retained planting. Drainage and other flood storage capacity matters are addressed by others.

NW12 Quality of Development 8.4 I explained that this policy has three aspects relevant to the scope of my evidence. I set these out in Table 8.2 below.

5781.003 Page 73 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Table 8.2

Aspect of Policy NW12 Appeal Proposals' Response

Demonstrate a high quality of The appeal proposals are not in a sustainable design that positively settlement. My assessment improved the individual settlement's demonstrates that there would be an character; appearance and adverse effect of minor significance on environmental quality of the area landscape character.

The appeal proposals would create linkages. It would retain the boundary Create linkages between green spaces vegetation which presently provides and wildlife corridors links and corridors and this would be supplemented by additional planting and meadow with copses.

The appeal proposals would retain the existing rights of way network and also Development should protect the would allow a further footpath system existing rights of way network and which would contribute to expansion of where possible contribute to its the rights of way network through expansion and management offering greater opportunity for leisure use.

8.5 The removal of aspects of the appeal site which presently give an air of dereliction, particularly when seen close the site, would benefit the environmental quality of the area although I have concluded that there would be an effects of minor adverse significance on the landscape as a whole. The appeal proposals respond positively to the other aspects of this policy and I conclude that the appeal proposals comply with this policy.

NW13 Natural Environment

8.6 I explain at Section 4.0 of my evidence that this policy aims to protect and enhance the quality, character, diversity and local distinctiveness of the natural environment. It states that within identified landscape character areas development will conserve, enhance and where appropriate, restore landscape character as well as promote a resilient, functional landscape able to adapt to climate change. Specific landscape, geo-diversity, wildlife and historic features which contribute to local character will be protected and enhanced. 8.7 My assessment identified that there are few specific landscape features which contribute to local character. The features on the appeal site which contribute to local character are the areas of vegetation, particularly to the site boundaries, which will be protected. There will be management of these areas to ensure that they are safe and continue their function and this will comprise enhancement as compared to the existing situation. I conclude that the proposals comply with this policy.

5781.003 Page 74 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

NW16 Green Infrastructure (GI) 8.8 This policy sets out that development proposals should maintain and enhance the GI network. Where new GI cannot be provided on site, contributions will be sought towards wider GI projects and improvements.

8.9 The appeal proposals will maintain the existing GI network because boundary vegetation will be retained and will be brought into management. There will be loss of some trees on site to development footprints (see below) but the connectivity between spaces presently provided by the appeal site will not be compromised substantially. I consider that the appeal proposals comply with this policy. North Warwickshire Local Plan 2006 ENV4: Trees and hedgerows

8.10 This policy explains that the Council will not permit development if it would result in the loss of trees, woodland or hedgerow that in terms of their historical, ecological, townscape or landscape significance make a positive contribution to the quality of the local environment.

8.11 I have explained that the trees, woodland and hedgerow that make a positive contribution to the quality of the local environment are those on the boundaries which will be retained and brought into management through the appeal proposals. There would not be loss of trees, woodland or hedgerow of landscape significance if the appeal proposals were implemented and the proposals comply with this policy.

ENV12: Urban design 8.12 This policy sets out a number of criteria to achieve appropriate urban design and development will be permitted only if these are met. Table 8.3 below sets out the criteria I identified most relevant to the scope of my evidence and demonstrate the appeal proposals' compliance with these aspects of policy:

Table 8.3

Aspect of Policy ENV12 Appeal Proposals' Response

The elements of the appeal proposals will be designed to relate well to each (i) All the elements of the proposals are other and this will be controlled by well related to each other and reserved matters. I have assessed the harmonise with both the immediate effects on views and noted where setting and wider surroundings to adverse effects will arise. I consider present a visually attractive that the appeal proposals will be as environment visually attractive as other contemporary developments of their type.

5781.003 Page 75 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Aspect of Policy ENV12 Appeal Proposals' Response

The appeal proposals will incorporate lighting to allow operation during hours controlled by conditions including during non-daylight hours in the (v) Any external illumination includes mornings and evenings. External measures to minimise sky glow, glare lighting will include measures to and light trespass minimise sky glow, glare and light trespass. In my assessment of effects on the landscape and views, I take account of the anticipated effects of controlled external lighting.

ENV14: Access Design

8.13 The Council states that development will be permitted only where, amongst other matters, vehicular access to the site is safe and the local road network is able to accommodate traffic to and from the development without adversely affecting the character of the surrounding environment. 8.14 I have taken account of the proposed access to the site in my assessments and do not consider that this will adversely affect the character of the surrounding environment.

8.15 I have considered the proposed off-site highways works and have concluded that these would not adversely affect the character of the landscape and townscape in which they would occur. I conclude that the appeal proposals comply with this policy. Arley Neighbourhood Plan

ANP1: Maintain the Rural Character of the Parish

8.16 I have described that the former Daw Mill Colliery site does not appear as rural or as countryside. I also note that the Arley Neighbourhood Plan does not refer to the former colliery in any way with regard to its contribution the character of the parish. I do not consider that the appeal proposals would affect the character of Arley and they would comply with this policy.

ANP3: Maintain the balance between built and natural environment 8.17 I note in my discussion of this policy that it focuses on the village of Arley. The existing former colliery site has built elements with some in the parish boundary. It is not a natural environment. Developing the former colliery as set out in the appeal proposals would not substantially disturb the existing balance between built and natural environment and I conclude that the proposals comply with policy. ANP5: Ensure the built environment in Arley meets the highest current standards

5781.003 Page 76 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

8.18 This policy primarily addresses residential development and does not expressly consider other aspects of built environment. The structures comprised in the appeal proposals would be built to the appropriate contemporary standards for buildings of their type and functions. I conclude that they would comply with this policy. Relevant Supplementary Planning Documents A Guide for the Design of Lighting Schemes (2003)

8.19 The appeal proposals would accord with this guidance. Lighting will be controlled and minimised to avoid glare and spillage where possible and to reduce sky glow and spillage that cannot be avoided. I have acknowledged in my assessments that it is inevitable that there will be light emanating from the appeal site and that this will have adverse effects on landscape character and in views.

North Warwickshire Green Space Strategy 2008-2018

8.20 I explain at Section 4.0 of my evidence that the Strategy sets out a priority for the Arley and Whitacre ward, in which the appeal site sits, which is 'improved access to the countryside through the promotion of footpaths and routeways through the area.' The appeal proposals would not assist this priority.

National Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Section 7 Good Design

8.21 I set out at Section 4.0 of my evidence requirements that developments should achieve relating to design in Section 7 of the NPPF. Table 8.4 below considers the appeal proposals in the existing landscape in response to the relevant aspects identified.

Table 8.4: Appeal Proposals in Existing Environment - Section 7 NPPF

Requirements of Development in Appeal Proposals' Response Section 7 Good Design

The appeal proposals would remove Function well and add to the overall the nature of dereliction present on the quality of the area appeal site. They would function well and add to quality of the area.

The appeal proposals would establish a strong sense of place, different from Establish a strong sense of place the present derelict nature of the appeal site.

5781.003 Page 77 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Requirements of Development in Appeal Proposals' Response Section 7 Good Design

The appeal proposals would use Optimise the potential of the existing levels, areas of hard standing, application site to accommodate railway sidings and existing boundary development screening to optimise potential to accommodate the works proposed.

Respond to local character and history, There is little locally distinctive on and reflect the identity of local which the appeal proposals can draw surroundings and materials, whilst not although the re-use of areas of hard preventing or discouraging appropriate standing and the railway sidings will innovation sustain aspects of local history.

The appeal proposals will be designed Create safe and accessible to be safe and appropriately environments accessible.

The appeal proposals will be as Be visually attractive as a result of visually attractive as other modern B2 good architecture and appropriate rail freight developments, using good landscaping architecture and appropriate landscaping.

The appeal proposals will use aspects Be properly integrated into the of the existing landscape including landscape and existing landscape levels, retained areas of hard standing features and boundary vegetation to be integrated into the landscape.

The appeal proposals will retain the boundary vegetation of trees and woodland belts. They will use much of the land disposition (levels, areas of Address landscape features such as hard standing) and will use areas key approaches into a settlement, where there are existing buildings for inward and outward views, woodland, new buildings. These aspects mean trees, river corridors and open spaces that inward views are not changed substantially and that many of the presently visible landscape features are retained.

5781.003 Page 78 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

8.22 I consider that the appeal proposals would comply with the parts of Section 7 of the NPPF which I have identified as relevant to the scope of my evidence. With regard to the criterion of being visually attractive, I have worked on a number of large projects including for industry such as waste recycling, electricity transmission and distribution as well as for B2 use classes. It is unlikely in my experience that all such developments will be as visually attractive as some other developments, such as open space, sports provision, residential or commercial development. Similarly, their architecture generally would not be viewed as of a very high standard with regard to distinctiveness. I do not interpret the NPPF as advising that such developments should not be allowed because it does not meet the very highest standard of visual attraction. Rather I understand that all developments should consider these matters in their design and respond appropriately taking account of their location and function. I consider that the appeal proposals will be of a standard of design and will be implemented to be consistent with Section 7 of the NPPF.

Section 9: Protecting Green Belt Land

8.23 I explain in Section 4.0 of my evidence that openness is a key characteristic of the Green Belt. I have assessed the effects that the appeal proposals would have on openness if developed on the appeal site as it presently exists. I conclude that there would be a slight adverse effects on openness. This adverse effect needs to be taken forward to the planning balance considered by Mr Rolinson in his evidence.

Section 11: Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment

8.24 I explain that paragraph 109 of the NPPF refers to protecting and enhancing valued landscapes and that there is reference at paragraph 113 to planning authorities seeking protection of landscapes according to a clear hierarchy. I explain that paragraph 115 sets out the great weight to be given to landscape of the National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

8.25 I have assessed the value of the landscape of the appeal site and consider it to be of community value. It is not a 'valued landscape' in terms of NPPF paragraph 109.

8.26 I set out that paragraph 125 of the NPPF requires that through good design the impact of light pollution from artificial light on local amenity should be limited. I explain that the appeal proposals will use contemporary lighting for its night-time use, lighting only those areas which require lighting and using directional lighting to minimise spillage. The appeal proposals will comply with this aspect of the NPPF and I have considered the night-time lighting of the proposals in my assessments. Planning Practice Guidance

8.27 Online Planning Practice Guidance explains that, where appropriate, landscape character assessments should be prepared to complement Natural England’s National Character Area profiles to help understand the character and local distinctiveness of the landscape and identify the features that give it a sense of place. I have used relevant landscape character assessments when I considered the anticipated effects of the appeal proposals on the landscape.

5781.003 Page 79 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Compliance of Appeal Proposals - Restored Landscape 8.28 I now consider the extent to which the appeal proposals would be compliant with planning policy if the alternative restoration landscape had been implemented. I set this out in the same format as for the existing landscape above.

Local Planning Policy North Warwickshire Local Plan Core Strategy

NW3 Green Belt

8.29 As with my assessment of compliance with this policy in the case of the existing landscape, I address the aspect of openness related to landscape and visual amenity with regard to the NPPF below. Other aspects of Green Belt policy are addressed by Mr Rolinson. NW10 Development Considerations

Table 8.5

Aspect of Policy NW10 Appeal Proposals' Response

If the appeal proposals were 1. Development should be targeted at implemented on the restored using brownfield land in appropriate landscape, it would not comprise locations brownfield land.

The design of the development has 11. Manage the impacts of climate considered the existing vegetation on change through the design and the site and particularly the boundary location of development, including trees which assist in screening views of sustainable drainage, water efficiency the site in the wider landscape. This measures, use of trees and natural vegetation largely would remain in the vegetation and ensuring no net loss of restored landscape. Drainage and flood storage capacity other matters are addressed by others.

8.30 There would not be compliance with Aspect 1 of Policy NW10 but there would be compliance with the parts of Aspect 11 relevant to landscape.

NW12 Quality of Development Table 8.6

Aspect of Policy NW12 Appeal Proposals' Response

The appeal proposals are not in a Demonstrate a high quality of settlement. If implemented on the sustainable design that positively restoration landscape, my assessment improved the individual settlement's demonstrates that there would be an character; appearance and adverse effect of moderate significance environmental quality of the area on landscape character.

5781.003 Page 80 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Aspect of Policy NW12 Appeal Proposals' Response

The appeal proposals would create linkages. It would supplement retained Create linkages between green spaces vegetation, including substantial and wildlife corridors boundary tree belts, with other areas of planting and also meadow with copses.

The restoration landscape shows Development should protect the possible footpaths. The appeal existing rights of way network and proposals on the restored landscape where possible contribute to its would not affect the existing rights of expansion and management way network and would offer other potential footpath links.

8.31 The present air of dereliction, particularly when seen close the site, would have been altered in the restored landscape. I have taken account of this in my assessment of effects on landscape character if the appeal proposals were implemented on the restored landscape. The appeal proposals respond positively to the other two relevant aspects of this policy however overall I conclude that the appeal proposals would not comply with NW12 if the restored landscape was in place.

NW13 Natural Environment 8.32 My assessment identified that there are few specific landscape features which contribute to local character and the restored landscape would not contribute substantially to the present situation. The features on the restored landscape which would contribute to local character would be the areas of vegetation, particularly to the site boundaries, as at present. The appeal proposals would retain these. The proposals would comply with policy because of the low change to landscape value which would arise due to the vegetation which would not have developed into a long-term landscape (ie before 15 years after planting). NW16 Green Infrastructure (GI)

8.33 The restoration landscape would introduce greater connectivity through planting across parts of the appeal site. This would create a greater GI network than in the existing landscape. If the appeal proposals were implemented on the restored landscape, there would remain linkages through the boundary vegetation. This loss and the low ability to enhance the GI network could be offset by contributions to wider GI projects and improvements. This offsetting would bring about compliance with this policy.

5781.003 Page 81 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

North Warwickshire Local Plan 2006 ENV4: Trees and hedgerows

8.34 There would be greater loss of trees and hedgerows from implementing the appeal proposals on the restored landscape than from the existing appeal site. The landscape significance of those losses would be localised and not of particular landscape significance because of the relatively high level of screening from boundary vegetation. The proposals would comply with this policy.

ENV12: Urban design

8.35 There would be no difference between the appeal proposals in respect of this policy if they were implemented on the restored landscape and so they would comply with policy.

ENV14: Access Design

8.36 As for the existing landscape, I have taken account of the proposed access to the site in my assessments of the appeal proposals implemented on the restored landscape. I do not consider that this will adversely affect the character of the surrounding environment. 8.37 There would be no difference to the assessment of effects on junction improvements off-site if the restoration landscape was in place on the appeal site. Arley Neighbourhood Plan

ANP1: Maintain the Rural Character of the Village

8.38 A restored landscape would have a more rural character than the existing former colliery site. However I have explained that it would remain apparent that the land had been subject to substantial intervention and this would detract from a rural character, particularly whilst the planting involved in a restoration scheme was growing (up to and beyond 15 years). Notwithstanding, I noted when considering the appeal proposals in light of this policy that the Arley Neighbourhood Plan does not refer to the former colliery in any way with regard to its contribution the character of the village. I do not consider that the appeal proposals would affect the character of Arley if they were implemented on a restored landscape and they would comply with this policy. ANP3: Maintain the balance between built and natural environment

8.39 If a restoration scheme had been implemented on the part of the former colliery in the Parish of Arley, it would increase the extent of apparently 'natural' environment as compared to the existing previously developed land of the colliery. The buildings on the former colliery would be removed during restoration and there would be a different balance between built and natural environment as compared to the existing situation. Implementing the appeal proposals on the restored landscape would not maintain the balance that would apply at that time and I conclude that the proposals comply with policy.

5781.003 Page 82 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

ANP5: Ensure the built environment in Arley meets the highest current standards

8.40 The built form in the appeal proposals would meet appropriate contemporary standards for buildings of their type and functions if constructed on a restored landscape. I conclude that they would comply with this policy. Relevant Supplementary Planning Documents

A Guide for the Design of Lighting Schemes (2003)

8.41 As for the appeal proposals implemented in the existing landscape, they would accord with this guidance.

North Warwickshire Green Space Strategy 2008-2018 8.42 The restored landscape may include a footpath network, although this is not confirmed. If footpaths were part of the restored landscape they would contribute to the priority for the Arley and Whitacre ward, in which the appeal site sits, which is 'improved access to the countryside through the promotion of footpaths and routeways through the area.' The appeal proposals would mean that footpaths which crossed the development footprint likely would be lost or would need diversion around the built form. National Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Section 7 Good Design

8.43 I set out in Table 8.7 below how I consider that the appeal proposals respond to Section 7 of the NPPF in the case of the restored landscape

Table 8.7

Requirements of Development in Appeal Proposals' Response Section 7 Good Design

The appeal proposals would take the place of the restored landscape. There Function well and add to the overall would be a greater adverse effects on quality of the area landscape character than in the case of the existing environment.

The appeal proposals would establish Establish a strong sense of place a strong sense of place, different from the restored landscape.

5781.003 Page 83 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

Requirements of Development in Appeal Proposals' Response Section 7 Good Design

The appeal proposals would optimise the potential of the site to Optimise the potential of the accommodate the development, albeit application site to accommodate that the restored landscape would be development less suited to accommodate the development and would require a greater extent of ground works.

Although the restored landscape would Respond to local character and history, be different to the existing landscape, and reflect the identity of local there would not be any aspects which surroundings and materials, whilst not would be of particular local distinction. preventing or discouraging appropriate There would be less evidence of the innovation local history of the site than in the existing landscape.

The appeal proposals will be designed Create safe and accessible to be safe and appropriately environments accessible.

The appeal proposals will be as Be visually attractive as a result of visually attractive as other modern B2 good architecture and appropriate rail freight developments, using good landscaping architecture and appropriate landscaping.

The restored landscape would be less suited to accommodating the proposed development without substantial Be properly integrated into the ground works to adjust levels. The landscape and existing landscape appeal proposals are less likely to be features integrated into the landscape, giving rise to a greater adverse effect as reported in my assessment.

The restored landscape would have retained much of the boundary vegetation of trees and woodland belts. The changed landform from the existing landscape would mean that Address landscape features such as there would be works required to key approaches into a settlement, accommodate the development. inward and outward views, woodland, However the retained boundary trees, river corridors and open spaces vegetation would limit the change in inward views and many of the presently visible landscape features, particularly around the appeal site, would not be changed.

5781.003 Page 84 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

8.44 The main difference between the appeal proposals taking place in the existing landscape and the restored landscape with regard to the parts of Section 7 of the NPPF which I have identified as relevant to the scope of my evidence are in relation to an adverse effect of greater significance on landscape character as I have reported in my assessment (from minor adverse to moderate adverse). Section 9: Protecting Green Belt Land 8.45 I conclude in my assessment that the appeal proposals on the restored landscape would result in a greater adverse effect on openness than would be the case for the existing landscape (from slight adverse to moderate adverse). This adverse effect needs to be taken forward to the planning balance considered by Mr Rolinson in his evidence. Section 11: Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment

8.46 The restored landscape will not constitute a 'valued landscape' in terms of NPPF paragraph 109 and so would not be different in this regard to the existing landscape. 8.47 With regard to my scope of evidence, is no difference with respect to policy compliance of the appeal proposals in the existing landscape or the restored landscape with regard to paragraph 125 of the NPPF or with regard to Planning Practice Guidance.

5781.003 Page 85 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5781.003 Page 86 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

9.0 Third Party Representations 9.1 There are two third party representations that relate to the scope of my evidence. I set these out with my response to them in Table 9.1 below.

Table 9.1

Representation Response

The assessment I have presented in my evidence is based on the site as The highest percentage of the so- existing and also as I consider it would called built up area of the colliery was appear if the restored landscape was in in fact the coal stock yards, not built up place. I have not assessed the effects at all and not 25m high as stated in of the appeal proposals on landscape Section 7.8 of the Planning Statement. and on views as compared to the colliery when it was in operation.

The appeal site is an area The Warwickshire Structure Plan is characterised as Ancient Arden and now superseded. I have referred to the had protection under the old Landscape Character Assessment Warwickshire Structure Plan as a 2010 in my assessment of the Special Landscape Area. This policy landscape. I also have acknowledged has now been replaced by the the reference to the extensive 'Forest Landscape Character Assessment of of Arden' and association with August 2010. The Appeal Site lies Shakespeare. within Landscape Character 7.

9.2 I do not consider that there are any matters raised in representations from third parties which would affect the assessments and analysis I have provided.

5781.003 Page 87 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

5781.003 Page 88 January 2017 Issue

Daw Mill Colliery Development Ian Grimshaw Proof of Evidence Landscape and Views

10.0 Conclusions 10.1 The appeal site is one which has generally strong enclosure in the local landscape. This is apparent from visiting the site and its environs and is commented on in the published landscape character assessment for the area. The extent of the previously developed land comprising the colliery is difficult to appreciate when outside the site and is discerned only by carefully considering its approximate scale from noting the redundant tall lighting columns on the site.

10.2 The appeal proposals comprise high levels of retention of important boundary and off-site vegetation in the appellants' land ownership together with additional planting and landscape works to bolster this screening. These proposals include additional planting near the existing site entrance and also close to the railway line where space allows.

10.3 I have demonstrated that the appeal proposals generally respond positively to local planning policy and to NPPF where policies are relevant to landscape and views. The appeal site is not in a landscape designated at any level for its importance or distinction from other areas and I consider it to be of community value. My assessment of effects on landscape and on views has not identified any serious adverse effects to be weighed in the planning balance. This is very apparent in relation to the existing baseline where there are areas of existing hard standing and large buildings on the site. I consider that a moderate to minor adverse effect on landscape would arise if the appeal proposals were developed. 10.4 I consider that the existing environment is the appropriate 'baseline' from which to consider effects. However I have considered the effects that would arise if a 'restored' landscape was in place, notwithstanding that there appears no prospect of that being the case. I consider that the adverse effects on landscape would be moderate adverse in that case. 10.5 The high level of enclosure of the site means that there would be no greater than moderate adverse effects on views and it is notable that there are relatively few receptors which would have views of development on the site. In walking rights of way around the site it is clear that some are very infrequently used and some are blocked or not apparent on the ground. 10.6 The site is in the Green Belt. With regard to the landscape and visual aspects of openness, I consider that there would be a slight adverse effect on openness of the Green Belt from the existing situation where there are buildings on the site. There would be a moderate adverse effect in the case of a restored landscape where buildings would have been removed (assuming that scenario to be valid). These effects need to be taken forward to the planning balance considered by Mr Rolinson.

5781.003 Page 89 January 2017 Issue

HEAD OFFICE MARKET GATESHEAD LONDON CORNWALL HARBOROUGH

Genesis Centre, Harborough Innovation Office 26, Gateshead 8 Trinity Street, 4 Park Noweth, Birchwood Science Park, Centre, International Business London, Churchtown, Warrington Airfield Business Park, Centre, SE1 1DB Cury, WA3 7BH Leicester Road, Mulgrave Terrace, Helston Market Harborough Gateshead Cornwall Leicestershire NE8 1AN TR12 7BW LE16 7WB

Tel: 01925 844004 Tel: 01858 383120 Tel: 0191 605 3340 Tel: 020 3096 6050 Tel: 01326 240081 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]