Winchfield Garden Community: Landscape and Visual Appraisal

Prepared on behalf of Gallagher Estates Ltd

June 2017

Prepared on behalf of Gallagher Estates Ltd

Project Ref: 20997/A5

Status: For Issue

Issue/ Rev: -

Date: June 2017

Prepared by: RH/WL

Checked by: MDC

Authorised by: MDC

Barton Willmore LLP

Ref: 20997/A5 Date: June 2017 Status: For Issue

The contents of this document must not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part without the written consent of Barton Willmore LLP.

All Barton Willmore stationery is produced using recycled or FSC paper and vegetation oil based inks.

CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction ...... 1

2.0 Methodology ...... 2

3.0 Site Context ...... 4

4.0 Published Landscape Character ...... 8

5.0 Relevant Policy ...... 13

6.0 Site Appraisal ...... 26

7.0 Opportunities for Development ...... 36

8.0 Review of Hart's 2016 Landscape Capactiy Study ...... 38

9.0 Review of Hart's 2017 Sustainability Appraisal ...... 47

10.0 Review of Murrell Green ...... 50

11.0 Summary and Conclusion ...... 64

ILLUSTRATIVE MATERIAL

Figure 1: Site Context Plan

Figure 2: Topographical Features Plan

Figure 3: Landscape Character Plan

Figure 4: Site Appraisal Plan

Figure 5: Hart Landscape Capacity Study

Figure 6: Murrell Green Site Context Plan

Site Appraisal Photographs A-F

Site Context Photographs 1-12

Winchfield Garden Community Introduction

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Barton Willmore Landscape Planning and Design (BWLPD) were commissioned by Gallagher Estates Ltd to undertake a Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) of land at Winchfield ('the Site') in the context of Hart District Council's Drat Local Plan: Strategy and Site 2011-2032 Regulation 18 Consultation (26 April to 9th June 2017).

1.2 The LVA has included for a review of a number of documents which form the evidence base for the Regulation 18 Consultation, including Hart's Landscape Capacity Study (2016) and Interim Sustainability Appraisal Report (April 2017) which notes in relation to the Site that:

"the topography of the site is suited to development insofar as it may prevent long views into developed areas."

1.3 Whereas the Interim Sustainability Appraisal Report (April 2017) has considered the Site in respect of 3,000 new dwellings, this LVA considers the Site in respect of 1,800 new dwellings, set within a robust landscape strategy and within the red line boundary as illustrated in Figure 1: Site Context Plan.

1.4 As a result of the reduction in the number of dwellings, the Site is comparable in terms of the number of dwellings at Murrell Green, which is included in the Draft Local Plan. The LVA has therefore undertaken a landscape and visual review of Murrell Green to identify whether the inclusion of Murrell Green in the Draft Local Plan is sound and to compare the likely landscape and visual effects between 1,800 dwellings at Murrell Green and Winchfield.

1.5 The LVA should be read in combination with the following illustrative plans and photographic material:

 Figure 1: Site Context Plan  Figure 2: Topographical Features Plan  Figure 3: Landscape Character Plan  Figure 4: Site Appraisal Plan  Figure 5: Hart Landscape Capacity Study  Figure 6: Murrell Green Site Context Plan  Site Appraisal Photographs A-F  Site Context Photographs 1-12

20997/A5 1 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Methodology

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 The Landscape and Visual Appraisal has been prepared with reference to the guidelines as set out in the 'Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd Edition', prepared b y the Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environment Management and Assessment.

2.2 A desktop review of the study area was undertaken, including for a review of the published landscape character information, landform, landscape features, relevant landsca pe and visual policy and landscape designations. This information was used as the initial basis against which to appraise the Site. A visit to the Site and surroundings was subsequently undertaken to verify the desk-based review and add further information to the landscape and visual context of the Site.

2.3 A description of the existing land use of the study area is provided and includes reference to existing areas of settlement, transport routes and vegetation cover, as well as local landscape designations, elements of cultural and heritage value, and local landmarks or tourist destinations. These factors combine to provide an understanding of landscape value and sensitivity and provide an indication of particular key views and viewpoints that are available to visual receptors.

2.4 To determine the extent of visual influence, a visual appraisal was undertaken of the Site to consider the nature of existing views from publicly accessible viewpoints including roads, Public Rights of Way (PRoW) and public open space. Consideration was given to private views, however access to private properties was not obtained. Views were considered from all directions and from a range of distances. The viewpoints chosen are not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to represent the potential views obtained towards the Site in order to identify areas of higher visual sensitivity that may not be best suited for development.

2.5 The sensitivity of the Site is considered in terms of the following:

 Landscape Character: i.e. landform, vegetation cover, land use, scale, state of repair of individual elements, representation of typological character, enclosure pattern, form/line and movement;  Landscape Value: i.e. national designations, local designations, sense of tranquillity/remoteness, scenic beauty and cultural associations; and  Visual Influence: i.e. landform influences, tree and woodland cover, numbers and types of residents, numbers and types of visitors and scope for mitigating potential for visual impacts.

20997/A5 2 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Methodology

2.6 From the above a judgement is made on the sensitivity of the Site in relation to residential development based on a range of low (suitable for development), medium (partially suitable for development) and high (limited opportunities for development). All development is based upon being based upon new dwellings set within a robust landscape framework with the retention of existing woodlands (including ancient woodland).

20997/A5 3 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Context

3.0 SITE CONTEXT

3.1 As demonstrated by Figure 1: Site Context Plan, the Site is consolidated around the existing settlement of Winchfield, extending from the north of the M3 to the Basingstoke Canal. The Site covers 217 hectares.

3.2 The Site is therefore set in the vicinity of the M3 motorway and the main London to Southampton railway, as well as between the settlements of Hook and Fleet, to the west and east of the Site respectively, with Hartley Wintney to the north and Winchfield Hurst to the south-east.

Topography and Hydrology

3.3 Figure 2: Topographical Features Plan demonstrates that the Site is in a low lying position relative to the surrounding landscape, being enclosed from the north, west and south by ridgelines.

3.4 To the east of the Site the landform falls towards the River Hart before rising again to a ridgeline across the west of Fleet.

3.5 The combination of these ridgelines locate the Site within a bowl shaped landform surrounded by higher landform, much of which is well vegetated.

3.6 In relation to the wider landscape the Site is set within a gently undulating plateaux between the River Whitewater valley to the west and the River Hart Valley to the east.

Vegetation

3.7 With reference to Figure 1: Site Context Plan, for the most part the Site is farmland bound by hedgerow vegetation with mature hedgerow trees with localised areas of woodland. To the east of the Site the grassland is noted as a Coastal and Floodplain Grazing Marsh BAP Priority Habitat.

3.8 The western parts of the Site are covered by woodland, notably in the vicinity of Winchfield train station and at Round Copse which is an area of ancient semi-natural woodland. The western part of the Site comprises predominantly broadleaved woodland, whilst the eastern part of the Site comprises for the most part open grassland/heathland and shrub vegetation.

3.9 To the east of the Site lies a Lowland Meadows BAP Priority Habitat approxima tely 50m from the Site boundary. In the wider landscape, the lanes and roads which traverse the area are generally bordered by mature trees and dense hedgerow vegetation with pockets of extensive woodland, notably in the vicinity of Odiham Common.

20997/A5 4 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Context

3.10 There are a number of ancient woodland blocks scattered throughout the landscape, the most extensive of which is at Odiham Wood/Bagwell Shaw.

3.11 Ancient woodlands within the Site are Furzy Moor, Blacklands Copse and Round Copse.

3.12 With reference to Hart District Council's on-line mapping, the northern and central western parts of the Site are part of an Area Tree Preservation Order. Similarly, there are Area Tree Preservation Orders adjacent to Taplins Farm Lane and Vale Farm.

Local Land Use

3.13 Figure 3: Site Appraisal Plan demonstrates that on the higher ground the land use primarily consists of rough pasture and woodland, whilst the lower-lying land predominantly consists of arable farmland.

3.14 The occasional farmstead is located within the Site with Hurst Farm, Wintney Farm and Oakfield Farm.

3.15 There are a number of solar panels in the eastern edge of the Site adjacent to Oakfield Farm, forming part of a larger solar farm bordering the Site. There is also a solar farm to the south - east of the Site. These land uses demonstrate that this landscape is able to accommodate change.

Access and Rights of Way

3.16 As demonstrated by Figure 1: Site Context Plan, 3 Public Rights of Way (PRoW) traverse the Site, including the Three Castle’s Path, a long distance footpath which extends from Windsor Castle to Winchester Castle.

3.17 2 PRoW border the Site boundary, following the course of the existing road network. The Site does not coincide with any Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act or Registered Common land.

3.18 The M3 motorway crosses the northern part of the Site, aligned broadly east-west. The B3016 Odiham Road passes underneath the M3 motorway and flanks the Site to the west, connecting the settlement of Hartley Wintney to Odiham.

3.19 To the east, Taplin’s Farm Lane passes over the M3 and proceeds to pass through the eastern extent of the Site. The eastern extremity of the Site is bordered by Pale Lane which connects to Taplin’s Farm Lane and connects Elvetham with Dogmersfield to the south of the Site.

3.20 A number of smaller lanes pass through the Site, including Station Road, Bagwell Lane and Old Rectory, which connect together the clusters of dwellings with the wider area.

20997/A5 5 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Context

3.21 The main London to Southampton railway line also passes through the Site on an embankment, broadly following the alignment of the M3 motorway and serves Winchfield station. The combination of the high number of trains and that they are situated on an embankment results in them being a notable and frequent feature from within the Site.

3.22 The nearest recognised cycle route, National Route 22, is located approximately 10km to the west of the Site and follows the course of the existing road network near Basingstoke.

Designations

National Designations

3.23 As demonstrated by Figure 1: Site Appraisal Plan, the Site is not subject to any National Landscape Designations. The nearest nationally designated landscape, the South Downs National Park, lies over 10km to the south of the Site.

3.24 Odiham Common with Bagwell Green and Shaw Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) lies adjacent to the south-west boundary of the Site. The Site is not subject to a National Nature Reserve designation.

Local Designations

3.25 The Site is not subject to a local nature reserve designation, however approximately 200m to the north-east of the Site is a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC), located the other side of the M3 motorway and a small section of the south of the Site is part of a SINC.

3.26 The nearest Registered Park and Garden in the vicinity of the Site is Dogmersfield Park (grade II listed), which is located approximately 650m to the south-east.

3.27 There are no Scheduled Ancient Monuments within the boundary of the Site. The nearest is the Roman villa at Lodge Farm, North Warnborough, located approximately 2.2km to the south - west of the Site.

3.28 The Site does not overlap a conservation area however it does lie adjacent to the Church House Farm conservation and the Dogmersfield conservation area, to the north and south-east receptively.

3.29 Listed buildings are scatted throughout the landscape, including 4 grad e II listings within the Site. Immediately adjacent to the Site lies the Church of St Mary’s which is afforded a grade I listing.

3.30 A review of the Flood Map for Planning (Rivers and Sea) indicates that for the most part the Site does not overlap a Zone 2 or Zone 3 flood risk area, with the exception of the south-

20997/A5 6 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Context

western part of the Site in the vicinity of Odiham Common and a small section in the eastern part of the Site adjacent to the River Hart. The Environment Agency’s Risk of Flooding from Surface Water mapping indicates that the majority of the Site is at 'Very Low' risk of flooding. However there are localised areas where the risk ranges from 'Low to High'.

20997/A5 7 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Published Landscape Character

4.0 PUBLISHED LANDSCAPE CHARACTER

4.1 Figure 4: Landscape Character Plan demonstrates that the Site is covered by a number of published landscape character studies.

National

Natural England National Character Area (NCA) Profile 129: Thames Basin Heaths (2014)

4.2 The Site is within NCA 129 which is an extensive area extending between Weybridge and Newbury. Relevant key characteristics of NCA 129 are:

 "20th-century conurbations, including Camberley, sprawl along the Blackwater Valley, with associated roads (including the M3) dissecting heathland and woodland into blocks."

4.3 The Statements of Environmental Opportunity (SEO) include:

 "At a catchment scale, manage and create woodlands, highway verges, field margins, reedbeds and other features in urban and rural settings to intercept run-off and to filter pollutants. In the heavily developed flood plains of the Blackwater and Thames, adapt the urban environment to manage floodwaters, and restore or enhance modified watercourses (SEO 1); and  provide good-quality green infrastructure(incorporating commons, woodlands and restored gravel pits) to facilitate people’s sustainable engagement with the local landscape. In doing so, also seek benefits for wildlife, water quality, flood amelioration and climate regulation SEO 4)."

County

Hampshire County Council Landscape Character Areas (May 2012)

1b North East Hampshire Plantations and Heath Landscape Character Area (LCA)

4.4 The northern part of the Site (north of the railway line) is within this character area, for which the relevant characteristics are:

 “Gently undulating landscape of plateau areas dissected by river valleys; and  Enclosed often intimate character with limited outward views and a sense of remoteness and seclusion despite proximity to populated areas.”

20997/A5 8 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Published Landscape Character

2c Loddon Valley and Western Forest of Eversley LCA

4.5 The southern part of the Site (south of the railway line) is within this character area, for which the relevant key characteristics are:

 “Low lying gently undulating landscape divided on a north- south axis by the shallow, broad valley of the River Loddon;  Distant views of continuous plantation woodland on elevated sand and gravel plateau in adjoining character areas to the east and west;  Thick hedges often with banks and ditches and many ancient trees; and  High voltage power lines stride through the landscape.”

Hampshire County Council Landscape Character Types (2010)

Lowland Mosaic Heath Associated Landscape Character Type (LCT)

4.6 This covers the north-west part of the Site, to the north and south of the M3 and is noted as primarily being associated with mixed farmland and woodland within Hart.

4.7 The key characteristics include:

 "Typically, grazed pasture small enclosures, in well wooded settings closely linked with adjoining heath and common land…;  Widespread horse grazing and urban fringe uses…; and  Associated with 19th and 20th century conifer plantations."

Lowland Mosaic Medium Scale LCT

4.8 This covers part of the central part of the Site, to the immediate north of the railway line and the southern part of the Site, to the south of the railway line and is primarily associated with large scale mixed farmland and woodland in Hart.

4.9 The key characteristics include:

 "Large Ancient woodlands, blocky shaped woodland and thick hedgerows; and  Surprising sense of remoteness as often close to large centres of population."

4.10 In relation to landform and elevation the published study notes the LCT is:

"Locally low lying, gently undulating, the higher ground reflects where sand and gravel outcrops in the landscape. There is always higher land surrounding these LCTs."

20997/A5 9 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Published Landscape Character

4.11 In relation to visibility the published study notes in relation to 'Prominency' that the LCT is one of:

"Low lying with high proportion of woodland cover makes this LCT of low visibility from within the type. However being lower than much of the surrounding land, the adjoining fringes are often very visible from external vantage points."

4.12 In relation to 'Enclosure' the published study notes:

"Often situated in close proximity to large settlements, and often closest countryside where it is possible to feel visually detached from built up areas – particularly where this LCT occurs north of the Solent and south of the Blackwater conurbations."

River Valley Floor LCT

4.13 This covers the eastern edge of the Site and is note primarily as floodplain farmland.

4.14 The key characteristics include:

 "Pasture dominated landscape with field boundaries often orientated to maximise accessibility to the water’s edge."

District

Hart District Landscape Assessment (1997)

Landscape Character Area 9: Winchfield

4.15 This character area covers the northern and central parts of the Site and t he main distinguishing features are:

 “A mosaic of farmland and woodland which contain strong healthy characteristics (e.g. with birch, pine, bracken and gorse evident in hedgerows and woods) to the south but which are absent from farmland to the north-east;  A moderately enclosed landscape except for the area to the east of Winchfield which has a denuded and exposed character; and  An area fragmented and bounded by roads (including the M3 motorway, the A30, the A323 and the B3016) and the railway line, which intrude upon its essentially rural character.”

4.16 The enhancement priorities for HLCA LCA 9: Winchfield are based on the quality of the mixed farmland and woodland being generally good but compromised in places by the visual intrusion and severance caused by roads and overhead power lines and by a loss of landscape features

20997/A5 10 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Published Landscape Character

resulting from agricultural intensification. The enhancement prioritise considered relevant to the Site are the:

 “Management of existing woodlands, hedgerows and trees;  the new planting of woods, hedgerows and trees around the fringes of settlements and along road corridors; and  the replacement of woods, hedgerows and trees within denuded areas of open countryside.”

LCA 10: Dogmersfield

4.17 The southern part of the Site is covered by HLCA LCA 10: Dogmersfield, for which the relevant key characteristics are:

 “A patchwork of mixed farmland and scattered blocks of woodland (including several remnants of ancient semi- natural woodland);  The strong landscape structure of woods and hedgerows which provide a backdrop to open fields and contain views; and  That the Basingstoke Canal is attractively wooded along much of its length.”

4.18 The landscape of LCA 10: Dogmersfield is considered to be varied and generally of a high quality and visual appeal. The enhancement priorities conside red relevant to the Site are the:

 “Management of existing woodlands, hedgerows and trees to secure their long-term presence within the landscape;  New planting of broadleaved woodlands, hedgerows and trees to reinforce the patchwork of wooded farmland and to minimise the impacts of main roads and traffic.”

LCA 11: Hart Valley

4.19 Part of the eastern edge of the Site is covered by HLCA LCA 11: Hart Valley, which is described as a:

 “Mixed landscape which lacks overall cohesion but which has common, unifying elements, notably the river and its immediate floodplain and a general pattern of mixed farmland and woodland.”

4.20 The enhancement priorities for LCA 11: Hart Valley considered relevant to the WCG are the:

 “Management of existing woodlands, hedgerows and trees to secure their long-term presence within the landscape and maximise their landscape and ecological value and the new planting of woods, hedgerows and trees to form a stronger landscape structure in denuded valley side areas, around the urban fringes and where roads or power lines

20997/A5 11 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Published Landscape Character

cross the valley, to minimise their intrusion on the valley landscape and where possible the creation of a more diverse range of wetland habitats within the valley floor, including wet grassland, seasonally flooded areas, marshes and wet woodland.”

20997/A5 12 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

5.0 RELEVANT POLICY

National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

5.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), sets out the Government’s planning policies for England. Twelve core planning principles, set out in Paragraph 17, underpin decision- making. Relevant principles state that planning should:

 “always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings;  take account of the different roles and character of different areas, promoting the vitality of our main urban areas, protecting the Green Belts around them, recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and supporting thriving rural communities within it;  contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment and reducing pollution. Allocations of land for development should prefer land of lesser environmental value, where consistent with other policies in this Framework;  promote mixed sue developments, and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas, recognising that some open land can perform many functions (such as wildlife, recreation, flood risk mitigation, carbon storage, or food production).”

5.2 NPPF Paragraph 58 states that planning policies and decisions should aim to ensure that proposals:

 “will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development;  establish a strong sense of place, using streetscapes and buildings to create attractive and comfortable places to live, work and visit…;  respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation…;  are visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscape…”

5.3 This is followed by NPPF Paragraph 60 which states that:

“Planning policies and decisions should not attempt to impose architectural styles of particular tastes and they should not stifle innovation, originality or initiative through unsubstantiated requirements to conform to certain development forms or styles. It is, however, proper to seek to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness.”

20997/A5 13 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

5.4 Paragraph 64 goes on to state:

“Permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions.”

5.5 In relation to conserving and enhancing the natural environment, NPPF Paragraph 109 notes that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued landscapes. This is followed by Paragraph 110 which states:

“in preparing plans to meet development needs, the aim should be to minimise pollution and other adverse effects on the local and natural environment. Plans should allocate land with the least environmental or amenity value, where consistent with other policies in this Framework.”

5.6 NPPF Paragraph 114 requires planning authorities to plan positively for the creation, protection, enhancement and management of networks of biodiversity and green infrastructure.

5.7 NPPF paragraph 182 requires a plan for examination to be "sound", in that it is positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with natio nal policy.

Hart District Local Plan (Replacement)

5.8 The Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996 – 2006 was adopted in 2002, with the first alterations to the plan adopted in 2006. In 2007 the council received a direction from the Secretary of State to save specific policies from the initial local plan. In 2009 the council received a second direction relating to saving the policies of the first alteration also, in accordance with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The Core Strategy 2011 – 2029 was withdrawn in 2013, therefore the saved policies of the Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996 – 2006 apply. Those saved policies of most relevance to this landscape and visual impact assessment are detailed below.

5.9 The overarching policy with regards to development within the district is set out in GEN 1 which states:

“Proposals for development which accord with other proposals of this plan will be permitted where they:

Are in keeping with the local character by virtue of their scale, design, massing, height, prominence, materials, layout, landscaping, siting and density;

Avoid any material loss of amenity to existing and adjoining residential, commercial, recreational, agricultural or forestry

20997/A5 14 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

uses, by virtue of noise, disturbance, noxious fumes, dust, pollution or traffic generation;

Cause no material loss of amenity to adjoining residential uses, through loss of privacy, overlooking or the creation of shared facilities;

Do not constitute ribbon or sporadic development, unrelated to existing patterns of settlement within the District;

Include provision for the conservation or enhancement of the District’s landscape, ecology and historic heritage and natural resources…;

…avoid the installation of lighting, which is visually damaging to the character of the area.”

5.10 GEN 3 sets out the policy framework with regards to landscape character areas, stating:

“Within the landscape character areas…development will be permitted if it does not adversely affect the particular character of the landscape, and is in accordance with other policies of this plan.”

5.11 A high quality of design for development proposals is advocated in GEN 4 stating:

“Development proposals will be permitted where they sustain or improve the urban design qualities of towns, villages and other settlements which derive from their layout and form, scale, character or appearance, special features, or the arrangement, scale and design of buildings and spaces.”

5.12 CON 7 concerns development in the vicinity of river corridors and waterbodies. It states:

“Development proposals which would have a significant adverse effect on the nature conservation, landscape or recreational value of riverine environments (which include those of the rivers Hart, Whitewater and Blackwater), wetlands and ponds will not be permitted.”

5.13 Development which affects trees, woodland and hedgerows is considered in Policy CON 8:

“Where development is proposed which would affect trees, woodlands or hedgerows of significant landscape or amenity value planning permission will only be granted if these features are shown to be capable of being retained in the longer term or if removal is necessary new planting is undertaken to maintain the value of these features. Planning conditions may be imposed to require the planting of new trees or hedgerows to replace those lost.”

20997/A5 15 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

5.14 Policy CON 12 sets out the policy framework with regards to historic parks and gardens, stating:

“Development that would adversely affect historic parks and gardens or their settings, will not be permitted.”

5.15 CON 13 sets out the general policy with regards to conservation areas. It states:

“Proposals for development which fail to meet the objectives of conserving or enhancing the character of appearance of a designated conservation area will not be permitted.”

5.16 The setting of settlements and recreation facilities are considered in Policy CON 22 which states:

“Development which would adversely affect the character or setting of a settlement, or lead to the loss of important areas of the development of open land around settlements, will not be permitted where it would:

i) Obscure typical views of the settlement from public vantage points; ii) Obstruct significant public views our[sic] of the settlement; iii) Result in the loss of ‘green fingers’ important to the structure and amenity of the settlement; or iv) Otherwise have a serious adverse effect on the character or setting of the settlement.”

5.17 Proposed developments which have the potential to affect PRoW are considered in Policy CON 23, stating:

“Development will not be permitted which would seriously detract from the amenity and consequent recreational value of well-used footpaths and other public rights of way in the countryside close to main settlements by reducing their character or detracting from significant views.”

5.18 Regarding development in the countryside, RUR 2 states:

“Development in the open countryside, outside the defined settlement boundaries, will not be permitted unless the local planning authority is satisfied that it is specifically provided for by other policies in the local plan, and that it does not have a significant detrimental effect on the character and setting of the countryside by virtue of its siting, size and prominence in the landscape.”

5.19 This policy is supported by RUR 3 which states:

“Developments which are provided for by other policies in this plan, will be permitted where:

20997/A5 16 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

The countryside is protected and maintained through the retention, creation or enhancement of features of nature conservation or landscape importance;

v) "Any existing buildings or structures can be retained if of architectural quality; vi) The site is satisfactorily landscaped to reduce its impact on the surrounding countryside; vii) The criteria of the specific Policy by which the development proposed may be permitted are also met.”

5.20 Housing developments within rural settlements are considered in Policy RUR 20, stating:

“Within the settlements boundaries of the rural settlements, small scale housing development will be permitted, provided that:

viii) The density, scale and design are not harmful to the character of the surrounding properties; ix) The development does not result in the loss of an important area of open land, or gap in a frontage, which contributes to the character and setting of the settlement; x) The proposal does not result in the loss of any natural feature considered worthy of retention; xi) The proposal provides a reasonable mix of dwelling types and sizes where appropriate, reflecting the current needs of the area.”

5.21 Additional residential development criteria is set out in Policy URB 12, which although not explicitly related to the Site, provides generic information which would be of relevance:

 “Within the main settlement boundaries, and on other sites specifically allocated in this plan, residential development will be permitted, provided that:

xii) The proposal is sympathetic in scale, design, massing, height, layout, siting and density both in itself and in relation to adjoining buildings, spaces and views and makes optimum use of the site at densities commensurate with good innovative design in relation to site characteristics…; xiii) The proposal does not result in the loss of any local feature of note, such as trees, hedgerows protected under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997 (SI No. 1160) and views; xiv) The proposal provides a reasonable mix of dwelling types and sizes where appropriate, reflecting the current housing needs of the area with the emphasis on smaller units to reflect the trend towards small household; xv) The proposal does not result in material loss of amenity to adjoining residents; xvi) The proposal does not result in the loss of land in lawful use or with lawful use rights for business (B1) or industry (B2) uses other than in the circumstances of Policy URB 7.”

20997/A5 17 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

Hart District Council Draft Hart Local Plan: Strategy and Sites 2011-2032 Regulation 18 Consultation - April 2017

5.22 The Draft Local Plan sets out how development will be planned and delivered across the District to 2032. It sets out the vision and strategy as the basis for growth within the District.

5.23 Key issues for the District include:

"1) To make provision for the new homes needed in the area…;

3) To facilitate sustainable economic growth in the context of the wider Enterprise M3 Local Economic Partnership area, and the Functional Economic Area within which Hart sits, and the need to provide for healthy town, District and local centres to serve the needs of residents;

6) To deliver development where possible, which respects the separate character and identity of Hart’s settlements and landscapes;

7) For development to be well-designed, creating safe, inclusive and cohesive environments where new housing is successfully integrated with existing communities;

8) To promote and improve sustainable transport particularly given the relative lack of sustainable transport options in what is a largely rural area, the pressure on highway infrastructure including the M3 motorway and its junctions in Hart (4a and 5) and a railway network at capacity at peak periods;

9) To deal with climate change both in terms of mitigation and adaptation;

12) To protect and enhance biodiversity including the protection of sites designated for their ecological importance. This includes the need to ensure that new development does not adversely affect the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBH SPA);

13) To protect and enhance the District’s green infrastructure; and

14) To conserve and enhance the District’s heritage assets and their settings."

5.24 The Vision includes:

"…The priority will have been given to the effective use of previously developed land (‘brownfield land’) so that ‘greenfield’ development will have been limited, albeit that the scale of new

20997/A5 18 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

housing planned will undoubtedly have had an impact on the size and nature of our present communities. Some villages will have grown substantially…

…All new developments will have been built to a high level of environmental and design standards, respecting local character and distinctiveness and providing measures to adapt to and mitigate the impacts of climate change. The coalescence of settlements will have been avoided through the protection of designated ‘Gaps’.

The character, quality and diversity of our natural, built and heritage assets will have been protected, and where possible enhanced. These assets include the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBHSPA), Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and other protected habitats, such as the Basingstoke Canal…"

5.25 The Local Plan Objective to link between the Vision and the Plan proposals include:

"1) To plan for sufficient land to be available for 10,185 new homes to be built in the District in the period 2011 – 2032…;

8) To conserve and enhance the distinctive built and historic environment in the District including the protection of heritage assets and their settings;

10) To protect and enhance the District’s natural environment, including landscape character, water resources and biodiversity, including ensuring appropriate mitigation is in place for new development to avoid any adverse impacts on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBHSPA);

12) To promote healthy and sustainable local communities through protecting and enhancing community, sport, cultural, recreation and leisure facilities, and through the delivery of a multi-functional green infrastructure network across the District;

13) To ensure new development is well designed creating safe, inclusive environments and taking account of character, local distinctiveness and sustainable design principles; and

14) To provide measures for adapting to the impacts of climate change and reduce the contribution of new and existing development to the causes of climate change including more efficient use of energy and natural resources and increased use of renewable low carbon energy infrastructure."

5.26 Figure 5: The spatial Strategy identifies the 'Gap between settlements' between Hartley Wintney and Hook.

20997/A5 19 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

5.27 In respect of 'Greenfield Land' the Plan states:

"The evidence is that not all of our need for new homes can be met through ‘brownfield’ sites alone. Other options are needed as well. Inevitably these will be on ‘greenfield’ sites adjacent to existing settlements."

5.28 New settlements options include:

"The options for the delivery of a new settlement have been explored and these include Murrell Green, the area around Winchfield Station, Lodge Farm, and Rye Common. The two best performing opportunities are Murrell Green (up 1,800 new homes), or a 3,000 new home settlement (up to 2,200 new homes within the Local Plan period) centred on the area around Winchfield Station."

5.29 For development in the countryside, the aim of the local pla n is to:

"to protect the countryside for its own sake. The intention is to maintain the existing open nature of the countryside, prevent the coalescence of settlements and resist the encroachment of inappropriate development into rural areas. The countryside is therefore subject to a more restrictive policy in recognition of its intrinsic character and beauty.

Through this local plan we want to encourage a flexible approach to support necessary development that is of a suitable scale and is designed to fit into its landscape.

We will ensure that there is good reason to site new development in the countryside, and will not permit development that would be better situated in an urban location or that contributes little to the benefit of the countryside, or where the benefits to the countryside are greatly outweighed by the harm."

5.30 In relation to Gaps between Settlements, their design intention is to ensure that a:

"sense of place is maintained for both those individual communities and for those travelling through the defined Gaps".

5.31 Policy MG6 states:

"Policy MG6: Gaps between Settlements

Development in Gaps will only be supported where:

a) it would not diminish the physical and/or visual separation of settlements; and

20997/A5 20 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

b) it would not compromise the integrity of the Gap either individually or cumulatively with other existing or proposed development."

5.32 Developments within 5 to 7 kilometres of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area, may be required to provide or contribute to an amount of SANG; however as out lined in Policy NE1: Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area, this will be assessed on a case by case basis.

5.33 Policy NE2 Landscape states:

"Policy NE2: Landscape

Development proposals must respect and wherever possible enhance the special characteristics, value or visual amenity of the District’s landscape.

Development proposals will be supported where there will be no detriment to:

a) the particular qualities identified within the Council’s landscape character assessment and subsequent updates or relevant guidance;

b) the visual amenity and scenic quality of the landscape;

c) historic landscapes, parks, gardens and features; and

d) important local, natural and historic features such as trees, woodlands, hedgerows, water features e.g. rivers and other landscape features and their function as ecological networks.

An assessment of the character and visual quality should be carried out proportionate to the scale and nature of the development proposed, and where appropriate, proposals will be required to include a comprehensive landscaping scheme to ensure that the development would successfully integrate with the landscape and surroundings."

5.34 The supporting text includes for any new development being in keeping with the character of the local landscape in terms of its location, siting and design.

5.35 Policy NE3: Biodiversity and Geodiversity states that development proposals will be supported where significant harm to biodiversity is either avoided or adequately mitigated and specifically where there will be no:

"a) adverse impact on the conservation status of key species;

20997/A5 21 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

b) adverse impact on the integrity of designated and proposed European designated sites;

c) harm to nationally designated sites;

d) harm to locally designated sites including Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) and Local Nature Reserves (LNRs);

e) loss or deterioration of a key habitat type, including irreplaceable habitats; and

f) harm to the integrity of linkages between designated sites and key habitats."

5.36 Policy BE2: Design is to ensure that a good standard of design is achieved, and that the distinctive qualities of our towns and villages will be reflected in new development and states:

"All developments should seek to achieve a high quality design and positively contribute to the overall appearance of the local area.

Development will be supported where it would meet all of the following criteria:

a) it promotes, reflects and incorporates the distinctive qualities of its surroundings in terms of the proposed scale, density, mass and height of development, and choice of building materials. Innovative building designs will be supported provided that they are sensitive to their surroundings and help to improve the quality of the townscape or landscape;

b) it provides or positively contributes to public spaces and routes that are attractive, safe and inclusive for all users, including families, disabled people and the elderly;

c) the layout of new buildings reinforces any locally distinctive street patterns, responds to climate change, and enhances permeability by facilitating access by walking or cycling modes;

d) it respects local landscape character and sympathetically incorporates any on-site or adjoining landscape features such as trees and hedgerows, and respects or enhances views into and out of the site;

e) it protects or enhances any surrounding heritage assets, including their settings;

f) it includes sufficient well-designed facilities/areas for parking (including bicycle storage) taking account of the need for good access for all users;

20997/A5 22 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

g) the design of external spaces (such as highways, parking areas, gardens and areas of open space) facilitates the safe use of these areas by future residents, service providers or visitors, according to their intended function;

h) the future maintenance and servicing requirements of buildings and public spaces have been considered, including the storage and collection of waste and recycling;

i) it reduces energy consumption through sustainable approaches to building design and layout, such as through the use of low-impact materials and high energy efficiency; and

j) it incorporates renewable."

5.37 Policy 12: Green Infrastructure states:

"Development will be supported provided that:

a) It protects and where possible enhances the green infrastructure network;

b) Any adverse impacts on the green infrastructure network are fully mitigated through the provision of green infrastructure on site or, where this is not possible, through appropriate off-site compensatory measures; and

c) Where new green infrastructure is provided with new development, suitable arrangements are put in place for its future maintenance and management.

Development proposals that would result in the loss of green infrastructure will only be supported if an appropriate replacement is provided that is of equivalent or better value in terms of quantity, quality and accessibility."

5.38 Policy 14: Open space, sport and recreation includes:

"Development proposals will be supported where they:

a) protect the existing open space network, sports and recreation facilities (including built facilities); and

b) enhance and improve the quality, capacity, accessibility and management of sports and recreation facilities (including built facilities) and the open space network within the District…"

20997/A5 23 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA), 2016

5.39 This identifies potential land that might be available and assesses the suitability, availability and achievability of sites with a realistic potential of being developed with the southern and eastern parts of the Site being covered by SHL183 Winchfield Meadow, Winchfield, with the supporting text stating:

"There are no significant market, cost or delivery factors have been identified, development at this site is considered to be economically viable, therefore the site is considered to be achievable."

Winchfield Neighbourhood Development Plan 2015 - 2032 (WNDP)

5.40 The WNDP forms part of the development plan, following Council meetings in March 2017 and the identified challenges are:

1) "Inappropriately sized or located or designed development not in keeping with the size and scale of the village. Winchfield currently comprises 242 houses with residents totalling c.660, with a village that has grown through sensitive and well-designed development; 2) Risk of coalescence e.g. losing the green space separation between the existing Winchfield village settlements and the local gaps between adjoining villages and towns. Our neighbouring parishes share this concern; 3) How to continue to respect the heritage of Winchfield alongside sustainable development. Winchfield is mentioned in the Domesday Book and is one of the best preserved Norman settlements in Hampshire – we have a duty to protect this; 4) Losing the natural green landscape valued by residents and visitors for varied recreational activities and the farmed landscape in Winchfield. How to protect this tranquil amenity (open countryside, footpaths, bridleways and canal walks) for the benefit of Hart residents whilst accommodating sustainable development; and 5) To retain and preserve the tree-lined narrow lanes whilst accommodating increased road usage in Winchfield and the surrounding villages. The 12th century lane patterns remain to this day."

5.41 The Winchfield 2032 Vision recognises that it needs to "play its part" in meeting the Districts housing requirement and the Vision is that it:

"remains a rural village still with its own unique character and ambience. It has succeeded in accommodating its share of new housing development in a way that complements both its built heritage and its natural topography and history."

5.42 A number of policies outline the planning considerations for new development:

20997/A5 24 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Relevant Policy

 Objective A - Housing (relating to size and location, height and type of housing, design and density);  Objective B - Character of the village (relating to rural look and feel and light pollution);  Objective C - Conservation;  Objective D - History; and  Objective E - Roads.

5.43 Within Objective A - Housing, Policy A1 includes for respecting existing local gaps.

5.44 Within Objective B - Character of the village a number of viewpoint locations from the Basingstoke Canal are identified, a number of which border the Site, with the supporting Policy text stating:

"1. Development should not result in a loss of, or harm to, the significant views from the canal as identified on the map within this policy.

2. Hedgerows, mature trees (individual or copses) and ancient woodland are valued and should be preserved and retained as part of otherwise acceptable new developments."

5.45 Significant views are also identified from adjacent to the PRoW routes crossing the Site.

20997/A5 25 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Appraisal

6.0 SITE APPRAISAL

6.1 BWLPD have undertaken detailed field work across the Site and within the surrounding landscape to provide a finer grain of detail to the published landscape character assessments.

Landscape

6.2 Figure 5: Site Appraisal Plan illustrates the Site, which has been divided into a number of Parcels (A-J) in relation to differing landscape or visual characteristics.

Parcel A

6.3 Parcel A forms the northern edge of the Site, located to the north of the M3 a nd consists of an agricultural field and mature woodland (Mabs Copse) and a number of mature individual trees, as illustrated by Site Appraisal Photograph A. Parcel A is also part of an Area Tree Preservation Order.

6.4 To the west of Parcel A is Winchfield House, set within mature wooded grounds, to the north is recently completed development forming part of the southern extension of Hartley Wintney and to the east is Taplin's Farm and PRoW 16.

6.5 The landform within Parcel A rises gradually from east to west and whilst the land use results in an open character, Mabs Copse encloses Parcel A in relation to the Winchfield House.

6.6 There is a localised high degree of inter-visibility with vehicles on the M3 and the railway line along with associated audibility. There is also inter-visibility with recently constructed residential properties on the southern edge of Hartley Wintney.

6.7 The Landscape Character of Parcel A therefore consists of rising landform, with the elements appearing to be in fair condition. The agricultural land use and woodland block are both representative of landscape features found in the surrounding area and can be considered common place. The woodland provides enclosure to Winchfield House.

6.8 Parcel A is not covered by any landscape designations, nor is there any sense of tranquillity due to the proximity to the M3. Whilst there is no scenic beauty to Parcel A as it is a common place landscape, there is a parkland character to the landscape as a result of the individual mater trees. Parcel A is also located adjacent to the recent extension of Hartley Wintney and therefore has a relationship to this, whereby development within Parcel A would likely give rise to the perceived extension of Hartley Wintney.

6.9 Visually, Parcel A is well enclosed in relation to the wider landscape due to Mabs Copse and the undulating landscape to the east of the Parcel. There are close range views from PRoW 16

20997/A5 26 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Appraisal

and residential properties forming the southern edge of Hartley Wintney; although the extent of these views are truncated by Mabs Copse and intervening vegetation.

6.10 The sensitivity of Parcel A is therefore assessed as Medium / High.

Parcel B

6.11 Parcel B forms part of the western edge of the Site, being located between the M3 and the railway line, with localised inter visibility and audibility with vehicles and trains, as well as residential development on the southern edge of Hartley Wintney.

6.12 The land use is characterised by fields and horse paddocks separated by hedgerows and mature trees, along with a substantial area of mature woodland at the western edge of Parcel B. Oak Farm Nursey is located within the southern part of Parcel B and includes built form and associated horticultural land uses.

6.13 The landform across Parcel B is undulating as illustrated by Site Appraisal Photograph B, rising gradually to the western edge, forming part of Shapley Hill. The Parcel is also part of an Area Tree Preservation Order.

6.14 There are open to partial views across Parcel B from PRoW 8 which forms the eastern boundary to the parcel.

6.15 The Landscape Character of Parcel B therefore consists of an undulating landform, with the landscape features appearing to be in fair condition. The agricultural land use and woodland block are both representative of landscape features found in the surrounding area and can be considered common place. The woodland provides enclosure to the Site in respect of the wider landscape to the west.

6.16 Parcel B is not covered by any national landscape designation. Part of the mature woodland is ancient woodland. There is no sense of tranquillity due to the proximity to the M3 and associated inter-visibility. Similarly there is no scenic beauty to the Parcel as it is a common place landscape.

6.17 Visually, Parcel B is generally well enclosed, although there are close range views from the PRoW 3, but the extent of views are truncated by the woodland in the western part of Parcel B.

6.18 The sensitivity of Parcel B is therefore assessed as Low/Medium.

20997/A5 27 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Appraisal

Parcel C

6.19 Parcel C is located centrally between the M3 and the railway line and consists of a larg e scale agricultural field with scrub and intermittent trees in the south.

6.20 Parcel C is crossed by PRoW 3 which follows the alignment of the hedgerow dividing it from Parcel B.

6.21 The landform rises sharply from PRoW 3 to a localised elevation at the western edge of Parcel C, before falling gradually eastwards to Taplin's Farm Lane. This localised elevation screens largely truncates views from PRoW 3 cross Parcel C, as demonstrated by Site Appraisal Photograph C.

6.22 Parcel C is crossed by large scale overhead pylons which extend north to south across the landscape. There is localised inter visibility with vehicles and trains and associated audibility.

6.23 The Landscape Character of Parcel C therefore consists of an undulating landform, with the elements appearing to be in fair condition. The agricultural land use is representative of landscape features found in the surrounding area and can be considered common place. The railway embankment aids in enclosing the Parcel from the wider landscape to the south.

6.24 Parcel C is not covered by any national landscape designation. There is no sense of tranquillity due to the proximity to the M3 and associated inter-visibility. Similarly there is no scenic beauty to the Parcel as it is a common place landscape.

6.25 Visually, Parcel C is generally well enclosed, although there are close range views from PRoW 3 and views from elevated land to the north of the M3.

6.26 The sensitivity of Parcel C is therefore assessed as Low.

Parcel D

6.27 Parcel D is located at the eastern edge of Site and consists of small scale fields divided by hedgerows and narrow watercourses (drains) between Wintney Farm and Oakfield Farm.

6.28 The landform across Parcel D is generally flat, and in combination with the vegetation provides a high degree of enclosure, with only localised inter-visibility with the railway and Taplin's Lane Farm.

6.29 The eastern edge of Parcel D consists of solar panels, forming part of a sola r farm to the east of Parcel D.

20997/A5 28 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Appraisal

6.30 The Landscape Character of Parcel D therefore consists of a flat landform, with the elements appearing to be in fair condition. The agricultural land use is representative of landscape features found in the surrounding area and can be considered common place. The vegetation patterns and railway embankment enclose the Site from the wider landscape overall.

6.31 Parcel D is not covered by any national landscape designation. There is no sense of tranquillity due to the proximity to the railway line and associated inter-visibility with solar panels. Similarly there is no scenic beauty to the Parcel as it is a common place landscape.

6.32 Visually, Parcel D is generally well enclosed, although there are close range views from the railway and adjoining farms.

6.33 The sensitivity of Parcel D is therefore assessed as Low / Medium.

Parcel E

6.34 Parcel E is located to the south of Winchfield's existing settlement pattern and consists of a large field extending from Station Road and with ancient woodland (Furzy Moor) at the western edge.

6.35 The landform across Parcel E is flat, as illustrated by Site Appraisal Photograph D, with the Parcel being enclosed by tree belts bordering the existing settlement pattern to the north and Tudor Farm to the south.

6.36 There is localised inter-visibility between Parcel E and residential properties adjacent to Station Road and Tudor Farm.

6.37 The Landscape Character of Parcel E therefore consists of a flat landform, with the elements appearing to be in fair condition. The agricultural land use is representative of landscape features found in the surrounding area and can be considered common place.

6.38 Parcel E is not covered by any national landscape designation. Fuzy Moor is ancient woodland. There is a very limited sense of tranquillity due to the proximity to residential properties adjacent to Station Road. Similarly there is no scenic beauty to the Parcel as it is a common place landscape.

6.39 Visually, Parcel E is generally well enclosed, although there are close range views from the road network and residential properties.

6.40 The sensitivity of Parcel E is therefore assessed as Low / Medium.

20997/A5 29 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Appraisal

Parcel F

6.41 Parcel F is located to the south of the railway embankment and extends around Vale Farm to Station Road. The landform across Parcel F is gently undulating with lower lying land in the eastern part of the parcel, associated with field drains.

6.42 The majority of Parcel F consists of a large scale field, which is open in character and crossed by overhead power lines. The eastern part of Parcel F consists of smaller field parcels separated by hedgerows and mature trees.

6.43 Parcel F encloses Vale Farm, a Listed Building. The group of trees to the north-east of Vale Farm and adjacent to Taplin;s Lane Farm road are covered by an Area Tree Preservation Order.

6.44 There is indivisibility and associated audibility with trains, which are highly visible has a result of being an embankment and that Parcel F is predominantly open in character.

6.45 Parcel F is in a low lying position overall in relation to the surrounding landscape and enclosed by existing vegetation patterns to the south and the railway embankment to the north.

6.46 Therefore, while there is a coherent agricultural land use across Parcel F, the rural character is fragmented by the engineered railway embankment and pylons.

6.47 The Landscape Character of Parcel F therefore consists of a gently undulating landform, with the elements appearing to be in fair condition. The agricultural land use is representative of landscape features found in the surrounding area and can be considered common place.

6.48 Parcel F is not covered by any national landscape designation, although encloses a Listed Building. There is a very limited sense of tranquillity due to the proximity to the railway embankment and inter-visibility with vehicles on Station Road. Similarly there is no scenic beauty to the Parcel as it is a common place landscape dominated by overhead power lines and the railway embankment.

6.49 Visually, Parcel F is well enclosed in relation to the landscape to the north as a result of the railway embankment and similarly in relation to views from the west and east due to the existing vegetation patterns. There is increased inter-visibility with the fields to the south of Station Road (forming the southern part of the Site) and Winchfield Hurst, however longer distance views are truncated by the vegetation bordering the Basingstoke Canal and wooded rising landform to the south of the canal.

6.50 The sensitivity of Parcel F is therefore assessed as Low / Medium.

20997/A5 30 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Appraisal

Parcel G

6.51 Parcel G is located at the eastern edge of the Site and consists of flat , large scale agricultural fields, between the railway line and Pale Lane as illustrated by Site Appraisal Photograph E.

6.52 Parcel G is well enclosed from the wider landscape as a result of the railway embankment the generally flat landform extending to the east and south of the Parcel. The extent of vegetation bordering Pale Lane is varied, resulting in varying level of inter-visibility between Pale Lane and Parcel G. There is localised inter-visibility with Taplin's Farm Lane.

6.53 The Landscape Character of Parcel G therefore consists of a flat landform, with the elements appearing to be in fair condition. The agricultural land use is representative of landscape features found in the surrounding area and can be considered common place.

6.54 Parcel G is not covered by any national landscape designation. There is a very limited sense of tranquillity due to the proximity to the railway embankment and inter-visibility with vehicles on Pale Lane. Similarly there is no scenic beauty to the Parcel as it is a common place landscape. In relation to the surrounding settlement patterns, development within Parcel G could be perceived as extending the settlement pattern closer to Fleet.

6.55 Visually, Parcel G is generally well enclosed, although there are close range views from the road network and residential properties.

6.56 The sensitivity of Parcel G is therefore assessed as Low / Medium.

Parcel H

6.57 Parcel H consists of 2 small scale fields in a triangular form adjacent to Hurst Farm (which includes a Listed Building) and bordered in part by Taplin's Farm Land and Station Road. The fields are open in character and flat and bordered by mature vegetation.

6.58 The adjoining built form includes agricultural sheds and black timber barns with red clay tile roofs, which is considered to make them a distinctive features within the landscape.

6.59 There is localised inter-visibility with the surrounding road network and the northern edge of Winchfield Hurst.

6.60 The Landscape Character of Parcel H therefore consists of a flat landform and small scale field parcels, with the elements appearing to be in fair condition. The agricult ural land use is representative of landscape features found in the surrounding area and can be considered common place.

20997/A5 31 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Appraisal

6.61 Parcel H is not covered by any national landscape designation, although borders built form which is considered to be notable in relation to the surrounding area.

6.62 There is a very limited sense of tranquillity due to the proximity to the existing built form and road networks. Similarly there is no scenic beauty to the Parcel as it is a common place landscape.

6.63 Visually, Parcel H is generally well enclosed in relation to the wider landscape, although there are close range views from road networks and residential properties .

6.64 The sensitivity of Parcel H is therefore assessed as Medium.

Parcel I

6.65 Parcel I consists of a triangular area of ancient woodland (Blackland Copse) adjacent to Station Road.

6.66 As the Parcel is ancient woodland its sensitivity is assessed as High.

Parcel J

6.67 Parcel J forms the southern part of the Site, extending from Station Road to the Basingstoke Canal.

6.68 The land use consists of irregular large scale fields in the central and eastern part of the Parcel, with smaller scale fields in the western part. The western part of the Parcel is also crossed by PRoW 5 and 6.

6.69 There are narrow tree belts extending across the Parcel, linking to Round Copse which forms a linear belt of ancient woodland.

6.70 The landform remains relatively flat in proximity to Winchfield Hurst , which borders the eastern edge of the Parcel, before rising towards the Basingstoke Canal and the south-west edge of Parcel J as illustrated by Site Appraisal Photograph F.

6.71 Across Parcel J there is localised inter-visibility with vehicles on Station Road and Taplins Farm Lane, residential properties within Winchfield Hurst and adjacent to Bagwell Lane. There are also longer distance glimpsed views of vehicles on the M3, which in combination with views of the overhead power lines, form a noticeable detracting feature.

6.72 Bordering the southern edge Parcel J is Hellet’s Copse (ancient woodland) and mature vegetation adjacent to the Basingstoke Canal.

20997/A5 32 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Appraisal

6.73 While there is a coherent agricultural land use across Parcel J, the rural character is fragmented by the engineered railway embankment and pylons, inter-visibility with residential properties, vehicles on the M3 and trains on the railway embankment.

6.74 The Landscape Character of Parcel J therefore consists an undulating landform, with the elements appearing to be in fair condition. The agricultural land use is representative of landscape features found in the surrounding area and can be considered common place.

6.75 Parcel J is not covered by any national landscape designation and contains a linear belt of ancient woodland. There is a limited tranquillity due to the inter-visibility with vehicles on Station Road, the M3 and trains on the railway embankment. Similarly there is no scenic beauty to the Parcel as it is a common place landscape.

6.76 Visually, Parcel J is generally well enclosed in relation to wider views to the south, east and west as a result of intervening vegetation and built form. There are close range views of Parcel J from the Basingstoke Canal, Winchfield Hurst and Station Road, as well as the PRoW which cross the Parcel.

6.77 The sensitivity of Parcel J is therefore assessed as Medium.

Visual Context

6.78 A number of views have been identified from the surrounding landscape as representative of views towards the Site, with their locations annotated on Figure 4: Site Appraisal Plan.

6.79 Site Context Photographs 1 and 2 demonstrate views from the north and north-west of the Site. Within these, the extent of existing woodland either screens the Site or enables very channelled and largely filtered views of Parcel A; which is seen in the context of existing residential properties.

6.80 Site Context Photograph 3 demonstrates how the Site is well screened by existing vegetation from the junction of Sprats Hatch Lane and Pale Lane, as well as the low lying position of the Site, exemplified by the vegetated ridge line in the background of the view.

6.81 Moving along Pale Lane, Site Context Photograph 4 demonstrates the low lying and flat landform across the eastern part of the Site and Parcel G and the varying extent of vegetation which borders Pale Lane. The view also demonstrates how the vegetated railway embankment contains the Site in relation to views from the north and that the landscape continues to rise to the west of the Site, exemplified by the vegetated ridgeline. As a result of the low lying landform and intervening vegetation, views across Parcel F are truncated.

20997/A5 33 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Appraisal

6.82 Continuing along Pale Lane, Site Context Photograph 5 demonstrates how the Site is screened in relation to the wider landscape by the intervening landscape and vegetation.

6.83 Similarly, Site Context Photograph 6 from the west of Fleet also demonstrates how the Site is screened by the intervening vegetation and its low lying position within the landscape.

6.84 Site Context Photograph 7 from along the Basingstoke Canal demonstrates that there are partial views of Parcel J and Parcel F, as well as the railway embankment and overhead power lines. However, from other locations along the canal, the intervening vegetation screens the Site, as demonstrated by Site Context Photograph 8.

6.85 From within the Site, Site Context Photograph 9 demonstrates how the undulating landform screens views across the remainder of the Site. Similarly, from PRoW to the south-west of the Site, the undulating landform and intervening vegetation screen the Site as demonstrated by Site Context Photograph 10.

6.86 From the surrounding road networks to the west of the Site, the intervening vegetati on screens the Site, as demonstrated by Site Context Photograph 11. Similarly, from road networks bordering the Site, including Station Road, there existing road side vegetation largely screens the Site between this road and the M3, as demonstrated by Site Context Photograph 12.

Summary of the Site's Landscape and Visual Character

6.87 The landscape character across the Site is characterised by arable, horse paddocks and grassland fields interspersed by areas of woodland, intermittent trees, hedgerows and matur e roadside vegetation and localised infrastructure with solar panels.

6.88 The combination of the vegetation structure, localised undulation in the landform and the physical severance of the railway embankment results in varying degrees of enclosure across the Site, with the areas in proximity to the railway line and the M3 considered to be more enclosed and with a reduced sense of countryside and openness than those in the south-east part of the Site, adjacent to Winchfield Hurst.

6.89 The rural character of the Site is lessened by the inter-visibility with road networks, the engineered form of the railway embankment and views of trains, inter-visibility with residential properties in Winchfield Hurst and the overhead pylons which cross part of the Site. This detraction from countryside is most notable in the area of land between the railway and the M3, in Parcels B, C and D, and to the south of the railway, across Parcel F.

6.90 Therefore, the field work support the published landscape studies, in that the M3, the existin g road network and the rail line erode the rural character of the Site due to the inter -visibility and audible noise with these features. Additionally, the low lying position of the Site overall

20997/A5 34 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Site Appraisal

reflects the low visibility noted within the published landscape character studies for this part of Hart.

6.91 Views of the Site are from close range locations such as the roads and PRoW crossing the Site, whilst views from the wider landscape are screened by existing vegetation. The Site is therefore visually contained. The combination of the identified ridge lines, the Site's low lying position and vegetation extents physically and visually separate the Site from the settlements of Fleet and Hook.

6.92 The more sensitive parts of the Site are the northern part (Parcel A) due to its slightly more elevated position with the landscape, its relationship to Hartley Wintney and that it exhibits a parkland character. Other sensitive parts are the areas of ancient woodland and the southern edge of the Site, as it borders the Basingstoke Canal and Winchfield Hurst.

6.93 The less sensitive parts of the Site are between the M3 and the railway line and to the south of the railway line extending to Station Road. This is because these parts of the Site exhibit common place agricultural fields and are well enclosed from the wider landscape by the combination of existing vegetation, low lying landform and the railway embankment. In addition, they exhibit a fragmented character.

20997/A5 35 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Opportunities for Development

7.0 OPPORTUNITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT

7.1 The Site is considered to provide the opportunity for a new 1,800 residential settlement as the Site is:

 Not covered by any national or local landscape designations, nor is it within a Conservation Area nor does it contain historically valued buildings;  Contains a common place agricultural land use;  In a low lying position relative to the wider landscape as a result of surrounding ridge lines, which result in the Site being well screened and enclosed in relation to this wider context. This limited inter-visibility is supported by the published landscape character assessments and Hart's 2017 Sustainability Appraisal (reviewed in the following chapters);  Predominantly flat, meaning there would be less requirements for cut and fill operations required to integrate a new residential settlement, such that the underlying landform pattern can be retained;  Already exhibits a fragmented character as a result of its proximity to the M3 and the railway embankment, along with large scale overhead power lines. This fragmented character is supported by the published landscape studies; and  Is consolidated around existing infrastructure and an existing settlement pattern, such that it would form a logical extension to Winchfield.

7.2 The constraints of a new 1,800 residential settlement are:

 The areas of ancient woodland, which can be retained and enhanced as part of a new residential settlement and utilised as part of a new Green Infrastructure strategy;  The more elevated northern part of the Site (Parcel A) which can be utilised for open space and no built form;  PRoW routes which cross the south-west part of the Site, as well as the proximity to the Basingstoke Canal, which can be accommodated as part of a new Green Infrastructure layout, as well as sympathetically designing and offsetting built from these routes;  The existing vegetation structure of trees and hedgerows, which can be retained and enhanced as part of the layout, or re-provided by new planting; and  Localised and close range views from PRoW and residential properties, in which the new built form can be softened through sensitive massing and new planting.

7.3 Development guidelines based on the Landscape and Visual appraisal are :

20997/A5 36 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Opportunities for Development

 Locating new development within the generally flat and enclosed areas, so as to limit the potential changes to the existing landform and utilise the visual screening provided by vegetation and the localised changes in terrain;  Locating any new development within a robust landscape framework, including for new Green Infrastructure of formal and informal space, SANGs, recreational areas, and new walking and cycling connections with the surrounding area;  Retaining, managing and enhancing existing woodland, tree belts and hedgerows, so as to maintaining the existing rural character and enclosure provided to many of the fields, as well as adhering to published landscape character policies and enhancement priorities to maximise the landscape value of existing vegetation;  Offsetting any new development from existing ancient woodland and TPOs, in accordance with Natural England standing advice and best practice advice, and also excluding any new hard surfacing or infrastructure within root protection areas;  New planting of broadleaved woodlands, hedgerows and trees to soften, break up and fragment the new built form and provide better integration to existing and proposed roads in accordance with the HLCA enhancement priorities;  Trees important to local character and appearance can be integrated within new development by design, with tree stocks enhanced through substantial opportunities to introduce new planting;  Substantial open space areas provide great potential to retain the tree coverage typical of the existing countryside;  Carefully considering the height, scale and mass of the built form within the settlement, particularly on the eastern part of the land area for WGC in relation to the existing settlement of Winchfield Hurst and existing listed buildings; and  Strengthening existing field boundaries through the reinforcement and enhancement of existing vegetation.

20997/A5 37 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2016 Landscape Capactiy Study

8.0 REVIEW OF HART'S 2016 LANDSCAPE CAPACTIY STUDY

8.1 Hart's Landscape Capacity Study (HLCS) has been produced to inform the evidence base for the Hart District Council Local Plan and inform upon which areas of the District are most sensitive to change with regard to landscape character and visual amenity.

8.2 It assesses the relative capacity of the landscape to accommodate development in the rural areas of the District, outside of the established settlement boundaries, based upon a development scenario of 50% residential development (30 dwellings per hectare) and 50% open space.

8.3 As demonstrated by Figure 6: Hart Landscape Capacity Study Plan, the Site is covered by a number of 'local areas':

 HW-01 (the north part of the Site);  WI-01 (the south central part of the Site); and  WI-02 (the north central part of the Site).

8.4 The Study notes that the assessment of each area is a:

"guide to the capacity of each of the local areas. The precise location and extent of development would depend on a closer study and evaluation."

8.5 In addition:

"The overall assessment given to any area does not mean that the assessment applies to the whole area – it may apply to one part of it.

The assessments also do not mean that development in any given area is acceptable. The purpose of the study is to inform which areas of the District are most sensitive to change with regard to landscape character and visual amenity."

Hart Landscape Capacity Study Main Study Methodology

8.6 The study identified the Landscape Sensitivity and Visual Sensitivity of each local area to provide a landscape character sensitivity.

8.7 However, the assessment of Landscape Sensitivity is based upon the degree to which the landscape in question is able to accommodate change without adverse impacts. Given that the majority of the land in the Study is agricultural, this will inevitably experience adverse impact in the form of residential development.

20997/A5 38 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2016 Landscape Capactiy Study

8.8 The visual sensitivity methodology also considers that recreational pursuits, such as walking are considered to be more sensitive than transient views of people tra velling through an area. However, whilst persons walking may be engaged in the appreciation of a landscape, they are certainly transient, particularly in the context of the number of long distance routes and therefore it is considered that the Study has over stated the sensitivity of walking routes.

8.9 The Study uses the landscape character sensitivity and combines it with the landscape value of the local area. Each of the judgements is based on how prominent each of the categories are and their relative sensitivity to change.

8.10 The landscape capacity to accommodate change is based upon a 5 point scale combining the landscape character sensitivity and landscape value:

 Low (the landscape area could not accommodate change without a significant and adverse impact on the landscape character. Occasional, small scale development may be possible, providing it has regard to the setting and form of existing settlements and the character and sensitivity of the adjacent landscape character areas.);  Low / medium (Thresholds for development are low and development can be accommodated only in limited situations, providing it has regard to the setting and form of existing settlements and the character and sensitivity of the adjacent landscape character areas.);  Medium (Thresholds for change are intermediate and the landscape character area is able to accommodate areas of new development in some parts, providing it has regard to the setting and form of existing settlements and the character and sensitivity of the adjacent landscape character areas.);  Medium / High (Thresholds for change are high and the area is able to accommodate larger amounts of new development, providing it has regard to the setting and form of existing settlements and the character and sensitivity of the adjacent landscape character areas.); and  High (Thresholds for change are very high and much of the area is able to accommodate significant areas of new development, providing it has regard to the setting and form of existing settlements and the character and sensitivity of the adjacent landscape character areas).

8.11 However the table on page 23 which correlates Landscape Character Sensitivity and Landscape Value is considered to be incorrect. For example, a 'high' landscape character sensitivity combined with a 'high' landscape value equate via the matrix to a 'high' landscape capacity, i.e. the landscape can accommodate significant change. But surely an area of 'high' landscape sensitivity and 'high' landscape value should not be able to accommodate any change, or very

20997/A5 39 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2016 Landscape Capactiy Study

limited change at best, and therefore the landscape capacity should be low, as per the above definitions.

8.12 This discrepancy is borne out by BH-01 which has a 'high' landscape character sensitivity and 'high' landscape valve, yet the overall landscape capacity is low. According to the Landscape Capacity table on page 23 it should be 'High'.

8.13 Therefore, the Landscape Capacity matrix is not justified and unsound.

8.14 Putting this discrepancy aside, the above methodology is caveated by the following statement:

"this Landscape Capacity Study provides a guide to the potential capacity of each of the character areas and is not site-specific. More detailed landscape assessments will therefore be required, and will be required at the appropriate time of the planning application process."

8.15 The Study also uses inconsistent densities as part of the assessment, with the introduction referring to a density of 30dph, but paragraph 5.7 Note 1 provides the density as 30-35 dph.

Local Areas

HW-01: South and South-east of Hartley Wintney

8.16 This local area extends from Fleet Road westwards to the B3016 and is bound to the south by the M3 and Hartley Wintney to the north. The Site covers 4% of this local character area.

8.17 The overall landscape capacity is stated as 'low' due to:

 Visual Sensitivity = High;  Landscape Sensitivity = High;  Landscape Character Sensitivity = High; and  Landscape Value = Medium / High.

8.18 The stated characteristics of HW-01 include:

 "Good network of hedgerows or hedgerow trees;  St. Mary's Church Grade II c13 chalk and flint. Notable views across the east to south of the district from the graveyard;  Western portion of this local area has good PRoW network;  Locally listed country house, parts of garden at Winchfield House, in western corner of this local area."

20997/A5 40 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2016 Landscape Capactiy Study

Visual Sensitivity

8.19 The visual sensitivity of this part of the Site is not considered to be high as Mabs Copse screens the Site from locations to the west and severs any visual links to the wider landscape. Similarly, this part of the Site is not part of any wider panorama, compared to the land to the immediate south of the church, which is noted. The number of people with views of this part of the Site is considered to be limited to users of PRoW 16 principally, whom are transient receptors.

8.20 Therefore, it is considered that the visual sensitivity for HW-01 should be lowered to Medium.

Landscape Sensitivity

8.21 From the Landscape and Visual Appraisal, this part of the Site is not considered to reflect the good network of hedgerows or the PRoW network. However, the Site does consist of Mabs Copse. This woodland also physically separates the Site from Winchfield House.

8.22 This part of the Site does not reflect any of the geological features of river valleys identified within the area. There is inter-visibility with the M3 and associated noise intrusion which limits any sense of remoteness.

8.23 Therefore the landscape sensitivity score is considered to be medium.

Landscape Character Sensitivity

8.24 The combination of the revised Visual and Landscape Sensitivity would result in a med ium Landscape Character Sensitivity.

WI-01: Local area south and east of Winchfield

8.25 This local area extends south from the railway line to Pale Lane and the Basingstoke Canal. The western edge of the Site extends between Potbridge Road, the B3016 and an un named stream to Greenway Farm. The Site covers 44% of this local character area.

8.26 The overall landscape capacity is stated as 'low/medium' due to:

 Visual Sensitivity = Medium / High;  Landscape Sensitivity = Medium / High;  Landscape Character Sensitivity = Medium / High; and  Landscape Value = Medium.

8.27 The characteristics include:

20997/A5 41 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2016 Landscape Capactiy Study

 "A low lying gently undulating landscape physically and visually constrained by the high embankment of the east/west mainline railway embankment;  Often poorly drained, the landscape is criss-crossed by land drains and ditches between the lanes and hedgerows;  Good coverage of robust hedgerows, hedgerow trees and tree belts;  Several small to medium woodland blocks (SINCs);  Moderate coverage of PRoW;  Small hamlet of Winchfield Hurt  Several farms, some converted to business use;  Basingstoke Canal (SSSi) farms sinuous south eastern boundary;  Small clusters of houses and cottages some listed;  St Mary’s Church, Bugwell Lane, Grade I listed 12th Century Norman origins; and  Very quiet local area disturbed occasionally by express trains."

8.28 From the Landscape and Visual Appraisal, this part of the Site is considered to accord to the Study's observations of being low lying and visually contained. In addition there are a number of small woodland blocks within the Site, although the PRoW coverage is limited rather than moderate.

8.29 The main difference is considered to be observation on the influence of the trains. From the field work, the trains are highly visible and frequent, resulting in a higher degre e of noise and disturbance than inferred by the Study.

Visual Sensitivity

8.30 The Study assessed W1-01 as forming part of the skyline, but the Site is low lying and does not contribute to this visual characteristics.

8.31 The types of receptors identified are all transient and therefore their magnitude should be medium rather than high.

8.32 Given how well enclosed this part of the Site is in relation to the wider landscape it is considered that the visual sensitivity of the Site is lower than stated by the Study and sho uld be 'medium'.

Landscape Sensitivity

8.33 As the woodland coverage within this part of the Site is localised to woodland blocks and field boundaries, and overall the land use is large scale agricultural fields which are open in character, the vegetation sensitivity is considered to be lessened.

20997/A5 42 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2016 Landscape Capactiy Study

8.34 The Study notes that an arable crop habitat will be less sensitive than one of species rich grassland and therefore the sensitivity of the pattern of semi-natural habitats is considered to be lessened.

8.35 As a flat landform, without distinctive features such as valleys and elevation, the sensitivity of the landform is lessened.

8.36 The tranquillity is stated as 'very quiet - occasional train noise'. This is considered to be an understatement, with the trains being highly visible and frequent, such that the perceptual is not one that is 'very quiet'.

8.37 From the above, the Landscape Sensitivity of the Site is considered to be lower than as stated by the Study, and should be 'Low / Medium'.

Landscape Character Sensitivity

8.38 From the revised findings, the 'medium' visual sensitivity and 'Low / medium' landscape sensitivity would result in a 'low / medium' Landscape Character Sensitivity for this part of the Site, as opposed to the Study's stated 'Medium / High'.

Landscape Value

8.39 This part of the Site is not covered by any national or local landscape designations.

8.40 The perceptual aspects (tranquillity) is influenced by the noise and inter -visibility with the railway line, existing residential properties, vehicles and overhead pylons.

8.41 The landscape value of the Site is therefore considered to be 'Low / Medium' rather than 'Medium' as identified by the Study.

Overall Landscape Capacity

8.42 Through combining the revised 'low / medium' Landscape Character Sensitivity and Landscape Value this equates to a 'Medium' Overall Landscape Capacity for this part of the Site, defined as:

"the landscape character area is able to accommodate areas of new development in some parts, providing it has regard to the setting and form of existing settlements and the character and sensitivity of the adjacent landscape character areas."

20997/A5 43 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2016 Landscape Capactiy Study

WI-02: Local Area east of Winchfield between M3 corridor and main railway line

8.43 As noted, this area is between these two infrastructure routes, and extends eastwards from the B3016 to the A323. The Site covers 49% of this local character area.

8.44 The Overall Landscape Capacity is assessed as 'medium / high' as a result of:

 Visual Sensitivity = Low/ Medium;  Landscape Sensitivity = Medium;  Landscape Character Sensitivity = Low / Medium; and  Landscape Value = Medium.

8.45 The characteristics include:

 "A landscape tightly cushioned by M3 corridor and main line railway embankment;  Topography formed by shallow undulating in places, flat, riparian through the centre;  Tree lined railway embankment, robust hedgerow network in many places; and  Limited Prow network limited to rest of area."

8.46 From the Landscape and Visual Appraisal, these characteristics are considered to be representative of the Site.

8.47 Similarly the finding of a medium / high Overall Landscape Capacity is considered to be supported by the Landscape and Visual Appraisal.

Summary

8.48 Hart's Landscape Capacity Study has been reviewed and is considered not to be sound in relation to NPPF paragraph 182 as the methodology and supporting assessments are not based on proportionate evidence.

8.49 With regards to the Methodology:

 The assessment of Landscape Sensitivity is based upon the degree to which the landscape in question is able to accommodate change without adverse impacts. Given that the majority of the land in the Study is agricultural, this will inevitably experience adverse impact in the form of residential development and therefore the assessment parameter is flawed;  The visual sensitivity methodology also considers that recreational pursuits, such as walking are considered to be more sensitive than transient views of people travelling through an area. However, whilst persons walking may be engaged in the appreciation

20997/A5 44 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2016 Landscape Capactiy Study

of a landscape, they are certainly transient, particularly in the context of the number of long distance routes and therefore it is considered that the Study has over stated the sensitivity of walking routes;  The table on page 23 which correlates Landscape Character Sensitivity and Landscape Value is considered to be incorrect. For example, a 'high' landscape character sensitivity combined with a 'high' landscape value equate via the matrix to a 'high' landscape capacity, i.e. the landscape can accommodate significant change. This discrepancy is borne out by BH-01 which has a 'high' landscape character sensitivity and 'high' landscape valve, yet the overall landscape capacity is low. According to the Landscape Capacity table on page 23 it should be 'High';  The Study uses inconsistent densities as part of the assessment, with the introduction referring to a density of 30dph, but paragraph 5.7 Note 1 provides the density as 30 - 35 dph; and  The Study does not adopt a consistent approach to the scoring. For example, for Winchfield W1-02 (covering the central part of the Site), the landscape sensitivity scores are 'Medium', 'Low / Medium' and 'Low / Medium'; resulting in a total score or Medium, i.e. the higher score from the amalgamation of the individual scores. Yet, for Murrell Green the landscape sensitivity scores are 'Medium /High, 'Medium / High and 'Medium'; but the total score is 'Medium'. This is the lower score from the amalgamation of the individual scores, not the highest.

8.50 The Site is included within the Study as parcels as:

 HW-01 (the north part of the Site);  WI-01 (the south central part of the Site); and  WI-02 (the north central part of the Site.

8.51 In relation to WI-01 the Study notes that the Overall Landscape Capacity is 'low/medium', inferring:

"Thresholds for development are low and development can be accommodated only in limited situations, providing it has regard to the setting and form of existing settlements and the character and sensitivity of the adjacent landscape character areas."

8.52 However, this is not considered to be an appropriate judgement for this part of the Site as:

 The Study assessed W1-01 as forming part of the skyline, but the Site is low lying and does not contribute to this visual characteristics;  The types of receptors identified are all transient and therefore their magnitude should be medium rather than high;

20997/A5 45 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2016 Landscape Capactiy Study

 Given how well enclosed this part of the Site is in relation to the wider landscape it is considered that the visual sensitivity of the Site is lower than stated by the Study and should be 'medium';  As the woodland coverage within this part of the Site is localised to woodland blocks and field boundaries, and overall the land use is large scale agricultural fields which are open in character, the vegetation sensitivity is considered to be lessened ;  The Study notes that an arable crop habitat will be less sensitive than one of species rich grassland and therefore the sensitivity of the pattern of semi -natural habitats is considered to be lessened;  As a flat landform, without distinctive features such as valleys and elevation, the sensitivity of the landform is lessened;  The tranquillity is stated as 'very quiet - occasional train noise'. This is considered to be an understatement, with the trains being highly visible and frequent, such that the perceptual is not one that is 'very quiet';  This part of the Site is not covered by any national or local landscape designations ; and  The perceptual aspects (tranquillity) are influenced by the noise and inter-visibility with the railway line, existing residential properties, vehicles and overhead pylons.

8.53 The Overall Landscape Capacity for WI-01 should therefore be revised to 'medium' equating to:

20997/A5 46 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2017 Sustainability Appraisal

9.0 REVIEW OF HART'S 2017 SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL

Sustainability Appraisal (SA) of the Hart Local Plan: Strategy and Sites (April 2017)

9.1 In the context of the emerging Hart Local Plan: Strategy and Sites allocating land for development, the SA is a mechanism for considering and communicating the likely effects of a number of development sites in the Borough ('the options'), with a view to avoiding and mitigating adverse effects and maximising the positives. The aim of the SA is however not to conclude on the overall performance / sustainability of the options.

9.2 SA topics include:

 Biodiversity (SA8 Protect and enhance biodiversity);  Climate change and mitigation (SA12 and SA14); and  Landscape (SA9 Protect and enhance the District's countryside and rural landscape).

9.3 Table 6.2 includes Winchfield East (SHL 124 and SHL 183) as a "better performing new settlement option" with opportunities "of access to a Winchfield Train Station and strategic SANG delivery".

9.4 Winchfield West is considered "a more peripheral location relative to the train station, does not offer a central focus and is close proximity to Odiham SSSI".

9.5 Winchfield is considered in terms of 3,000 homes and included as 'Option 6' in Table 7.1 which compares the various development options and Appendix III.

9.6 All development options within the borough result in significant positive effects for housing; however in all other categories the development options result in significant adverse effects.

9.7 The following spatial strategy appraisal scores are out of a total of 6, with the higher the score the worse the performance:

 Biodiversity - 4th;  Climate change - 1st on the basis that it would "…involve the greatest concentration of growth at a new settlement in central Hart. The effect could be to enable delivery of low carbon infrastructure and also standards of sustainable design and construction over-and-above national requirements..."; and  Landscape - 2nd= on the basis that "much of this area has a strongly rural character, particularly the eastern part. There would also be a need for significant re-modelling of the rural road network, with attendant landscape

20997/A5 47 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2017 Sustainability Appraisal

/ character implications. However, the topography of the site is suited to development, insofar as it may prevent long views into developed areas."

9.8 The 'Landscape' performance of Winchfield is the lowest scoring option, in combination with Options 2 and 4; however this decision is not considered to be robust, given the observations on the Site's topography and that it would prevent long views.

9.9 The SA actually identifies that:

"…it is not possible to confidently differentiate further between the alternatives."

9.10 From the Landscape and Visual Appraisal, it is considered that Winchfield can meet the SA9 Objective of Protecting and enhancing the District's countryside and rural landscape.

9.11 While there are no identified buildings of historical value within the Site, their setting could be sensitivity responded to and incorporated within any new layout. Additiona lly, focusing development around Winchfield would safeguard the landscape character surrounding smaller settlements in the wider area and localise potential adverse landscape and visual effects through concentrating development at a specific location, rather than throughout the District. As the Site would be set within an enclosed landscape, there would be no coalescence with Fleet or Hook.

9.12 New development would be set within a robust and comprehensive landscape framework which would include new green infrastructure linking across the Site and provide a range of alterative transport options to the private car.

9.13 The Site would retain the character of mature roadside hedgerows and trees to provide a high degree of physical and visual enclosure. Any road improvements/widening would be undertaken in accordance with detailed arboricultural surveys (BS5837: 2013 Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction) to retain the existing vegetation structure wherever possible. New roadside planting would be incorporated within the development layout to reflect the existing vegetated character of the lanes and roads within the area.

9.14 Winchfield is not defined by a settlement boundary and the Site provides the opportunity to create a defined boundary, based on siting development within a robust landscape framework. Whilst proposed development of the scale of the Site would result in a technical reduction in openness of the District’s countryside, the combination of new informal and formal open space, green infrastructure, planting and the retention of existing vegetation would create a series of green buffers to retain separation from existing settlement patterns, aided by the existing enclosure provide by the ridge lines and therefore there would be no coalescence wi th Hook and Fleet.

20997/A5 48 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Hart's 2017 Sustainability Appraisal

9.15 The Site appraisal noted above, in combination with Hart’s landscape character assessment has noted that the rural character is already fragmented and eroded and varies across the Site.

9.16 Therefore existing landscape features of field hedgerows, roadside vegetation, individual trees and woodland (including ancient woodland) could be retained and protected within the proposed development.

9.17 This can be achieved through offsetting proposals in accordance with Natural England’s best practice and BS5837:2012 Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction. Furthermore, the proposed development offers the opportunities for new planting and green infrastructure to enhance the existing landscape character and enable the proposed development to be integrated within the existing landscape character.

20997/A5 49 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

10.0 REVIEW OF MURRELL GREEN

10.1 This chapter comprises an assessment of the land at Murrell Green through the following processes:

 A Landscape and Visual Appraisal to assess the landscape character of the Murrell Green Site and to identify views to and from the surrounding area;  A review of the Landscape Capacity Study (LCS) produced by Hart District Council in 2016;  A review of the Stage 4 Detailed Site Assessment produced for Strategic Site STR011 produced by Adams Hendry in 2017; and  A Review of the Hart District Draft Strategy and Sites Document produced in 2017.

10.2 This chapter will demonstrate that the land at Murrell Green exhibits a landscape and visual sensitivity such that development within it would lead to the physical and perceptual coalescence of Hook and Phoenix Green/Hartley Wintney.

10.3 Furthermore, it will demonstrate that the conclusions of the Landscape Capacity Study, upon which the Draft Strategy is based, are not justified by the information contained within the document and that they are, therefore, not sound in relation to NPPF paragraph 182.

Landscape Appraisal

10.4 The location of Murrell Green is shown on Figure 6: Murrell Green Site Context Plan. The appraisal was undertaken in late May when the trees were fully vegetated, reducing visual permeability to and from Murrell Green. As a result, inter-visibility will be notably higher during months when leaf cover is not at its full extent.

Location

10.5 Murrell Green is located on land between Phoenix Green/Hatley Wintney and Hook and to the west of the Winchfield Site.

10.6 The southern boundary of Murrell Green is marked by the M3 motorway for the most part, with the motorway partially located within cutting and partially bordered b y tree planting. The majority of the northern boundary is formed by the A30 London Road and the rear of properties fronting onto it. A small area of land north of the A30 is also included within the Murrell Green Site boundary. The eastern boundary of the Murrell Green Site is formed by the B3016 which runs north-south between the A30 and the M3. The western boundary is formed by a combination of the route of the River Whitewater, the railway line and the route of high voltage

20997/A5 50 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

power lines A30. The western boundary of the land to the north of the A30 is formed by Borough Court Road.

Character

10.7 Land to the north of the railway line, within the main body of Murrell Green, has a strong rural character with pastoral fields set back against a backdrop of woodla nd, giving a parkland character visible from Totters Lane. The eastern area of Murrell Green comprises smaller areas of pastoral field and meadow, surrounded by areas of woodland and tall hedgerows, resulting in an intimate character.

10.8 The southern part of Murrell Green is influenced by the M3 in the form of noise and some limited views and, further north, by the more open route of the railway line. However, the enclosure by the woodland in the south-east of Murrell Green and along the route of the railway line, results in less intrusion than might be implied by desktop assessment alone. The high voltage cables and pylons form a detracting feature along the south -western boundary.

10.9 The area in the north of Murrell Green, closer to the A30, is influenced by the road and the Murrell Green Business Park and these areas have a more fringe character. The northern -most field is influenced by the A30 along its southern boundary but quickly becomes more rural and intimate in scale in the north, influenced by the high hedgerows with mature oaks and the neighbouring woodland.

10.10 Views towards the south and south-west are possible from the area south of the railway line, particularly from Totters Lane and are characterised by a settled countryside landscape.

10.11 Overall, urbanising features do influence the northern, western and sout hern edges of Murrell Green, but the main central and eastern parts of Murrell Green are rural in character with a wooded/parkland character, i.e. of landscape value.

Land Use and Settlement

10.12 Murrell Green mainly comprises a mix of arable and pastoral farmland, interspersed with areas of woodland, farms and individual residential dwellings, resulting in a settled rural character. Land in the centre of Murrell Green, to the east and west of Totters Lane, has been subdivided into paddocks for grazing horses.

10.13 Murrell Green Business Park is located outside of the Murrell Green boundary but it almost entirely enclosed by the Site. Settlement at Scutts Farm is located to the west of Borough Court Road, opposite the northernmost part of Murrell Green.

20997/A5 51 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

10.14 Totters Farm and Trimmer’s Farm are located off Totters Lane, and Winchfield Lodge, a historic lodge building converted to offices, is located within the south-eastern boundary, alongside properties on Old Potbridge Road.

10.15 The edge of Phoenix Green is located almost immediately adjacent to the north -eastern corner of Murrell Green at a distance of 100m, separated by a small area of woodland within the Hitches Lane SANG. The Phoenix Green Conservation Area is immediately adjacent to the north- eastern corner of Murrell Green, separated only by the B3016. The edge of Hook at Athoke Croft is located 250m to the west at the closest point to Murrell Green and the distance between Hook and the western boundary along the A30 is 570m as demonstrated by Figure 6: Murrell Green Site Context Plan.

10.16 At present, there is a separation between the settlements of Hook, Murrell Green and Phoenix Green/ Hartley Wintney. Some ribbon development has started to emerge, par ticularly south of Phoenix Green.

Access and Rights of Way

10.17 The A30 provides the main vehicular access route across the north of Murrell Green, with the B3016 running south along the eastern boundary and Totters Lane passing north -south through the centre of the Site. Old Potbridge Road extends along the northern edge of the M3 and around the south-western boundary of Murrell Green.

10.18 The Brenda Parker Way National Trail runs north-south through the approximate centre of Murrell Green, between the A30 along the northern boundary before joining Old Potbridge Road in the south-east of Murrell Green.

10.19 A dense network of Public Rights of Way (PRoW) crosses Murrell Green, connecting through to the National Trail with:

 Footpath 8 runs along the north-eastern boundary of the land north of the A30 before joining the National Trail to the south of the A30;  Footpaths 2 and 3 run west from the National Trail towards Totters Lane ;  Footpath 1 runs east to the junction of Potbridge Lane and the B3016 ;  Footpath 5 runs west from Totters Lane before connecting to the Bassett Mead Country Park to the west; and  Footpath 729 cuts through the south-western portion of the Site, running north-west from Totters Lane before joining Footpath 6 within the Bassett Mead Country Park.

20997/A5 52 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

Topography and Hydrology

10.20 Land within Murrell Green rises up from approximately 60mAOD in the north-western and south-western areas, which are located within the valley of the River Whitewater, up to over 90mAOD in the south-east.

10.21 The River Whitewater forms the western boundary in the south-west of Murrell Green, running approximately north-south through the Study Area. This is connected by drains in the south of Murrell Green as well as two large agricultural field ponds in the south-west of Murrell Green.

10.22 An area of ponds, present on maps dating back to the late 20th Century, is located within woodland to the south of Shapley House which was built around the same time. Further small field ponds are present throughout Murrell Green.

Vegetation

10.23 The landscape around Murrell Green is well-vegetated, with areas and belts of woodland connecting to create a strong wooded character, particularly to the east. The largest areas of woodland which partially lie within Murrell Green are those within and around the south -eastern and eastern boundaries.

10.24 Areas of this woodland which are located within the Murrell Green boundary, including Shapley Copse, are ancient woodland. Further areas of woodland are located to the south of Shapley House, likely part of the historic grounds of the house, and to the south of Murrell Green Business Park. Further small areas of woodland within the east of Murrell Green create a small- scale landscape which has an intimate parkland character.

10.25 The route of the National Trail is marked by a hedgerow and mature trees which, together with the sunken nature of parts of the route, contribute to the intimate and enclosed nature of the footpath.

Designations

10.26 There are no landscape designations within Murrell Green. There are Listed milestones within the northern boundary, alongside the A30, and along the route of the B3016 in the easternmost area of Murrell Green. There is a Grade II Listed building, named Murrell, at Murrell Green Business Park.

10.27 The grounds of Winchfield House, immediately across the B3016 to the east, is a Locally Listed Park and Garden. Orchard House, off Old Potbridge Road and within Murrell Green, is a locally Listed building.

20997/A5 53 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

10.28 There are a number of TPOs around Winchfield Lodge in the south-east of Murrell Green. An Area TPO covers an area of woodland in the wedge of land between the M3 and the railway line in the south-east of Murrell Green. Sheet Lane Copse, between the east of Murrell Green and the A30, and the woodland around Winchfield House, to the east of Murrell Green, are covered by Area TPOs.

Visual Appraisal

10.29 Murrell Green is visible from the north-east as the land rises up towards Phoenix Green although the extent of views are reduced by the intervening layers of field and hedgerow trees.

10.30 Murrell Green is also visible from the edge of Hook, including the proposed north-east extension of Hook and the Bassett Mead Country Park, again due to the rising landform. The character of these views are of fields and woodlands, with only the overhead power lines forming a detracting feature.

10.31 The south-western areas of Murrell Green is also visible from the countryside to the south- west, particularly from the southern end of Totters Lane.

10.32 The eastern area of Murrell Green is generally enclosed by blocks of woodland and this, together with the local landform, reduces visual permeability from the wider landscape to the east and south east of Murrell Green.

Review of Hart's Landscape Capacity Study (LCS) for Murrell Green

10.33 The majority of Murrell Green Site is located within Parcel HO-03 within the LCS. The area of land to the north of the A30 falls within the south-western corner of parcel HW-04. Parcel HO- 03 is bordered by the M3 to the south, the B3016 to the east, the A30 to the north and a combination of field boundaries, woodland and built form in the west. Parcel HW-04 is marked along its southern and eastern boundaries by the A30, with a small extension to include Murrell Green Business Park. The western boundary is formed by Borough Court Road in the south and by blocks of woodland in the north. The northern boundary is formed by West Green Road.

10.34 Both Parcel HW-04 and HO-03 were assessed within the LCS as being of medium landscape, visual and landscape character sensitivity and of medium landscape value within the LCS, resulting in an overall landscape capacity of medium. However, the Capacity Study as noted in the preceding chapters states that these assessments are broad-brush and may not take into account local variations.

10.35 It is also important to note as highlighted in the earlier chapters, that the table demonstrating the assessment of Landscape Capacity, at paragraph 6.3, is incorrectly set out. For example, the table erroneously states that parcels of land that are of high landscape value and of high

20997/A5 54 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

landscape character sensitivity are of high landscape capacity; instead of low landscape capacity.

10.36 The document identifies the visual and landscape sensitivity, and landscape value of all areas of Murrell Green, i.e. those within both HW-04 and HO-03, as being medium, resulting in medium landscape capacity.

10.37 This broad-brush assessment does not take into account the higher visual sensitivity of the western and south-western areas of Murrell Green due to views from the valley of the River Whitewater. It also underplays the extent of the views into the north of Murrell Green from the A30, or the views from the extensive network of PRoW in the Site, including the National Trail.

10.38 Furthermore, the conclusions of the document, i.e. that the landscape capacity of parcel HO - 03 and HW-04 is medium, does not reflect the results of the assessment as identified within the main body of the document. The landscape and visual sensitivity of Murrell Green are downplayed within the conclusions, as explained below.

Visual Sensitivity

10.39 The table in Appendix II of the Capacity Study relating to HO-03, i.e. all land south of the A30, identifies a general visibility of medium to high, a sensitivity with regards to population of medium, and a sensitivity with regards to mitigation potential as medium to high. This is the n summarised as a visual sensitivity score for parcel HO-03 of medium when it should be medium to high.

10.40 The table relating to HW-04 identifies a sensitivity in relation to general visibility of medium, a sensitivity in relation to population of medium and a sensitivity in relation to mitigation potential as medium to high. The table concludes the visual sensitivity is medium when it should be medium to high. Furthermore, the south-western corner of HW-04 is generally of greater visual sensitivity than the main body of parcel HW-04 as it is adjacent to the A30, further supporting an overall visual sensitivity of medium to high.

10.41 In both cases, the conclusions set out within the assessment do not reflect the information within the tables, and therefore downplays the visual sensitivity of Murrell Green.

Landscape Sensitivity

10.42 The document also identifies that the land within Murrell Green, within parcel HO -03 and HW- 04, is of medium landscape sensitivity. However, this does not take into account the enclosed and intimate nature within the eastern areas of Murrell Green and its small-scale parkland character, which is highlighted within the Stage 4 Detailed Site Assessment for Murrell Green.

20997/A5 55 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

10.43 The table within Appendix II relating to parcel HO-03 identifies a landscape sensitivity in relation to natural factors as medium to high and to cultural factors as medium to high with a sensitivity in relation to perceptual features as medium. Again, this is summarised as an overall landscape sensitivity of medium when it should be medium to high.

10.44 The table relating to parcel HW-04 identifies a landscape sensitivity in relation to natural factors as medium to high, in relation to cultural factors as medium to high and to perceptual features as medium. The overall landscape sensitivity of parcel HW-04 has been assessed as medium when it should be medium to high. As with the visual sensitivity, the conclusions downplay the landscape sensitivity of Murrell Green.

Landscape Character Sensitivity

10.45 The landscape character sensitivity is a product of the landscape and visual sensitivity and has been assessed as being medium for both parcels. However, the tables within Appendix II of the Capacity Study demonstrate that the landscape and visual sensitivity for parcel HO -03 and HW-04 should be medium to high, as identified above, resulting in a landscape character sensitivity for both areas of medium to high.

Landscape Value

10.46 The document identifies the area as being of medium value but the methodology states that the assessment of landscape value should take into account not only designations but also the role the land plays in the settlement edge, perceptual aspects and local associations.

10.47 The local landscape does not contain landscape designations but the land within the east of parcel HO-03 is immediately adjacent to the Phoenix Green Conservation Area and is within 100m of the curtilage of the nearest property. The land in the west of parcel HO -03 is visible from the edge of Hook and from Bassett Mead Country Park, and development in this a rea would result in intrusion of large areas of built form into a landscape which is not characterised by such development. The eastern and central areas of parcel HO-03 are small-scale, resulting in an intimate and tranquil character.

10.48 The tables within Appendix II of the Capacity Study relating to parcel HO-03 identifies the proximity of ecological sites, Listed Buildings, Locally Listed Parks and Gardens and areas of flood zone. The landscape value has been assessed as medium whereas this document asserts that this assessment should be medium to high.

Landscape Capacity

10.49 In accordance with the findings of the Hart District Landscape Capacity Study, the Landscape Character Sensitivity of parcels HO-03 and HW-04 should be assessed as medium to high, as

20997/A5 56 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

outlined above. The landscape value of parcel HO-03 should be assessed as medium to high and parcel HW-04 as medium.

10.50 The overall landscape capacity of both parcel HO-03 and HW-04 should be assessed as medium to low, if the second table is corrected. The explanation of medium to low landscape capacity is as follows:

“Thresholds for development are low and development can be accommodated only in limited situations, providing it has regard to the setting and form of existing settlements and the character and sensitivity of the adjacent landscape character areas.”

Conclusions of Appraisal of Landscape Capacity Study for Murrell Green

10.51 The LCS underplays the landscape sensitivity of the eastern part of Murrell Green and the visual sensitivity of its western part in views from Hook and the north-east expansion of Hook.

10.52 The LCS underplays the role that Murrell Green plays in the separation and definition of Phoenix Green and Hook. Furthermore, the approach used within the LCS is not consistent and the findings of a landscape capacity of medium are not justified based on the information included within the tables in Appendix II.

10.53 The summary of the landscape and visual sensitivity should be medium to high as supported by the text and conclusions within the tables, rather than the stated medium.

10.54 This would result in a more accurate assessment of the landscape capacity of Murrell Green as being medium to low, rather than medium as stated.

10.55 Therefore, the findings of the Capacity Study in relation to parcels HO -03 and HW-04 are not sound in relation to NPPF paragraph 182.

10.56 The assertions of Murrell Green as a development site within the emerging Local Plan are based upon this flawed LCS assessed and must therefore be considered not justified and similarly not sound.

Review of Stage 4 Detailed Assessment and Sustainability Appraisal for Land at Murrell Green

10.57 The land at Murrell Green was shortlisted as part of stages 2 and 3 and was then identified as STR011: North-West Winchfield within the Local Plan Site Assessment: Stage 4 - Detailed Site Assessment. Only Sites shortlisted from the high-level site assessments were taken forward for detailed site assessment.

10.58 STR011 includes the following SHLAA sites:

20997/A5 57 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

 SHL083: Shapley Heath, Winchfield  SHL084: Winchfield Lodge, Old Potbridge Road  SHL126: Murrell Green, London Road, Hook  SHL135: Shapley Ranch, London Road  SHL136: Trimmers Farm, Totters Lane, Hook  SHL167: Land between M3 and Railway  SHL169: Land at Totters Farm, Totters Lane, Hook  SHL184: Winchfield Park, Winchfield  SHL186: Shapley Lake, Winchfield  SHL209: Winchfield Park B, Winchfield.

10.59 The Detailed Site Assessment Proforma for STR011 includes a number of tables summarising the issues at hand. Murrell Green is described within Table 1 as a “predominantly greenfield site” and that it:

“largely comprises agricultural fields, with numerous blocks of woodland, a number of large ponds, in addition to scattered agricultural and residential buildings throughout the site”.

Landscape Impact

10.60 Table 8 of the document states that the character impact assessment has identified a “severe impact” prior to mitigation due to:

“high level landscape sensitivity and high magnitude of impact for the indicative housing capacity (1415 houses)”.

10.61 Table 4 reinforces the assertion of this document that the west of Murrell Green displays an intimate parkland character:

“The areas of woodland and the wooded field boundaries and enclosures are a significant feature with the eastern parts of the site. These add positively to the landscape character of the site, and combined with the sloping and undulating topography and the lakes at the north of the site, make for an attractive ‘parkland landscape’ to the east of SHL136.”

10.62 This is reinforced within Table 5 which states:

“The site represents greenfield land, within the attractive countryside between Hook and Hartley Wintney. The eastern parts of the site in particular provide a highly attractive wooded/parkland setting for any new development…”

10.63 The table states that the south-eastern area of Murrell Green is “dominated by the converging railway and M3 motorway transport corridors”. However, this was not found

20997/A5 58 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

to be the case on visiting Murrell Green. Although the motorway is audible in the south of the Site, its partial location within cutting and the strong areas of woodland planting reduce its influence, despite its proximity, and have little effect on the perception of tranquillity within SHL parcels 184 and 136. This is supported by the description under the heading of the views into Murrell Green from the surrounding areas which acknowledges that inter-visibility between STR011 and the M3 is limited:

“For example, views of the southwestern part of SHL167 are possible from the M3 Motorway, before the motorway goes into the cutting further east. These views would not be noticeable when travelling at speeds for much of the year due to some boundary screening, but would be more obvious in winter months.”

10.64 Table 4 also acknowledges the potential impacts upon the extensive rights of way network within Murrell Green:

“There is the potential that development of the site could give rise to significant negative impacts on the users of these PROWs.”

Visual Impact

10.65 Table 8 of the document states that the visual impact assessment has identified a “severe impact” prior to mitigation due to “high level visual sensitivity and high magnitude of impact for the indicative housing capacity (1415 houses)”. Table 4 acknowledges the openness of the central and western areas of the Site and their “more extensive views”.

10.66 Under the heading of 'Potential impacts to surrounding uses', Table 4 makes reference to the visual enclosure of the eastern areas of the Site but underplays potential impacts on the distinctive, rural and tranquil landscape character of this area.

10.67 With regards to the east of Murrell Green, table 4 states:

“As the sites that form the west of STR011 currently comprise open fields, any development proposals in these areas have the potential to result in changes to the longer-distance views from existing development to the west, including the eastern parts of Hook. It is important to bear in mind that the views of the west of the site from Hook and the Whitewater Valley are currently dominated by the major overhead power transmission lines. If the opportunity to underground the power transmission lines was taken forward as a result of development, it may be possible to improve on the existing views from the west.”

10.68 It is acknowledged that the pylons are visible within views towards the west of Murrell Green and are detracting features, due to their size. However, it is not the case to state that they

20997/A5 59 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

‘dominate’ the view as the overall character of views from the west are rural in nature, with mature woodland on the horizon, which new development will obscure and alter the character of the landscape.

Potential for Coalescence

10.69 In relation to the potential for coalescence, Table 4 echoes the findings of this report:

“The site occupies the open countryside areas between Hook to the west and Phoenix Green/Hartley Wintney to the northeast. Therefore, if the site was to be developed in any significant way, it would erode what is currently a largely open and undeveloped area of countryside between the two settlements.”

Summary

10.70 Table 10 – Sustainability Appraisal has identified significant effects in relation to Sustainability Object SA9: To protect and enhance the District’s countryside and rural landscape with the following explanation:

“Development would result in the loss of a large area of open countryside, affecting 7 PROWs. Development on more elevated parts of the site could harm the rural setting of Hartley Wintney. Further landscape harm may result from the widening / improvement of local roads, and increased levels of traffic.”

10.71 In relation to coalescence, under SA6 on page 31 of table 10, the document states:

“Potential negative effects are also significant: development would result in the near-coalescence of Hartley Wintney and Hook; development on more elevated parts of the site could harm the rural setting of Hartley Wintney; a large influx of new residents could have an adverse effect on community identity...”

10.72 The Detailed Site Assessment produced on behalf of Hart District Council supports the findings of the Landscape and Visual Appraisal in that developing Murrell Green would:

 lead to adverse landscape impacts upon a high quality, parkland type landscape to the east; and  adverse visual impacts on views form the west and south-west, including the Bassett Meads Country Park.

10.73 In addition, development at Murrell Green would lead to the physical and perceptual coalescence of Hook and Phoenix Green / Hartley Wintney.

20997/A5 60 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

Draft Policy Review

10.74 Murrell Green is allocated under Policy SC2 of the Hart District Draft Strategy and Sites Document. As identified with the documents described above, development within Murrell Green would cause coalescence between Hook and Phoenix Green / Hartley Wintney and would have the potential for significant adverse impacts upon landscape character and views. This is supported by the sustainability appraisal which identifies Murrell Green as having significant adverse impacts in relation to Sustainability Object SA9: To protect and enhance the District’s countryside and rural landscape.

10.75 Within the Draft Strategy and Sites Document, a number of key issues are identified, including Issue 6:

“To deliver development where possible, which respects the separate character and identity of Hart’s settlements and landscapes.”

10.76 Figure 5: The Spatial Strategy on page 31 of the document, identifies the location of the new settlement at Murrell Green and new gaps between settlements, supported by Policy MG6. Development within the land at Murrell Green would not provide a gap between the Site and Phoenix Green / Hartley Wintney and would create a single, expense of development, particularly when experienced along the A30. This would be in contravention with Policy MG6 as a result of the diminishing of the physical and / or visual separation of settlements .

10.77 Paragraph 116 states that Murrell Green is the most favoured alternative when considered against the land around Winchfield Station but this is based on unsound conc lusions which are unsupported by the evidence within the Landscape Capacity Study and the Detailed Sustainability Appraisal of STR011.

10.78 Paragraph 160 states that “Gaps are designated however, to prevent the coalescence of settlements and maintain their separate identity”. Paragraph 161 goes on to acknowledge the effects of development on visual coalescence. The gap identified between Murrell Green and Hook as identified under Policy MG6 would not be sufficient to prevent the perceptual merging of the settlements and would result in the creation of the impression of a single area of development extending along the A30.

10.79 Policy SC2 part F states that the development at Murrell Green will:

“Respect areas of undeveloped land between the new neighbourhood, Phoenix Green and Hook, to maintain significant physical and visual gaps and thereby preserve the separate identity of these settlements.”

20997/A5 61 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

10.80 The findings of the LVA and the evidence within the Landscape Capacity Study and Detailed Site Assessment documents has identified that this aim is not achievable and that development at Murrell Green will result in physical and perceptual coalescence with Hook and Phoenix Green.

10.81 Policy NE2: Landscape states that new development will be supported where “there will be no detriment to: the visual amenity and scenic quality of the landscape”. However, the sustainability report for STR011 has identified significant landscape and visual effects that may reduce to moderate landscape and visual effects with mitigation.

Conclusion on Murrell Green

10.82 The landscape and visual appraisal of the land at Murrell Green has identified that development would result in physical and visual coalescence with Hook to the west and Phoenix Green / Hartley Wintney to the east, resulting in the perception of a single body of development extending along the A30 and eroding the identities of the existing settlements.

10.83 This assertion is supported by evidence with the Detailed Site Assessment Document. The land at Murrell Green does not provide sufficient space between itself and the neighbouring settlements to perform the role of a gaps as identified in Policy MG6 parts x and xi of the Draft Strategy and Sites Document, and would therefore be in contravention of the Spatial Strategy as outlined on Figure 5 on page 31, and the stated aim set out within Issue 6 on page 22, i.e. to prevent the coalescence of settlements and prevent the loss of their individual identity.

10.84 The assessment of the Landscape Capacity Study produced by Hart District Council has identified that the conclusions brought forward, i.e. that the landscape capacity of parcel HO - 03 and HW-04 is 'medium', is not justified by the findings of the document and that they are, therefore, not sound.

10.85 The LVA supports the findings of the Landscape Capacity Study as set out within the tables, that the parcels at HO-03 and HW-04 are of medium to high landscape and visual sensitivity and are therefore of medium to low landscape capacity, such that:

10.86 The review of the Stage 4 Detailed Site Assessment for STR011 – North-West Winchfield, which corresponds with Murrell Green, has highlighted that the information set out within the tables corresponds with the findings that the land at Murrell Green has an intimate and tranquil

20997/A5 62 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Review of Murrell Green

landscape character in the east and is therefore of higher landscape sensitivity than suggested by the Council.

10.87 Additionally the west part of Murrell Green is open in relation to views from the edge of Hook and the north-east expansion of Hook and therefore this part of Murrell Green is of higher visual sensitivity. This visual openness to the west of Murrell Green is also shown to create the potential for perceptual and physical coalescence between Hook and Murrell Green, as supported by text within the Detailed Site Assessment for STR011.

20997/A5 63 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Summary and Conclusion

11.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

11.1 The landscape character across Winchfield ('the Site') is characterised by arable, horse paddocks and grassland fields interspersed by areas of woodland, intermittent trees, hedgerows and mature roadside vegetation and localised infrastructure with solar panel s.

11.2 The combination of the vegetation structure, localised undulation in the landform and the physical severance of the railway embankment results in varying degrees of enclosure across the Site, with the areas in proximity to the railway line and the M3 co nsidered to be more enclosed and with a reduced sense of countryside and openness than those in the south -east part of the Site, adjacent to Winchfield Hurst.

11.3 The rural character of the Site is eroded by the inter-visibility with road networks, the engineered form of the railway embankment and views of trains, inter-visibility with residential properties in Winchfield Hurst and the overhead pylons which cross part of the Site. This detraction from countryside is most notable in the area of land between the railway and the M3, in Parcels B, C and D, and to the south of the railway, across Parcel F.

11.4 Therefore, the field work support the published landscape studies, in that the M3, the existing road network and the rail line erode the rural character of the Site due to the inter-visibility and audible noise with these features. Additionally, the low lying position of the Site overall reflects the low visibility noted within the published landscape character studies for this part of Hart.

11.5 Views of the Site are from close range locations such as the roads and PRoW crossing the Site, whilst views from the wider landscape are screened by existing vegetation. The combination of the identified ridge lines, the Site's low lying position and vegetation extents physically and visually separate the Site from the settlements of Fleet and Hook. The Site is therefore visually contained.

11.6 The more sensitive parts of the Site are the northern part (Parcel A) due to its slightly more elevated position with the landscape, its relationship to Hartley Wintney and that it exhibits a parkland character. Other sensitive parts are the areas of ancient woodland and the southern edge of the Site, as it borders the Basingstoke Canal and Winchfield Hurst.

11.7 The less sensitive parts of the Site are between the M3 and the railway line and to the south of the railway line extending to Station Road. This is because these parts of the Site exhibit common place agricultural fields and are well enclosed from the wider landscape by the combination of existing vegetation, low lying landform and the railway embankment. In addition, they exhibit a fragmented character.

20997/A5 64 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Summary and Conclusion

11.8 The Site is considered to provide the opportunity for a new 1,800 residential settlement as the Site is:

 Not covered by any national or local landscape designations, nor is it within a Conservation Area nor does it contain historically valued buildings;  Contains a common place agricultural land use;  In a low lying position relative to the wider landscape as a result of surrounding ridge lines, which result in the Site being well screened and enclosed in relation to this wider context. This limited inter-visibility is supported by the published landscape character assessments and Hart's 2017 Sustainability Appraisal (reviewed in the following chapters);  Predominantly flat, meaning there would be less requirements for cut and fill operations required to integrate a new residential settlement, such that the underlying landform pattern can be retained;  Already exhibits a fragmented character as a result of its proximity to the M3 and the railway embankment, along with large scale overhead power lines. This fragmented character is supported by the published landscape studies; and  Is consolidated around existing infrastructure and an existing settl ement pattern, such that it would form a logical extension to Winchfield.

Review of Hart's Landscape Capacity Study 2016

11.9 Hart's Landscape Capacity Study has been reviewed and is considered not to be sound in relation to NPPF paragraph 182 as the methodology and supporting assessments are not based on proportionate evidence.

11.10 With regards to the Methodology:

 The assessment of Landscape Sensitivity is based upon the degree to which the landscape in question is able to accommodate change without adverse impacts . Given that the majority of the land in the Study is agricultural, this will inevitably experience adverse impact in the form of residential development and therefore the assessment parameter is flawed;  The visual sensitivity methodology also considers that recreational pursuits, such as walking are considered to be more sensitive than transient views of people travelling through an area. However, whilst persons walking may be engaged in the appreciation of a landscape, they are certainly transient, particularly in the context of the number of long distance routes and therefore it is considered that the Study has over stated the sensitivity of walking routes;

20997/A5 65 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Summary and Conclusion

 The table on page 23 which correlates Landscape Character Sensitivity and Landscape Value is considered to be incorrect. For example, a 'high' landscape character sensitivity combined with a 'high' landscape value equate via the matrix to a 'high' landscape capacity, i.e. the landscape can accommodate significant change. This discrepancy is borne out by BH-01 which has a 'high' landscape character sensitivity and 'high' landscape valve, yet the overall landscape capacity is low. According to the Landscape Capacity table on page 23 it should be 'High';  The Study uses inconsistent densities as part of the assessment, with the introduction referring to a density of 30dph, but paragraph 5.7 Note 1 provides the density as 30 - 35 dph; and  The Study does not adopt a consistent approach to the scoring. For example, for Winchfield W1-02 (covering the central part of the Site), the landscape sensitivity scores are 'Medium', 'Low / Medium' and 'Low / Medium'; resulting in a total score or Medium, i.e. the higher score from the amalgamation of the individual scores. Yet, for Murrell Green the landscape sensitivity scores are 'Medium /High, 'Medium / High and 'Medium'; but the total score is 'Medium'. This is the lower score from the amalgamation of the individual scores, not the highest.

11.11 From the above, the Hart's methodology is therefore considered not to be sound.

11.12 The Site is included within the Study as parcels as:

 HW-01 (the north part of the Site);  WI-01 (the south central part of the Site); and  WI-02 (the north central part of the Site.

11.13 In relation to WI-01 the Study notes that the Overall Landscape Capacity is 'low/medium', inferring:

11.14 However, this is not considered to be an appropriate judgement for this part of the Site as:

20997/A5 66 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Summary and Conclusion

 Given how well enclosed this part of the Site is in relation to the wider landscape it is considered that the visual sensitivity of the Site is lower than stated by the Study and should be 'medium';  As the woodland coverage within this part of the Site is localised to woodland blocks and field boundaries, and overall the land use is large scale agricultural fields which are open in character, the vegetation sensitivity is considered to be lessened;  The Study notes that an arable crop habitat will be less sensitive than one of species rich grassland and therefore the sensitivity of the pattern of semi -natural habitats is considered to be lessened;  As a flat landform, without distinctive features such as valleys and elevation, the sensitivity of the landform is lessened;  The tranquillity is stated as 'very quiet - occasional train noise'. This is considered to be an understatement, with the trains being highly visible and frequent, such that the perceptual is not one that is 'very quiet';  This part of the Site is not covered by any national or local landscape designations; and  The perceptual aspects (tranquillity) are influenced by the noise and inter -visibility with the railway line, existing residential properties, vehicles and overhead pylons.

11.15 The Overall Landscape Capacity for WI-01 should therefore be revised to 'medium' equating to:

Review of Murrell Green Development Option

11.16 The landscape and visual appraisal of the land at Murrell Green has identified that development would result in physical and visual coalescence with Hook to the west and Phoenix Green / Hartley Wintney to the east, resulting in the perception of a single body of development extending along the A30 and eroding the identities of the existing settlements.

11.17 This assertion is supported by evidence with the Detailed Site Assessment Document. The land at Murrell Green does not provide sufficient space between itself and the neighbouring settlements to perform the role of a gaps as identified in Policy MG6 parts x and xi of the Draft Strategy and Sites Document, and would therefore be in contravention of the Spatial Strategy as outlined on Figure 5 on page 31, and the stated aim set out within Issue 6 on page 22, i.e. to prevent the coalescence of settlements and prevent the loss of their individual identity.

11.18 The assessment of the Landscape Capacity Study produced by Hart District Council has identified that the conclusions brought forward, i.e. that the landscape capacity of parcel HO -

20997/A5 67 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Summary and Conclusion

03 and HW-04 is 'medium', is not justified by the findings of the document and that they are, therefore, not sound.

11.19 The LVA supports the findings of the Landscape Capacity Study as set out within the tables, that the parcels at HO-03 and HW-04 are of medium to high landscape and visual sensitivity and are therefore of medium to low landscape capacity, such that:

11.20 The review of the Stage 4 Detailed Site Assessment for STR011 – North-West Winchfield, which corresponds with Murrell Green, has highlighted that the information set out within the tables corresponds with the findings that the land at Murrell Green has an intimate and tranquil landscape character in the east and is therefore of higher landscape sensitivity than suggested by the Council.

11.21 Additionally the west part of Murrell Green is open in relation to views from the edge of Hook and the north-east expansion of Hook and therefore this part of Murrell Green is of higher visual sensitivity. This visual openness to the west of Murrell Green is also shown to create the potential for perceptual and physical coalescence between Hook and Murrell Green, as supported by text within the Detailed Site Assessment for STR011.

Conclusion

11.22 Winchfield is considered to be able to accommodate new residential development set within a robust landscape framework. This is due to its low lying position and enclosure in relation to surrounding settlement patterns, as well as its position adjacent to existing road and rail infrastructure, which have fragmented the existing landscape character, as noted by the published landscape assessments.

11.23 Hart's Landscape Capacity Study (2016) is not sound, due to errors within the methodology and reporting of landscape sensitivity. The part of the Site to the south of the railway has been identified as exhibiting a 'low/medium' capacity for development, however the LVA has demonstrated that the capacity of this part of the Site is greater, and that it exhibits a medium capacity for development.

11.24 New residential development at Winchfield will be able to be accommodated within the existing landscape and visual amenity to a greater extent than development at Murrell Green and therefore reduce the potential for adverse landscape and visual effects.

20997/A5 68 June 2017 Winchfield Garden Community Summary and Conclusion

11.25 This is because Winchfield is in a low lying landform and enclosed from the wider landscape by a series of vegetated ridgelines. In contrast Murrell Green is in an elevated position in relation to Hook and the proposed north-east expansion of Hook, such that it is far more visible than Winchfield from surrounding settlement patterns and development at Murrell Green would be far more visually apparent and prominent, eroding views of wooded skylines.

11.26 The landscape character sensitivity of Winchfield is inherently lower than that at Murrell Green as it consists of common place fields overall, as opposed to Murrell Green which exhibits a much stronger parkland character. As a result, the ability for Winchfield to accommoda te change is greater than Murrell Green.

11.27 Additionally, development at Winchfield would be focused upon the existing settlement pattern and consolidated to areas between existing road and rail infrastructure, such that development would not result in the physical or perceived coalesces with Hook or Fleet. In contrast, development at Murrell Green will result in the perceptual and physical coalescence with Hook, directly contradicting the vision and policies within the Draft Local Plan.

11.28 It is therefore recommended that from a Landscape and Visual perspective, development is focused at Winchfield and not Murrell Green and the Draft Local Plan is amended accordingly.

20997/A5 69 June 2017

SITE APPRAISAL PHOTOGRAPH A

SITE APPRAISAL PHOTOGRAPH B

SITE APPRAISAL PHOTOGRAPH C WINCHFIELD

SITE APPRAISAL PHOTOGRAPHS: A - C RECOMMENDED VIEWING DISTANCE: 20CM @A1 DATE TAKEN: MARCH 2017 PROJECT NUMBER: 20997 SITE APPRAISAL PHOTOGRAPH D

SITE APPRAISAL PHOTOGRAPH E

SITE APPRAISAL PHOTOGRAPH F WINCHFIELD

SITE APPRAISAL PHOTOGRAPHS: D - F RECOMMENDED VIEWING DISTANCE: 20CM @A1 DATE TAKEN: MARCH 2017 PROJECT NUMBER: 20997 PRoW 17 Residential development on St Savin

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 1: VIEW FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY 17, LOOKING SOUTH

PRoW 18 PRoW 18

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 2: VIEW FORM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY 18, LOOKING SOUTH

Sprats Hatch Lane The Hurst Pale Lane

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 3: VIEW FROM CHATTER ALLEY, THE HURST AND PALE LANE INTERSECTION, LOOKING NORTH-WEST WINCHFIELD

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPHS: 1 -3 RECOMMENDED VIEWING DISTANCE: 20CM @A1 DATE TAKEN: MARCH 2017 PROJECT NUMBER: 20997 Pale Lane

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 4: VIEW FROM PALE LANE, LOOKING WEST

Parkfield Copse Pale Lane

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 5: VIEW FROM PALE LANE, LOOKING SOUTH-WEST

Hart Leisure Centre

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 6: VIEW FROM OPEN SPACE, TO THE WEST OF FLEET, LOOKING WEST WINCHFIELD

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPHS: 4 -6 RECOMMENDED VIEWING DISTANCE: 20CM @A1 DATE TAKEN: MARCH 2017 PROJECT NUMBER: 20997 Towing Path Towing Path

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 7: VIEW FROM TOWING PATH ALONG BASINGSTOKE CANAL, LOOKING NORTH-WEST

PRoW 10 Basingstoke Canal

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 8: VIEW FROM BASELEY’S BRIDGE ON BASINGSTOKE CANAL, LOOKING NORTH-EAST

Church of St Mary PRoW 6 Court House Rounde Copse

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 9: VIEW FORM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY 6, LOOKING NORTH WINCHFIELD

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPHS: 7 - 9 RECOMMENDED VIEWING DISTANCE: 20CM @A1 DATE TAKEN: MARCH 2017 PROJECT NUMBER: 20997 PRoW 8 Winchfield Court Farm Withy Bed Copse

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 10: VIEW FORM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY 8, LOOKING NORTH-EAST

Odiham Road (B3016) Odiham Road (B3016)

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 11: VIEW FROM ODIHAM ROAD (B3016), LOOKING EAST

Station Road Access to Oak Farm Nursery Station Road

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPH 12: VIEW FROM STATION ROAD, LOOKING NORTH WINCHFIELD

SITE CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPHS: 10 - 12 RECOMMENDED VIEWING DISTANCE: 20CM @A1 DATE TAKEN: MARCH 2017 PROJECT NUMBER: 20997 bartonwillmore.co.uk town Planning Masterplanning & Urban Design Architecture Landscape Planning & Design Project Management & Cost Consultancy Environmental & Sustainability Assessment Graphic Design Public Engagement research

All Barton Willmore stationery is produced using recycled or FSC paper and vegetable oil based inks