LAND AT HAVERINGLAND HALL PARK
Landscape and Visual Appraisal
JSL3155/170 Land at Haveringland Hall 2.0 31 January 2020
rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Quality Management
Version Status Authored by Reviewed by Approved by Review date
1.0 For Planning Paul Hopper Nick Mannering
2.0 For Planning Paul Hopper Craig Thomson Craig Thomson 31.01.2020
Approval for issue
Craig Thomson 31 January 2020
File/Model Location
Document location: P:\3100 Series\JSL3155 - Haveringland Hall\Report
Model / Appendices location:
© Copyright RPS Group Plc. All rights reserved. The report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client and unless otherwise agreed in writing by RPS Group Plc, any of its subsidiaries, or a related entity (collectively 'RPS'), no other party may use, make use of, or rely on the contents of this report. The report has been compiled using the resources agreed with the client and in accordance with the scope of work agreed with the client. No liability is accepted by RPS for any use of this report, other than the purpose for which it was prepared. The report does not account for any changes relating to the subject matter of the report, or any legislative or regulatory changes that have occurred since the report was produced and that may affect the report. RPS does not accept any responsibility or liability for loss whatsoever to any third party caused by, related to or arising out of any use or reliance on the report. RPS accepts no responsibility for any documents or information supplied to RPS by others and no legal liability arising from the use by others of opinions or data contained in this report. It is expressly stated that no independent verification of any documents or information supplied by others has been made. RPS has used reasonable skill, care and diligence in compiling this report and no warranty is provided as to the report’s accuracy. No part of this report may be copied or reproduced, by any means, without the prior written consent of RPS.
Prepared by: Prepared for:
RPS John L Broome CBE and Haveringland Hall Country Park Ltd
Paul Hopper BA (Hons), Dip LA, CMLI
Lakesbury House, Hiltingbury Road Hampshire SO53 5SS
T +44 2380 810 440 T E [email protected] E
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2 APPRAISAL METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ...... 2 3 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT ...... 12 4 BASELINE ENVIRONMENT ...... 17 5 DESIGN PROPOSALS ...... 25 6 ASSESSMENT OF LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL EFFECTS...... 26 7 RESIDUAL EFFECTS AND CONCLUSION ...... 37
Figures Figure 1 Designations and Local Plan Housing Allocations Figure 2 ZTV and Representative Viewpoint Locations Figure 3a-m Representative Viewpoints Figure 4 Site Specific Landscape Character Areas
Appendices Appendix A Landscape Type ‘D: Tributary Farmland’ and Landscape Character Area ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’ (Extract from Broadland Landscape Character Assessment)
Appendix B Summary of Landscape Appraisal
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
1 INTRODUCTION General 1.1 RPS has been commissioned by John L Broome CBE and Haveringland Hall Country Park Ltd to prepare a Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) of the proposed development of a site at Haveringland Hall, Norfolk. The application site (hereinafter referred to as the Site) falls within the administrative area of Broadland District Council (BDC). It is approximately 45 hectares in extent. 1.2 The proposed development is for the construction of a holiday and leisure park comprising 280 units of holiday accommodation; landscaping; drainage and associated infrastructure works, inclusive of a visitor car park. The holiday accommodation units would comprise a mix of two storey log cabins, single storey lodge/ villas, treehouses and ‘tipi’ type cabins, together with new access roads and pathways. It would also include new native species tree, woodland and hedgerow planting.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 1 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
2 APPRAISAL METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
General 2.1 The Landscape and Visual Appraisal considers the potential effects of the proposed development upon: ● Landscape character in general; ● Individual elements and features in the landscape; and, ● Visual amenity of individuals who would view the proposed development.
Distinction Between Landscape and Visual Effects 2.2 As set out in the ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment: Third Edition’, 2013 (Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment) (GLVIA3) (Ref. 1) landscape and visual effects have been assessed separately, although the procedure for assessing each of these is closely linked. A clear distinction is drawn between landscape and visual effects as described below: ● Landscape effects relate to the effects of the proposed development on the physical and other characteristics of the landscape and its resulting character and quality. ● Visual effects relate to the effects on views experienced by visual receptors (e.g. residents, footpath users, tourists etc.) and on the visual amenity experienced by those people. The likely landscape and visual effects of the proposed development have been assessed by considering the change that would result from it against the landscape resource or visual receptor as outlined in the diagram below.
2.3 These factors are determined by a combination of quantitative (objective) and qualitative (subjective) appraisal using professional judgement. Magnitude of change (impact) and resource and receptor sensitivity are described in the paragraphs below. Landscape and Visual effects can be beneficial (positive) or neutral as well as adverse (negative).
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 2 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
2.4 The assessment has been carried out for the operational phase of the proposed development and has considered potential day-time effects during this phase. Fieldwork was undertaken during January 2020 when existing deciduous vegetation was without its leafcover. The assessment of potential landscape and visual effects is based upon that of the opening year during winter Year 1 (when all the construction works are complete) and during summer Year 15 when any mitigation (in the form of landscape planting) would have achieved its intended design function. Due to the timing of site work, the assessment of potential landscape and visual effects at summer Year 15 has necessarily been completed based on professional experience and judgement.
Planning Policy Context 2.5 The Site is within Norfolk, for which the determining authority is Broadland District Council (BDC). The current local plan for the Broadland district is made up of several documents. These include the ‘Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk’ (adopted March 2011), and amendments adopted January 2014 (Ref 2) and the Development Management DPD, 2015 (Ref 3). In addition, the Relevant landscape planning designations are shown on Figure 1.
Visual Baseline Zone of Theoretical Visibility 2.6 A Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) for the proposed development has been prepared based on the anticipated height of several of the lodges and tree houses throughout the Site (see Figure 2). It also shows settlements and buildings at 9 metres height, woodland blocks at 12 metres height and assumes a target visual receptor height of 1.5m. 2.7 Visual receptors include the public or community at large, residents and visitors to the area. Representative Viewpoints looking towards the proposed development have been selected. These include views from publicly accessible areas and the public rights of way network at different distances and orientations to the Application Site. They have been used to assess the potential visual effects of the proposed development (for their locations, refer to Figure 2). The Representative Viewpoints are described in Section 4.0 of the appraisal. 2.8 Baseline photographs have been taken at eye level from each of the Representative Viewpoints, using a digital SLR camera fitted with a 50mm lens. These photographs have been reproduced in the assessment with a description of the existing view and assessment of potential effects at winter Year 1 and summer Year 15 included. The Representative Viewpoints are shown on Figures 3a-3m. They are presented in accordance with the latest guidance within the Landscape Institute Technical Guidance Note 06/19, ‘Visual Representation of Development Proposals’ (Ref 4). Landscape Baseline 2.9 The landscape character baseline information referred to in this appraisal is derived from the following: National: ● National Character Area (NCA) 178: Central North Norfolk (2013) (Ref. 5). District: ● Broadland District Landscape Character Assessment SPD (September 2013) (Ref. 2).
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 3 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
2.10 Due to the variation in landscape character within the Site, the baseline to the appraisal includes a site specific landscape character assessment. This exercise has sub-divided the site into areas with their own identify and combinations of elements and features that distinguish them from one another. Eight separate site specific landscape character areas have been defined and the likely effects of the proposed development upon each has been assessed. In addition, the wider landscape within which the Site sits has also been described with reference to both the NCA 178 and the available district level landscape characterisation provided by Broadland District Council (see above). The study has included an appraisal of the likely effects upon the district level landscape character areas within the study area; reference to the National Character Area study is included to provide further context. 2.11 The landscape character areas which may be affected by the proposed development are shown on Figure 4. Appraisal Criteria and Significance of Effects 2.12 The purpose of the appraisal is to evaluate the magnitude of change (impact) upon landscape and visual resources and receptors within the study area to enable the likely key adverse or beneficial effects of the proposed development to be identified. 2.13 Published guidance states that the level of effects is ascertained by professional judgement based on consideration of the sensitivity of the baseline landscape or visual receptor and the magnitude of change as a result of the proposed development.
Sensitivity of Landscape Resource 2.14 The sensitivity of a landscape receptor is a combination of “judgements of their susceptibility to the type of change or development proposed and the value attached to the landscape” (GLVIA3, para 5.39). For the purpose of this appraisal, susceptibility and value of landscape receptors are defined as follows: • Landscape susceptibility: “the ability of the landscape receptor (whether it be the overall character or quality/condition of a particular landscape type or area, or an individual element and/or feature, or a particular aesthetic and perceptual aspect) to accommodate the proposed change without undue consequences for the maintenance of the baseline situation and/or the achievement of landscape planning policies and strategies” (GLVIA3, para 5.40). • Value of the landscape receptor: “The value of the Landscape Character Types or Areas that may be affected, based on review of designations at both national and local levels, and, where there are no designations, judgements based on criteria that can be used to establish landscape value; and, the value of individual contributors to landscape character, especially the key characteristics, which may include individual elements of the landscape, particularly landscape features, notable aesthetic, perceptual or experiential qualities, and combinations of these contributors” (GLVIA3, para 5.44).
Value 2.15 Landscape value is defined in the glossary of the GLVIA (2013) at paragraph 5.44 as the “the value of the Landscape Character Type or Areas that may be affected, based on review of any designations at both national and local levels, and, where there are no designations, judgements based on criteria that can be used to establish landscape value” and “the value of individual contributors to landscape character, especially the key characteristics, which may include
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 4 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
elements of the landscape, particular landscape features, notable aesthetic, perceptual or experiential qualities, and combinations of these contributors”. 2.16 The value of certain landscapes has been recognised, e.g. the national designations of National Park (NP). Some landscapes are locally designated, e.g. Special Landscape Area (SLA). The aspects/special qualities of the landscape that led to the designations have been noted, as has the degree to which that aspect is present in the particular area under consideration. 2.17 Other landscapes are undesignated, but valued locally for specific reasons or specific elements / features. The value of an area of landscape is expressed both through designation and also other criteria, such as tranquillity, remoteness, wildness, scenic beauty, cultural associations and conservation interests. These aspects have been summarised in the main assessment. 2.18 Landscape value is classified on a four-point scale (low, medium, high and very high) as set out in the Table below. The table can only illustrate general categories, as the effects on an area or element of landscape is specific to the development proposed and that particular aspect affected. Table 2.1: Landscape Value Value Designation Example
Very High International/ Exceptional scenic quality (and/or special qualities), no or National limited potential for substitution. E.g. World Heritage Site, National Park, AONB or key elements features within them well known to the wider public.
High National/ Regional Very attractive or attractive scenic quality, high or good /Local landscape quality, limited potential for substitution. E.g. National Park, AONB, SLA or key elements within them
Medium Regional/Local Typical and commonplace or in part unusual scenic quality, ordinary landscape quality, potential for substitution, E.g. Locally designated (SLA) or undesignated, but value expressed through literature and cultural associations or through demonstrable use.
Low Local Dull, degraded or damaged scenic quality, poor landscape quality, can be readily substituted. E.g. Undesignated. Certain individual landscape elements or features may be worthy of conservation or landscape identified would benefit from restoration or enhancement.
Condition 2.19 The evaluation of condition is based on judgements about the physical state of the landscape resource. It reflects the state of repair of individual features and elements, as indicated by the categories within Table below, or can be applied to the intactness of the resource as a whole outlined by the corresponding descriptions:
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 5 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Table 2.2: Landscape Condition Condition Example
Very Good Strong structure; very attractive with distinct features worthy of conservation; strong sense of place; no detracting features.
Good Recognisable structure; attractive with many features worthy of conservation; occasional detracting features.
Ordinary Distinguishable structure; common place with limited distinctiveness and features worthy of conservation; some detracting features.
Poor Weak structure; evidence of degradation; lacks distinctiveness and sense of place; frequent detracting features.
Very Poor Damaged structure; evidence of severe disturbance or dereliction; no distinctiveness; detracting features dominate.
Sensitivity of Visual Receptors 2.20 Visual receptors are always people. The sensitivity of each visual receptor (the particular person or group of people likely to be affected at a specific viewpoint) “should be assessed in terms of both their susceptibility to change in views and visual amenity and also the value attached to particular views” (GLVIA, para 6.31). For the purpose of this appraisal, susceptibility and value of visual receptors are defined as follows: • Visual susceptibility: “The susceptibility of different visual receptors to changes in views and visual amenity is mainly a function of: The occupation or activity of people experiencing views at the particular locations; and, the extent to which their attention or interest may therefore be focused on the views and the visual amenity they experience at particular locations” (GLVIA3, para 6.32). • Value of views: Judgements made about the value of views should take account of: “recognition of the value attached to particular views, for example in relation to heritage assets, or through planning designations; and, indicators of value attached to views by visitors, for example through appearances in guidebooks or on tourist maps, provision of facilities for their enjoyment (such as parking places, sign boards or interpretive material) and references to them in literature or art…” (GLVIA3, para 6.37). 2.21 Sensitivity is not readily graded in bands and GLVIA3 notes, with regards to visual sensitivity, that the division of who may or may not be sensitive to a particular change “is not black and white and in reality, there will be a gradation in susceptibility to change” (GLVIA3, para 6.35). In order to provide both consistency and transparency to the appraisal process, however, Table 2.3 defines the criteria which have guided the judgement as to the intrinsic susceptibility and value of the resource/receptor and subsequent sensitivity to the proposed development.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 6 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Table 2.3: Sensitivity of Landscape and Visual Receptors
Sensitivity Landscape resource/receptor Visual receptor
Landscape value is low, with no designations; May include people at their place of work, or Low landscape is in a poor condition and a engaged in similar activities, whose attention may degraded character with the presence of be focussed on their work or activity and who detractors such as industrial units; and the may therefore be potentially less susceptible to landscape has the capacity to potentially changes in view. Occupiers of vehicles whose accommodate significant change. attention may be focused on the road.
Landscape value is recognised or designated Viewers’ attention may be focused on landscape; locally; the landscape is relatively intact, with such as users of secondary footpaths, and people Medium a distinctive character and few detractors; and engaged in outdoor sport or recreation (e.g. horse is reasonably tolerant of change. riders using gallops).
Large number or high sensitivity of viewers Landscape value recognised by existing or assumed. Viewers' attention very likely to be proposed national designation. The qualities focused on landscape. for which the landscape is valued are in a High good condition, with a clearly apparent e.g. residents experiencing views from dwellings; distinctive character and absence of users of strategic recreational footpaths and cycle detractors. This distinctive character is ways; people experiencing views from important susceptible to relatively small changes. landscape features of physical, cultural or historic interest, beauty spots and picnic areas.
Magnitude of impact on landscape resources / receptors 2.22 The magnitude of impact or change affecting landscape receptors depends on the size or scale, geographical extent of the area influenced and its duration and reversibility. These factors are described below: ● Size or scale: “The extent of the existing landscape elements that will be lost, the proportion of the total extent that this represents and the contribution of that element to the character of the landscape…; the degree to which aesthetic or perceptual aspects of the landscape are altered either by removal of existing components of the landscape or by addition of new ones… ; and, “whether the effect [impact] changes the key characteristics of the landscape, which are critical to its distinctive character” (GLVIA3, para 5.49). ● Geographical extent: Distinct from scale or size, this factor considers the geographical area over which the landscape impacts will be felt, it might, for example, be a moderate loss of landscape receptors or character over a large area, or a large loss of receptors or character over a very localised area. At para 5.50 GLVIA3 notes that “in general effects [impacts] may have an influence at the following scales, although this will vary according to the nature of the project and not all may be relevant on every occasion: at the site level within the development site itself; at the level of the immediate setting of the site; at the scale of the landscape type or character area within which the proposal lies; and, on a larger scale, influencing several landscape types or character areas.” ● Duration and reversibility: Duration is categorised as short, medium or long-term. GLVIA3 explains that as there are no standard lengths of time within these categories, the assessment JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 7 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
must state what these are and why these have been chosen (GLVIA3, para 5.51). Reversibility is described as “a judgement about the prospects and practicality of the particular effect being reversed in, for example, a generation” (GLVIA3, para 5.52). Projects are considered to be permanent (irreversible), partially reversible or fully reversible. Magnitude of impact on visual receptors 2.23 As with the magnitude of landscape impacts, the magnitude of impact or change affecting visual receptors depends on the size or scale, geographical extent of the area influenced and its duration and reversibility. These factors are described below: ● Size or scale: Judgements need to take account of: “the scale of the change [impact] in the view with respect to the loss or addition of features in the view and changes in its composition, including the proportion of the view occupied by the proposed development; the degree of contrast or integration of any new features or changes in the landscape with existing or remaining landscape elements and characteristics in terms of form, scale and mass, line, height, colour and texture; and, the nature of the view of the proposed development, in terms of the relative amount of time over which it will be experienced and whether views will be full, partial or glimpses” (GLVIA3, para 6.39). ● Geographical extent: This will vary from viewpoint to viewpoint and will reflect: “the angle [orientation] of view in relation to the main activity of the receptor; the distance of the viewpoint from the proposed development; and, the extent of the area over which the changes [impact] would be visible” (GLVIA3, para 6.40). ● Duration and reversibility of visual effects: As with landscape impacts, duration should be categorised as short, medium or long-term and projects considered to be permanent (irreversible), partially reversible or fully reversible (GLVIA3, para 6.41). Table 2.4: Magnitude of Impact (or Change)
Magnitude Landscape impacts Visual impacts
The character of the view will not be altered by the proposed development. Negligible The impact of change on the perception The proposed development is at such of the landscape, the physical features a distance or is heavily screened so as or the character is barely discernible. to be barely perceptible and may only be visible in clear conditions. May go unnoticed.
Changes to the physical landscape, its character and the perception of the landscape are slight. Visible, but not prominent. Minor Small component and no marked effect on Long distance to affected landscape view. with views toward the character area/type.
The proposed development forms a Prominent. visible and recognisable feature in the Medium landscape. Has an important, but not defining influence on view; is Proposed development is within or
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 8 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Magnitude Landscape impacts Visual impacts
adjacent to affected character area/type. a key element in the view.
Scale of development fits with existing features.
Where there are substantial changes affecting the character of the landscape, or important elements. Dominant. Large Proposed development within or close to affected landscape. Has a defining influence on the view.
Size of development out of scale with existing elements.
Significance of effect 2.24 The significance of the landscape and visual effects have been assessed through consideration of the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of change. The following table outlines the broad approach adopted to assess the level of effect, together with professional judgement. This may lead some effects to fall between two categories. Table 2.5: Significance of effect
Magnitude of change Landscape and visual sensitivity Large Medium Small Negligible
High Major Major or Moderate Moderate or Minor Minor or Negligible
Medium Major or Moderate Moderate Minor Minor or Negligible
Low Moderate or Minor Minor Minor or Negligible Negligible
2.25 Significance effects of relevant aspects of the proposed development on the landscape have been described and evaluated against the following criteria, as set out in Table 2.5 overleaf: Table 2.6: Significance of landscape effects
Significance of effect Definition (landscape resource/receptor)
Where the proposed changes cannot be fully mitigated; would be uncharacteristic and Major adverse would damage a valued aspect of the landscape.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 9 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Significance of effect Definition (landscape resource/receptor)
Where some elements of the proposed changes would be out of scale or Moderate adverse uncharacteristic of an area.
Minor adverse Where the proposed changes would be at slight variance with the character of an area.
Negligible adverse Where the proposed changes would be barely discernible within the landscape.
Where the proposals would be in keeping with the character of the area and/or would maintain the existing quality or where on balance the proposals would maintain quality Neutral: (e.g. where on balance the adverse effects of the proposals are off-set by beneficial effects).
Negligible beneficial Where the proposed changes would be barely discernible within the landscape.
Where the proposed changes would reflect the existing character and would slightly Minor beneficial improve the character and quality of the landscape.
Where the proposed changes would not only fit in well with the existing character of the Moderate beneficial surrounding landscape but would improve the quality of the resource through the removal of detracting features.
Where the proposed changes would substantially improve character and quality Major beneficial through the removal of large-scale damage and dereliction and provision of far reaching enhancements.
2.26 The effect of relevant aspects of the proposed development on views have been described and evaluated as set out in Table 2.7 below. Table 2.7: Significance of visual effects
Significance of effect Definition (visual resource/receptors)
Where the proposed changes would form a major part of the view, or would be Major adverse uncharacteristic, and would alter valued views.
Where the proposed changes to views would be out of scale or uncharacteristic with Moderate adverse the existing view.
Where the proposed changes to views would be at slight variance with the existing Minor adverse view.
Negligible adverse Where the proposed changes would be barely discernible within the existing view.
Neutral Where the project would be imperceptible or would be in keeping with and would maintain the existing views or, where on balance, the proposals would maintain the quality of the views (which may include adverse effects of the proposals which are
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 10 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Significance of effect Definition (visual resource/receptors)
offset by beneficial effects for the same receptor).
Negligible beneficial Where the proposed changes would be barely discernible within the existing view.
Where the proposed changes to the existing view would be in keeping with and would Minor beneficial improve the quality of the existing view.
Where the proposed changes to the existing view would not only be in keeping with but Moderate beneficial would greatly improve the quality of the scene through the removal of visually detracting features.
Where the proposed changes to existing views would substantially improve the Major beneficial character and quality through the removal of large-scale damage and dereliction and provision of far reaching enhancements.
2.27 The level of effects has been described as Major, Moderate, Minor or Negligible. Where Negligible adverse and beneficial effects occur within the same view or same landscape, on balance, the effect can be described as ‘Neutral’. The level of effects varies according to individual circumstances and the baseline situation, for example the presence of landscape designations and/or visual detractors. 2.28 A conclusion regarding the significance of each effect on a landscape or visual receptor needs to combine separate judgements about the sensitivity of receptors and magnitude of change as a result of the proposed development. GLVIA3 states at paragraph 5.55 that a sequential approach can be taken to appraisal of significance; “susceptibility to change and value can be combined into an appraisal of sensitivity for each receptor, and size/scale, geographical extent and duration and reversibility can be combined into an appraisal of magnitude for each effect. Magnitude and sensitivity can then be combined to assess overall significance”.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 11 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
3 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT 3.1 This section identifies the international, national and local plan policies of relevance to landscape and visual matters. European Landscape Policy European Landscape Convention (2006) 3.2 The European Landscape Convention (Council of Europe, ratified 2006) (ELC) requires that each party (member state) “establish and implement landscape policies aimed at landscape protection, management and planning…” through the adoption of specific measures (Article 5). Landscape Protection is defined in Article 1d as “actions to conserve and maintain the significant or characteristic features of a landscape, justified by its heritage value derived from its natural configuration and/or from human activity.” The specific measures set out at Article 6 require, amongst other matters, each party to undertake an analysis of the characteristics and the forces and pressures on its landscapes (Article 6C, 1a (ii)) and “to assess the landscapes identified taking into account the specific values assigned to them by the interested parties and the population concerned” (Article 6C, 1b). National Policy and Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) as amended (Ref 6)
3.3 This document consolidates a number of policy statements, circulars and related documents into a single document. It replaces previous national planning policy in relation to landscape issues. Paragraph 170 states that “Planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment” (Page 49).
3.4 The NPPF emphasises the importance of sustainable development. Paragraph 7 states, “The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development” (Page 5). Three objectives of sustainable development are highlighted by the NPPF which should be considered which includes (along with Economic and Social objectives) an “Environmental Objective - to contribute to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; including making effective use of land, helping to improve biodiversity, use natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy”. These objectives should not be considered in isolation as they are mutually dependant.
3.5 The NPPF states that, the principles of creating “high quality buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve”. These are enshrined in paragraph 127 of Section 12 of the NPPF (“Achieving well-designed places”). Paragraph 127 of the NPPF states that:
“Planning policies and decisions should ensure that developments:
a) 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;
b) are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and effective landscaping;
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 12 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
c) are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities);
d) establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces, building types and materials to create attractive and distinctive places to live, work and visit;
e) optimize the potential of the site to accommodate and sustain an appropriate amount and mix of development (including green and other public spaces) and support local facilities and transport networks;
f) create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well- being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users46; and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion and resilience” (Page 38).
3.6 Section 15 of the NPPF consultation draft is entitled “Conserving and enhancing the natural environment”. Paragraph 170 states that,
“The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:
protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils;
recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, and the wider benefits from natural capital – including the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land, and of trees and woodland” (Page 48). 3.7 Paragraph 172 states that “Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues”. The Application Site is not located in either of these statutorily designated areas. 3.8 NPPF paragraph 180 b) highlights the need to “identify and protect tranquil areas which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason”.
National Planning Practice Guidance (Ref 7) 3.9 The National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) (DCLG, 2014) is a web-based guidance resource that was introduced in 2014 in order to bring together existing planning practice guidance for England in an accessible and useable way. 3.10 The NPPG sets out details in relation to protected landscapes and the need for local planning authorities to undertake landscape character assessments. Local Planning Authority Policy and Guidance Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk Adopted March 2011, amendments adopted January 2014 3.11 The Joint Core Strategy (Ref 2) sets out the policy baseline for the district. The policies considered to be relevant to this appraisal are set out below:
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 13 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Table 3.1: Relevant Landscape Planning Policies within the Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk Adopted March 2011, amendments adopted January 2014 Policy No. and Title Summary of Policy Spatial Planning Objectives Objective 1 “To minimise the contributors to climate change and address its impact Throughout Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk, high standards of design and sustainable access will be promoted to reduce greenhouse gases and adapt to the impact of climate change. Zero and low -carbon developments will be encouraged. Water efficiency will be a priority in both new and existing development. New development will generally be guided away from areas with a high probability of flooding. Where new development in such areas is desirable for reasons of sustainability (e.g. in the city centre), flood mitigation will be required and flood protection will be maintained and enhanced.” Objective 8 “To positively protect and enhance the individual character and culture of the area …… Adequate public open space, sport and recreational facilities, as well as access to the countryside, is needed locally to make sure everyone can take part in community activities. More visitors will be encouraged to the area by protecting the very qualities that make the area attractive. Gateways between the wider Norwich area and the Broads, the Brecks and the coast will be enhanced in a way that does not harm their special character.” Objective 9 “To protect, manage and enhance the natural, built and historic environment, including key landscapes, natural resources and areas of natural habitat or nature conservation value The area is a special place and everyone should be proud of where they live, work, or study. Norwich has a remarkable historic centre with some fine architecture. There are also extensive areas of open space, historic parks and gardens, wildlife sites and wooded ridges in the city. The surrounding market towns and villages are very attractive with each having its own identity. People living in the area have access to open countryside, river valleys, wildlife sites and the special qualities of the Broads and the coast. It is a priority to maintain and improve these special qualities so that everyone can enjoy them. The use of previously developed land will be prioritised to minimise the loss of agricultural land and the countryside. The scale of development we have to accommodate will require the development of some significant greenfield areas, which will affect the existing landscape. Where this is necessary, development must provide environmental gains through green infrastructure, including allotments and community gardens. Biodiversity, geodiversity and locally distinctive landscapes will be protected and enhanced. Linkages between habitats will be promoted, helping to enable adaptation to climate change. Sustainable access to the countryside will be promoted. Efficient use will be made of minerals, energy and water resources, and the production of waste will be minimised.” Area Wide Policies Policy 1: Addressing “To address climate change and promote sustainability, all development will be climate change and located and designed to use resources efficiently, minimise greenhouse gas protecting emissions and be adapted to a changing climate and more extreme weather. environmental assets Development will therefore: (Abridged) • use locally sourced materials wherever possible; • be located to minimise flood risk, mitigating any such risk through design and implementing sustainable drainage; •make the most efficient appropriate use of land, with the density of development varying according to the characteristics of the area, with the highest densities in centres and on public transport routes; • be designed to mitigate and be adapted to the urban heat island effect in Norwich; • improve the resilience of ecosystems to environmental change; The environmental assets of the area will be protected, maintained, restored and enhanced and the benefits for residents and visitors improved.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 14 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Development and investment will seek to expand and link valuable open space and areas of biodiversity importance to create green networks. Where there is no conflict with biodiversity objectives, the quiet enjoyment and use of the natural environment will be encouraged and all proposals should seek to increase public access to the countryside. In areas not protected through international or national designations, development will : • minimise fragmentation of habitats and seek to conserve and enhance existing environmental assets of acknowledged regional or local importance. Where harm is unavoidable, it will provide for appropriate mitigation or replacement with the objective of achieving a long-term maintenance or enhancement of the local biodiversity baseline; • contribute to providing a multifunctional green infrastructure network, including provision of areas of open space, wildlife resources and links between them, both off site and as an integral part of the development; • help to make provision for the long-term maintenance of the green infrastructure network. The built environment, heritage assets, and the wider historic environment will be conserved and enhanced through the protection of buildings and structures which contribute to their surroundings, the protection of their settings, the encouragement of high-quality maintenance and repair and the enhancement of public spaces. Policy 2: Promoting All development will be designed to the highest possible standards, creating a good design strong sense of place. (Abridged) In particular development proposals will respect local distinctiveness including as appropriate: • the landscape setting of settlements including the urban/rural transition and the treatment of ‘gateways’ • the landscape character and historic environment, taking account of conservation area appraisals and including the wider countryside and the Broads area • townscape, including the city and the varied character of our market towns and villages • provision of landscaping and public art • the use of sustainable and traditional materials. This will be achieved by ensuring that: • Design and Access Statements for non-residential development will show how the development will meet similar high standards Policy 8: Culture, The cultural offer is an important and valued part of the area. Existing cultural leisure and assets and leisure facilities will be maintained and enhanced. The development of entertainment new or improved facilities……will be promoted. (Abridged) Development will be expected to provide for local cultural and leisure activities, including new or improved built facilities, provide for a range of activities including performance space, and/or access to green space, including formal recreation, country parks and the wider countryside. Policies for Places Policy 17: Smaller rural In the countryside (including villages not identified in one of the above communities and the categories),….. Farm diversification, home working, small-scale and medium-scale countryside commercial enterprises where a rural location can be justified, including limited (Abridged) leisure and tourism facilities to maintain and enhance the rural economy, will also be acceptable. Other development, including the appropriate replacement of existing buildings, will be permitted in the countryside where it can clearly be demonstrated to further the objectives of this Joint Core Strategy.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 15 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Development Management DPD (2015) 3.12 The policies within the DPD do not repeat those of the Joint Core Strategy listed above, but seek to further its aims and objectives. It contains more detailed policies for the management of development and is aimed at achieving high standards of development which complement the valued attributes of the district. Table 3.2: Relevant Policies within the Development Management DPD (2015)
Policy No. and Title Summary of Policy Policy GC4 - Design Development will be expected to achieve a high standard of design and (Abridged) avoid any significant detrimental impact……Proposals should pay adequate regard to: i. The environment, character and appearance of an area; ii. Ii. Reinforcing local distinctiveness through careful consideration of the treatment of space throughout the development, the appearance of new development, the scale of new development and landscaping; iii. Meeting the reasonable amenity needs of all potential future occupiers; iv. Considering the impact upon the amenity of existing properties; v. Making efficient use of land and resources Policy EN2 - In order to protect the character of an area, development proposals Landscape should have regard to the Landscape Character Assessment SPD and, in particular, consider any impact upon as well as seek to protect and enhance where appropriate: i. Gaps between settlements; ii. Visually sensitive skylines, hillsides and valley sides and important views including the setting of the Broads; iii. Nocturnal character; iv. Conservation Areas; v. Scheduled Ancient Monuments; vi. Historic Parks and Gardens; vii. Green spaces including natural and semi-natural features as well as geological/ geomorphological features which make a significant contribution towards defining the character of an area.
Landscape Character Assessment Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) September 2013 3.13 The SPD (Ref 8) provides an up-to-date integrated assessment of the landscape character of the district in accordance with the current guidance and best practice. It includes an assessment of the landscape character of the district, considering not only scenic and visual characteristics but also the physical and historical influences that have shaped the landscape. A total of six ‘Landscape Character Types’ are defined, within which sixteen ‘Landscape Character Areas’ have been identified. 3.14 The SPD incorporates the ‘Broadland District Landscape Character Assessment’ completed by Chris Blandford Associates in May 2008 (Updated September 2013).
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 16 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
4 BASELINE CONDITIONS Site Context 4.1 The small settlement of Haveringland is just under 2km to the south of the Site. The Site is known as Haveringland Hall Park and forms part of the wider and more extensive former Haveringland Hall Estate. Whilst the park has seen a number of homes (or Haveringland Halls) since medieval times, only the Coach House now remains, this has now been converted to provide holiday accommodation and conference facilities, amongst others. The site of the medieval Haveringland Hall can still be defined on the ground, enclosed by its moated remains to the north of the Site. 4.2 The medieval Haveringland Church, to the south of the Site, is one of 124 existing round-tower churches in Norfolk. It stands isolated on a disused World War Two airfield (Swannington airfield) that was once part of the park to Haveringland Hall. The airfield was home to Mosquito and Spitfire squadrons during World War Two. Although now mostly ploughed up, portions of runway remain and some buildings, including the rifle range complex, still remain. A further cultural heritage feature near to the Site is Stump Cross, standing at the side of the Haveringland Road, part of a medieval stone cross. 4.3 Parts of the Site and the landscape to the east (Great Wood) are wooded with a mix of plantation woodland and semi-natural broadleaved woodland. However, the main landuse and characterising feature of the wider landscape is agriculture with a mix of fields under pasture and arable cultivation with a field pattern defined by hedgerows and small woodlands. Albeit, the fields are large and extensive within parts of the study area. There is also a scattered settlement pattern with country homes, parklands and farmsteads; both standing alone and in small hamlets connected by small country lanes as well as Haveringland Road and the B1149 (Holt Road).
Landform and Drainage Features 4.4 Topography within the landscape character area within which the Site sits is described in the Landscape Character Assessment SPD 2013, as being influenced by the tributaries of the River Wensum and the Upper Bure. However, neither of these rivers are within the study area itself. The landscape is described as gently rolling. Within the Site itself, Haveringland Lake is an important water feature, which is fed by several springs which emerge to the west and north of the Site. Land Use and Land Cover 4.5 Landuse is extensively agriculture and the landscape within the study area comprises a mosaic of parkland, arable fields, woodland, copses of mature trees and clipped hedgerows. Part of the market town of Cawston is located on the extreme north-west edge of the study area. Elsewhere, the settlement pattern is nucleated. Parkland estates, houses and plantations are also a characteristic. Public Rights of Way (PRoW) 4.6 There are no public rights of way which run through the Site itself. The nearest is a public footpath to the north of the Site which connects Haveringland Road with Holt Road (B1149) in the east and Cawston to the north-west.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 17 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Landscape Designations 4.7 There are no areas within the study area which form part of a National Park or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The landscape may thus be regarded as not being of National importance for its landscape value and scenic quality. However, Great Wood, which partly lies within the Site and abuts its east boundary is Ancient Woodland and CRoW Access Land. 4.8 Haveringland Hall Coach House and Haveringland Parish Church are listed buildings; the former is within the Site. Buxton Heath is also a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) within the east of the study area.
Landscape Character National Level Landscape Character 4.9 The National Character Area (NCA) profile published by Natural England (Natural England 2013) has been reviewed to develop an appreciation of the wider landscape, landscape character and context of the area. 4.10 The Site and the majority of the study area lie within Central North Norfolk NCA 78. It is a gently undulating landscape and is described further as follows: “This is ancient countryside with a long-settled agricultural character, where arable land is enclosed by winding lanes and hedgerows, interspersed with woodland and remnant heath and dissected by lush pastoral river valleys. A patchwork of cultivated land, numerous church spires, distant wooded horizons and big skies dominates the landscape. This is a predominately tranquil place, with isolated market towns and scattered villages and farmhouses, their red brick, flint walls and pantile roofs an intrinsic and important component of Norfolk’s built character, reflecting the underlying geology. The area is rich in 18th-century estates and medieval churches,….. The area is well wooded for Norfolk and important for its remnant heathland, which was once much more extensive….. The main pressures for change to the area are posed by growth and a need to accommodate increased development, especially around Norwich. Other key challenges include the potential for further agricultural intensification, a need for sustainable approaches to commercial farming practices and managing ongoing visitor pressures in coastal areas. Maintaining the traditional farmed landscape of the Central North Norfolk NCA through sustainable land management practices – to help protect its important natural processes and resources, its areas of high tranquillity, accessibility to important coastal features and geodiversity – and enhancing the landscape for recreational and biodiversity opportunity will present further challenges into the future.” 4.11 Its key characteristics include the following: ● A gently undulating, sometimes flat, landscape dissected by river valleys,……. ● Gravels, sands, chalk erratics and glacial till left behind by the retreating ice of Pleistocene glaciations, and the resulting complexity of soils, determine natural vegetation patterns. ● Underlying chalk aquifer, small fast-flowing chalk rivers and biodiversity-rich, wide, lush river valleys with wooded valley slopes,…. ● Tranquil agricultural landscape with extensive areas of arable land, dominated by cereals with break-cropping of sugar beet and oilseed rape, and some pastures along valley floors.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 18 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
● Ancient countryside, much of it enclosed by the 16th century, with a sporadically rationalised patchwork field system, sinuous lanes and mixed hedges with hedgerow oaks. ● Relatively well-wooded landscape, with ancient oak and beech woodland and areas of conifer plantation. ● Large number of 18th-century estates with their associated parkland, and a great density and stylistic variety of churches, which are often prominent features of the skyline. ● Coherent vernacular architecture – marked by distinctive red brick and flint buildings with pantiled roofs, much dating from the 17th and 18th centuries with some earlier timber frame – is an inherent component of the area’s character. ● A mix of villages and many farmhouses within a complex minor road network, with a traditional pattern of market towns connected by main roads,…. ● Dense network of public rights of way…... 4.12 The NCA profile also identifies a number of landscape opportunities for the NCA. These include the following: ● Protect 18th-century estates and parkland from development and enhance their landscape character, biodiversity, wildlife and recreational value. ● Manage and enhance woodlands by replacing conifer and poplar plantations with native tree species, re-introducing traditional coppice management, creating new woodlands and connecting fragmented habitats. ● Manage and enhance existing arable farmland for wildlife by working with landowners to reinstate hedgerows, increase areas of set aside and arable margins, and adopt wildlife- friendly land management practices through stewardship schemes. ● Plan green infrastructure, including areas of broadleaved woodland to screen new developments, to enhance landscape character, improve biodiversity and recreational opportunities, and to make a positive contribution to climate change.
District Level Landscape Character 4.13 The 3km radius study area comprises two landscape character types and two landscape character areas, with the Site lying within landscape character type ‘D: Tributary Farmland’ and the ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’ landscape character area. Extracts from the ‘Broadland District Landscape Character Assessment’ SPD describing both is included in Appendix A. To the east of the B1149 (Holt Road), is part of landscape character area ‘B1: Horsford’ within landscape character type ‘B: Woodland Heath Mosaic’. 4.14 The ‘D: Tributary Farmland’ landscape character type is mainly underlain by a mixture of sand and gravels, giving rise to light and sandy soils. Albeit, pockets of Till occur. There are gentle variations in topography due to the presence of small tributary valleys which are barely noticeable within views across the landscape. The landscape has a predominantly rural character, with a dispersed settlement pattern, accessed via small, often narrow lanes, sometimes bounded by banks or ditches. Small ponds also occur within what is a predominantly arable landscape. Occasional parkland landscapes add further interest. 4.15 Forces for change within this landscape type include loss of mature hedgerow field boundaries due to agricultural intensification. Its overall condition and its overall strength of character are assessed in the study as ‘Moderate’; however, there are areas with a recognisable sense of place, with views to landmark features, i.e. churches, being available.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 19 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
4.16 The overall strategy for the ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’ landscape character area is to conserve and restore the hedgerow network and to conserve the tributary river corridors as important landscape and nature conservation features. The SPD (September 2013) recommends that species selection for any new hedges is specific to the landscape character area within which the hedgerow is to be planted; in this case ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’. Specific management objectives include the creation of all types of grassland and woodland, especially mixed grassland and scrub habitats, wetland habitats, such as wet meadows and wet woodland, blocks of woodland, parkland trees and hedgerows. 4.17 Landscape character area ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’ is described as a gently rolling landscape. The Site is located towards the eastern boundary of the landscape character area as defined by the B1149. The following inherent ‘Landscape Sensitivities’ are listed in the SPD: • Mosaic of parkland, arable fields and woodland, providing a diverse and interesting landscape character. • Mature landscape structure including substantial blocks of woodland, copses of mature trees and intact hedgerows, providing a robust visual mosaic. • Historic and architectural landscape features of large seventeenth and eighteenth century estates, including scenic parkland landscapes rich in idyllic components such as rides, parkland trees and lakes. • Landscape setting of grand houses, manors, estate settlements, churches, and halls. • Nucleated medieval market towns with a strong historic core. • Landscape setting of villages. • Distinctive and largely unspoilt landscape character. • Rich historic character and a strong sense of place. • Characteristic views across the farmland to landmark, often isolated, churches. 4.18 Of these, it is considered that the proposed development would not affect the landscape within or the wider setting to the market towns and villages within the landscape character area. The landscape planning guidelines applicable to the landscape character area are designed to conserve these landscape sensitivities, i.e. the “diverse and interesting landscape pattern and character”, and the “historic architectural and landscape features, including the seventeenth and eighteenth century parkland landscapes”. Minimising impacts upon the skyline; a guideline designed to maintain landscape elements such as church towers as distinct features on the skyline. Other guidelines include the use of vernacular materials in new developments, including brick and pantiles, to conserve the landscape setting of grand houses, manors and churches (amongst others) and to seek opportunities to restore the hedgerow network where it is fragmented. 4.19 An immediately apparent characteristic of that part of landscape character area ‘B1: Horsford’ within the study area are the extensive tracts of woodland (both deciduous and conifer plantation) to the east of the B1149. This provides a strong sense of enclosure and a wooded horizon to views to this part of the study area. There are also areas of heathland within this part of the study area based on the acidic soils which occur.
Site Specific Landscape Character 4.20 The above national and district level landscape character studies described above provide the context and setting for a more detailed description of landscape character for the Site itself, which has been sub-divided into several site specific landscape character areas as follows:
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 20 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Haveringland Hall Park Lodges and Amenity Landscape 4.21 Much of the Site is already developed and provides both permanent residential homes for people as well as holiday lodges set within an amenity landscape setting of trees, mown grasslands and gardens, together with areas of managed woodland and other habitats, including open water. This amenity landscape of lodges occupies about 12-13ha of the Site (approximately 30% or one third of the Site area) and includes lodges within ‘Charmbeck’ as well as the recently completed ‘Woodland Park’ to the immediate east. It also includes the ‘Pond’, which is a more linear landscape feature. Whilst the southern edge of the ‘Pond’ is characterised by native scrub, its northern edge is mown grassland with occasional trees. It has strong associations with the existing amenity landscape of lodges, access roads and the intensively managed amenity landscape within this site specific character area to the immediate north. Haveringland Hall Coach House and Cottages 4.22 These have been converted from an Italianate courtyard of coach house buildings to provide holiday accommodation and conference facilities, amongst others. This part of the estate was built in 1840 on a design by the Buckingham Palace architect Edward Blore, the Clock Tower entrance (with working clocks similar to that of the Palace) is thought to be the only other example of its kind. The Coach House and Cottages are more or less enclosed by existing woodland and dense vegetation. This site specific character area includes the gravel surfacings and formal courtyard, as well as land to the rear further east. 4.23 Both of the above are considered to be developed landscapes. In addition, the Site also includes the following less developed and undeveloped, semi-natural, planted and man-made habitats:
Middle Clump Mixed Plantation Woodland 4.24 This is an area of mixed plantation woodland, albeit primarily an even aged stand of mature Scots Pine with clear stems, adjacent to the northern boundary of the Site. It is separated from the existing amenity landscape of lodges and maintained grounds within ‘Charmbeck’ and the recently completed ‘Woodland Park’ development to its immediate east by a surfaced road.
Central Mixed Plantation and Semi-natural Broadleaved Woodland 4.25 This area includes parts of existing plantation woodland, mainly Scots Pine, but also an even aged stand of Oak without understorey and set within mown grassland, as well as semi-natural broadleaved woodland. Its northern section is divided in two by an existing surfaced track. There is also an earth bank within the northern block of semi natural broadleaved woodland.
Eastern Plantation, Semi-natural broadleaved and Mixed Woodland 4.26 This part of the Site includes areas of broadleaved plantation woodland, marshy grassland, introduced scrub and semi-natural broadleaved woodland; a mix of landscape and habitat types. The more easterly part of this site specific character area falls to an existing watercourse within the bottom of a shallow valley which runs broadly north-west to south-east.
South-western Semi-natural Broadleaved Woodland 4.27 Part of this area is used for materials storage, including arisings from landscape maintenance works on the Site. It also includes areas of bare ground and is a partly degraded landscape, with redundant structures, albeit these elements are contained by a fringe of semi-natural broadleaved woodland.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 21 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Haveringland Lake 4.28 This is a man-made landscape feature created by damming the watercourse flowing through the Site. It includes a large area of open water as well as marginal habitats, including reedbeds. Adjacent to its southern edge, there are areas of dense native scrub interspersed with areas of mown grassland. In contrast, its eastern edge is characterised by rough grassland and mature trees. There is a circular footpath route used by users of the existing Site as an informal footpath route. Haveringland Lake is also of some scenic value within the Site and is of some amenity importance. It also has close associations with the former Haveringland Hall and Estate.
Great Wood 4.29 This site specific landscape character area forms the eastern edge of the Site and comprises semi-natural mixed woodland, coniferous woodland, semi-natural woodland and dense scrub. It is contiguous with the remainder of Great Wood which extends further east beyond the Site boundaries. All of Great Wood, including that part within the Site, is designated as Ancient Woodland. The western edge of this site specific character area follows the boundary to the ancient woodland within Great Wood as defined by Natural England.
Overview of Landscape Condition and Value 4.30 The two district landscape character areas within the study area, i.e. ‘B1: Horsford’ and ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’ are not designated for their landscape value, i.e. no National Parks or AONBs occur. Nonetheless, the landscape mosaic of parkland, arable fields and woodland within the ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’ remains of some scenic value and is countryside. Similarly, the landscape within the woodland and heath mosaic of landscape character area ‘B1: Horsford’ is also of some scenic value. Both landscape character areas are assessed as being of Medium landscape value and in an Ordinary, but (in the case of ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’) with some areas of Poor landscape condition. 4.31 The landscape within the Site is also not designated for its landscape and scenic quality. Whilst parts of Great Wood fall within the Site boundary, its designation as ancient woodland is a reflection of the fact that it has had a continuous cover of trees since 1600. This is not a designation that necessarily reflects landscape quality. However, this part of the Site is assessed as having a good sense of wildness and some tranquillity, particularly that section to the east of Haveringland Lake. It is also of some cultural heritage interest given its associations with the former Haveringland Hall and estate. It is thus assessed as being of High landscape value. It is also assessed as being in Good condition with occasional detracting features, such as the overhead transmission line which follows its western edge and the occasional surfaced tracks running through it. 4.32 Haveringland Lake is also somewhat separate from the developed parts of the Site, namely the ‘Haveringland Hall Park Lodges and Amenity Landscape’ site specific landscape character area, which gives it some sense of remoteness and tranquillity. It is also strongly associated with the former Haveringland Hall estate and is a landscape feature that has notable aesthetic, perceptual and experiential qualities; naturally associated with water. It is therefore also assessed as being of High landscape value and in an overall Good landscape condition. 4.33 Haveringland Hall Coach House and Cottages is also a site specific landscape character area with strong associations with the former Hall and estate. Indeed, it is the sole remaining set of buildings associated with the former house and is a listed building. This site specific landscape character area also includes the local setting to the buildings provided by gravel surfacings, its courtyard and rear gardens (albeit the latter were not accessible on the day fieldwork was undertaken). It is assessed as being of a High landscape value and in Good landscape condition.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 22 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
4.34 The remaining site specific character areas are assessed as being generally typical and commonplace. They have some value given their strong associations with the Haveringland Hall parkland and estate. However, they are considered to be substitutable and thus of Medium landscape value. All are also assessed as being in an Ordinary landscape condition, except for the woodland within the South-western Semi-natural Broadleaved Woodland site specific character area, which is assessed as being in a Poor condition, given its slightly degraded appearance due to materials storage, derelict buildings and use as a maintenance yard. Visual Baseline 4.35 A preliminary visual assessment has been conducted to verify the desk study findings and confirm the extent of visual influence of the Site. A site visit was conducted on 10th January 2020.
Zone of Theoretical Visibility 4.36 A Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) for the proposed development has been prepared based on the anticipated height of several of the lodges and tree houses throughout the Site (see Figure 2). It also shows settlements and buildings at 9 metres height, woodland blocks at 12 metres height and assumes a target visual receptor height of 1.5m. The ZTV indicates that the proposed development would potentially be visible from areas to the north/ north-west, towards Eastgate, as well as to the west and south-west, albeit limited by existing woodland bordering Haveringland Road. Some fragmented visibility is also suggested with areas to the south towards Church Road. Great Wood obstruct views from the east.
Visual Receptors
Representative Viewpoints 4.37 Representative viewpoint locations have been identified and photography has been undertaken. These representative viewpoints are all from publicly accessible locations from which the ZTV indicates that the proposed development may be potentially visible. Table 4.1 below lists each of the representative viewpoints. Table 4.1 Description of Views from Selected Key Viewpoints
Representative Distance Receptor Description Viewpoint and from Site and Location Sensitivity
Vp.1: Medium View looking south-east to the northern edge of Haveringland 559m (Users of a the Site from the local road used by those Road local road) accessing Haveringland Hall Country Park by car.
Vp.2: High View looking south-east to northern edge of Site PRoW (Public 347m (Users of from a PROW which links Heveringland Road Footpath) PRoW) with Hall Farm to the north of the Site.
Vp.3: High View looking south from a Public Footpath to the PRoW (Public 371m (Users of north of the Site and to the east of Hall Farm. Footpath) PRoW)
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 23 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Representative Distance Receptor Description Viewpoint and from Site and Location Sensitivity
Vp.4: Medium Looking north-east to the southern edge of the Haveringland Parish 171m (Users of a Site, which would be experienced by visitors to Church Car Park car park) the church; most notably those arriving by car.
View looking north from a part of the churchyard Vp.5: to the north of the church and on the opposite Haveringland Parish Medium side of the building to that of the main entrance. Church (Northside 183m (Users of the View mainly experienced by those tending graves of Churchyard) Church) within the church and visitors walking around the church itself.
Vp.6: View looking east from a part of the churchyard to Medium Haveringland Parish the east of the church. View mainly experienced (Users of the Church (Eastside of 203m by those tending graves within the church and Church) Churchyard) visitors walking around the church itself.
Vp.7: View looking north-east for users of the road Medium Heveringland travelling north towards Cawston and 467m (Users of a Road Eastgate. local road)
View, more or less perpendicular to the Vp.8: Medium direction of travel from this minor road. Minor Road north of 909m (Users of a Brandiston Hall local road) Transient view which could be experience by users of the road travelling either north or south.
Looking south-east from a slightly raised Medium section of the roadside footpath. Also Vp.9: (Users of a representative of views for occupiers of Eastgate 1,158m roadside footpath) residential properties lining the north of the road.
Medium View looking north-west towards Site and Vp.10: School Lane 877m (Users of a local road) Great Wood.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 24 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
5 DESIGN PROPOSALS General 5.1 The proposed development is for the construction of holiday and leisure park comprising 280 units of holiday accommodation; landscaping; drainage and associated infrastructure works. It would also include a new visitor car park. 5.2 The holiday accommodation would include a mix of two storey log cabins, single storey lodge/ villas, treehouses and ‘tipi’ type cabins, together with new access roads and pathways. For the purposes of the appraisal, it has been assumed that the holiday accommodation units would comprise pitched roof buildings of slate (or imitation slate) roofs and would be constructed in natural stone or timber with windows. They would be of a naturally recessive colour. Surfacings for new access roads and pathways would match those found on Site and would comprise black- top with some surface texture finish. Albeit, that these surfacings too would be of a naturally recessive tone. 5.3 Landscape design proposals are shown on the Landscape Masterplan accompanying the planning application (see Drwg No. JSL3155/ 100). This drawing shows both existing trees to be removed and a mix of new native species tree, woodland and hedgerow planting. The approach to the landscape design of the proposed development is to retain existing trees wherever practical and to reinforce the existing Site boundaries, especially the open boundary to the south west looking towards Haveringland Parish Church, with new woodland and hedgerow planting. 5.4 The appraisal has assumed that new planting implemented as a part of the proposed development would have reached the following heights by summer Year 15: ● Native woodland planting: 6-8m above egl; ● Native hedgerows: 6m above egl; and ● Individual trees: 6-8m above egl.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 25 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
6 ASSESSMENT OF LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL EFFECTS Assessment of Operational Effects Landscape Effects
District Landscape Character 6.1 Both the district level landscape character areas are assessed as capable of accommodating the type of change proposed, i.e. holiday lodges/ pathways and access tracks with associated managed amenity landscape, with some impacts upon landscape character, features and elements. Haveringland Hall Park is such a landscape type which is already present in landscape character area ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’; chicken farms and some light industrial activity also occur locally to the Site. Overall, both are assessed as being of Medium susceptibility and sensitivity. 6.2 The ZTV (Figure 2) suggests that there would be very little inter-visibility between the proposed development and those parts of landscape character area ‘B1: Horsford’ to the east of the B1149 Holt Road. What limited views are available would be restricted and would not impact upon the experiential qualities of this mosaic of woodland and heath. Accordingly, the magnitude of change is assessed as No Change and the significance of effect would be ‘No Effects. 6.3 There would be direct impacts upon a small part of landscape character area ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’; however, a part of it which is already characterised by lodges set within a managed amenity landscape (Haveringland Hall Park). Potential effects upon the landscape within the Site are assessed in the sections which follow. This part of the appraisal assesses the potential effects of the proposed development upon those parts of the landscape character area outwith the Site, but within the study area. 6.4 Within the local area adjoining the Site, there are visual references to lodges and the amenity landscape within the Site. Whilst the character of views are strongly rural, the amenity landscape and lodges within the Site are partly visible within views from parts of the locally surrounding area, most notably to the south-west, given the currently open character along this boundary of the Site. During the initial period following completion, the extent of the local surrounds from which lodges would represent a more immediately noticeable element within views would be greater than exists at present. However, the landscape design strategy for the proposed development is to retain as much of the existing trees within the Site as possible and to plant those Site boundaries abutting open countryside with new hedgerow and native tree and shrub planting. This would especially be the case within the south-west of the Site where a substantial belt of new native species woodland planting is proposed. Over time, and once the new planting has established, it would reinforce the existing sense of containment to the Site and limit the potential characterising effects of the proposed development upon the local surrounds. Whilst there would be a greater sense and awareness of a rural landscape with lodges, set within an amenity landscape, from these local surrounds, this would reduce overtime as the new planting establishes and matures. It would, ultimately, largely conceal the proposed development within these local views. 6.5 At winter Year 1 following completion of the proposed development, there would be some additional locally characterising effects upon the local surrounds to the Site due to the increased visibility of the lodges within views. As such, there would be a Small magnitude of change and a Minor adverse significance of effect. However, at summer Year 15, this would be reduced to a
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 26 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Negligible magnitude of change and a Negligible adverse residual significance of effect, given the visual screening to the views that the new planting would provide once it is fully established.
Site Specific Landscape Character Areas Haveringland Hall Park Lodges and Amenity Landscape 6.6 The proposed development would be in-keeping with the type and nature of development within this intensively managed landscape. The site specific character area is thus assessed as being of Low susceptibility to the type of change proposed, i.e. it is capable of accommodating the proposed change, i.e. further holiday lodges, without undue consequences for the baseline situation. However, the landscape is intact, managed and has its own character. It is assessed as being of Medium sensitivity. 6.7 The proposed development would result in some 15No. single storey lakeside lodge villas together with parking spaces positioned on the northern side of the Pond. The area directly impacted would be mainly mown amenity grassland, albeit some existing marginal reeds and several existing mature trees would be removed. There would be some effects upon the experiential qualities of the Pond for users of the Site given that the proposed lodges would obstruct views to the Pond from parts of the site specific character area. There would thus be slightly less awareness of this aquatic habitat. A small Visitor Car Park also forms part of the proposed development and would be positioned on an area of mown grassland within an extensively parkland setting towards the higher parts of the Site. However, it is assessed that these adverse effects would be largely offset by the new native woodland planting, meadow grassland and parkland tree planting proposed within the more south-westerly parts of this site specific character area. The magnitude of change is thus assessed as Negligible and the overall significance of effect to be Neutral; the adverse effects of the proposed development due to the lakeside lodge villas and Visitor Car Park being offset and balanced by the new woodland and specimen tree planting elsewhere within the site specific landscape character area. Haveringland Hall Coach House and Cottages 6.8 This site specific character area is assessed as being of High sensitivity, given that its distinctive character is susceptible to relatively small changes. 6.9 This site specific landscape character area would remain as it is and would not be directly impacted by the proposed development. However, some 4no. tree houses would be positioned near to its south/ south western boundaries. There would thus be some change to the local landscape setting of the character area and to its sense of enclosure, as some of the existing dense vegetation which encloses the Coach House and Cottages would be removed to accommodate the proposed development. However, it is considered that sufficient existing vegetation would be retained that, consequently, the strong sense of enclosure to the Coach House and Cottages would be retained. As such, it is considered that there would be a local Negligible magnitude of change and a Negligible adverse significance of effect since, whilst parts of the proposed development would be adjacent to the affected character area, sufficient existing vegetation would be retained to maintain its sense of enclosure and to screen any potential inter- visibility between the two. 6.10 The proposed development would broaden the footprint of the existing amenity landscape of lodges, access roads and pathways interspersed with trees, gardens and grasslands, into parts of the Site which are currently wooded or quite densely vegetated. Most of these areas are thus of a noticeably different landscape character to the developed parts of the Site. Its likely effects upon these areas is further described in the following sections.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 27 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Middle Clump Mixed Plantation Woodland 6.11 Whilst Middle Clump is plantation woodland, its close proximity to the existing and intensively maintained amenity landscape of lodges within Charmbeck and the recently completed additional area of lodges to the east (Woodland Park) do have some characterising effects upon the woodland. Further, the type of development proposed does not require wholesale clearance of trees within a woodland in order accommodate the lodges, access tracks and pathways. The landscape type has the capacity to accommodate the lodges whilst retaining at least some existing trees. It is therefore considered to be capable of accommodating change of the type proposed with some impacts upon its character and elements; and as such is assessed as being of Medium susceptibility and sensitivity. 6.12 This area of mixed plantation woodland, albeit primarily an even aged stand of mature Scots Pine with clear stems, would be partly cleared as part of the proposed development with a fringe of native trees retained along its edges and, where practicable, existing trees would be retained amongst the lodges. New native species hedgerow planting and native woodland (mainly understorey native shrubs) would be planted along its boundaries with open countryside. It would then accommodate 19 two storey lodges with associated surfaced access roads and pathways and new planting along its boundaries. There would be a recognisable landscape change within this site specific landscape character area, albeit some sense of a mixed plantation woodland would be retained due to the retention of existing mature trees, which would also add a sense of maturity to what would essentially be a new site specific landscape character type of Mixed plantation woodland with holiday lodges. The site specific character area would thus become part of the wider amenity landscape of Haveringland Hall Park. The magnitude of change is assessed as Medium and the overall significance of effect as Moderate adverse. Central Mixed Plantation and Semi-natural Broadleaved Woodland 6.13 Single storey lodges, tree houses with access roads and pathways would replace parts of existing plantation woodland, mainly Scots Pine, but also an even aged stand of Oak, as well as semi- natural broadleaved woodland. However, existing higher grade trees would be retained, along with other trees amongst the new lodges, where practicable, to provide some sense of maturity to this part of the proposed development. This retained vegetation would be supplemented with new native species hedgerow planting and individual trees, also set amongst the lodges where practical. Whilst there would be a noticeable landscape change, this change would take place within a part of the Site where a relatively strong sense of the amenity landscape with lodge style development already exists. The site specific character area is thus assessed as being of Medium susceptibility and sensitivity to the type of change proposed. Whilst, the site specific landscape character area would be changed and become a part of the amenity landscape of Haveringland Hall Park, it would retain something of its woodland structure and woodland character. The magnitude of change is assessed as Medium and the significance of effect as Moderate adverse.
Eastern Plantation, Semi-natural broadleaved and Mixed Woodland 6.14 As with the other predominantly woodland landscapes directly impacted by the proposed development, due to its position adjacent to the main developed part of the Site containing an amenity landscape with holiday lodges, there is already some sense of awareness of this type of landuse affecting the experiential qualities of this site specific landscape character area. It is therefore assessed that this character area is also of a Medium susceptibility to the type of change proposed and of an overall Medium sensitivity. 6.15 This part of the proposed development would comprise two storey lodges, tree houses and single storey lodges together with associated access roads/ pathways. It would replace areas of broadleaved plantation woodland, marshy grassland, introduced scrub and semi-natural
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 28 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
broadleaved woodland; a mix of landscape and habitat types. Whilst there would be a noticeable landscape change; from a range of semi natural habitats but predominantly wooded landscape to semi-natural habitats with holiday lodges, some sense of the woodland landscape would be retained due to the retention of existing trees where practical, both along the boundaries to the character area and amongst the lodges. This retained vegetation would also be supplemented with new native tree planting, also where practical. The magnitude of change and significance of effect is assessed as Medium and Moderate adverse respectively. South-western Semi-natural Broadleaved Woodland 6.16 Whilst it is in poor condition, this site specific landscape character does retain its woodland character. However, there is strong references to the landscape of the adjacent amenity landscape with holiday lodges, both direct (maintenance yard) and indirect, through the availability of views to holiday lodges. The site specific character area is thus assessed as being of Medium susceptibility and sensitivity. 6.17 The proposed development would change part of this partly degraded wooded area to an area which would accommodate 15 single storey lodges, together with associated access roads/ pathways. Some of the adverse effects of vegetation clearance and landscape change would be reduced (and partly offset) by the existing degraded character of part of this area and the new hedgerow planting along with intermittent tree planting between the lodges. Some existing trees would also be retained, especially adjacent to its southern edge. This would also provide some sense of maturity. The landscape change would be from semi-natural broadleaved woodland with maintenance yard to one of semi-natural broadleaved woodland with holiday lodges. The magnitude of change and significance of effect would be Small and Minor adverse respectively. Haveringland Lake 6.18 This site specific landscape character area includes Haveringland Lake and adjacent land, including the area of damp woodland to its west, with mown path, within which there are references to the wider amenity landscape of the Site, both direct and indirect. It also includes the fringe of native woodland contiguous with Great Wood to the east. Whist of a High landscape value, it is assessed as being of Medium susceptibility and sensitivity to the type of change proposed given the slight characterising effects that the adjacent Haveringland Hall Park exerts upon it due to its close proximity and due to the visual references to an amenity landscape within it, i.e. mown footpaths. It is thus considered to be capable of accommodating change with some effects upon landscape character, elements and features. 6.19 The proposed development would result in the removal of some areas of dense native, developing woodland with a more wetland character in comparison to elsewhere on the Site, as well as some semi-natural mixed and broadleaved woodland along the north and east sides of the Lake. It would also impact upon some swamp habitats along its northern margins. This landscape change would take place within a part of the Site which is somewhat separate and remote from the landscape of amenity lodges within the more central parts of the Site. Its magnitude of change upon this site specific character area would thus be greater than elsewhere (Large magnitude of change), which would result in a Major adverse significance of effect. Great Wood 6.20 Great Wood is an ancient woodland site and is assessed as being of High landscape value. However, as stated elsewhere, the type of development proposed does not require wholesale clearance of trees within a woodland in order to accommodate the access tracks/ pathways. The landscape type has the capacity to accommodate these elements whilst retaining at least some existing trees. In common with the other woodland landscape types described in this appraisal,
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 29 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Great Wood is also assessed as being of Medium susceptibility to the type of change proposed and of an overall Medium sensitivity. 6.21 There would be some direct impacts upon this site specific character area, mainly as a result of the holiday lodges bordering the east side of Haveringland Lake, together with the two access roads/ pathways which would run through it to link with an existing track adjacent to the eastern edge of the Site. The latter could be aligned at detail design stage to avoid major trees within the wood. Other lodges to the north would also abut the boundary to Great Wood. However, the overall integrity of the woodland would be maintained, along with its character and quality. There would be some direct impacts but they would be limited. The magnitude of change would be Small and the significance of effect would be Minor adverse.
Visual Effects 6.22 An assessment of the visual effects of the proposed development upon the existing view from each of the representative viewpoints is provided in the Table overpage.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 30 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Table 6.1: Visual Effects: Operational Phase (Representative Viewpoints) Significance of Daytime Representative Magnitude of Effect Sensitivity Change to Existing Daytime View Viewpoints Impact Year 1 Year 15 (Winter) (Summer) Vp.1: Medium Existing (Winter): Open foreground to view afforded by extensively level (Users of a arable farmed landscape and lack of hedgerows. Distinct blocks of mixed Haveringland local road) plantation woodland within the north of the Site are an obvious feature within Road the middle-distance to the view. Little depth to the view due to the foreshortening to the view provided by the woodland blocks. Existing lodges within the Country Park are not discernible, albeit traffic entering the Site along the access road to it are an occasional feature within the view. Year 1 (Winter): Some existing trees within the plantation woodland within Middle Clump would be removed. However, a sufficient number would be retained such that Middle Clump would still read as a woodland block within Year 1 the view. Two storey lodges within the area of Middle Clump would form a (Winter) noticeable (and new) element within the view. The lodges would be visible, Small Minor adverse but not prominent. Year 15 (Summer): The tops of the two-storey lodges within the former Year 15 Middle Clump would be partly visible over and above the native species (Summer) hedgerow and tree and shrub belt planted along the northern edge of the Negligible Negligible Site as part of the proposed development. Retained intermittent trees and adverse new planting amongst the lodges would further integrate these features within the view. New lodges within the remainder of the proposed development would be screened. Part of the proposed development would be visible, but not prominent. Vp.2: High Existing (Winter): Mixed plantation woodland within Middle Clump PRoW (Public (Users of a foreshortens the view over an open foreground of arable farmland. Existing Footpath) PRoW) lodges within the Site are not discernible, albeit traffic using the existing access to it are a transient feature of the view.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 31 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Significance of Daytime Representative Magnitude of Effect Sensitivity Change to Existing Daytime View Viewpoints Impact Year 1 Year 15 (Winter) (Summer) Year 1 (Winter): The removal of trees within the mixed plantation woodland Year 1 within Middle Clump would be an immediately noticeable change to the view, (Winter) Moderate albeit Middle Clump would still read as a woodland block. Two storey lodges Medium adverse would be a noticeable element within the view. Year 15 (Summer): New planting along the northern boundary to the Site would provide some screening to the two storey lodges within Middle Clump, Year 15 which would be further reinforced by intermittent retained and new tree (Summer) Minor planting amongst the lodges. The proposed development would remain Small adverse partly visible. Vp.3: High Existing: Mixed woodland within Middle Clump is framed by woodland/ trees PRoW (Public (Users of a associated with Hall Farm within the right of the view and intervening Footpath) PRoW) woodland between the representative viewpoint and the Site within the left of the view. Open foreground provided by arable field. Year 1 (Winter): The removal of some trees within the mixed woodland within Middle Clump would be a noticeable change to the view and the 2 Year 1 storey lodges within it would be visible, albeit Middle Clump would still read (Winter) Moderate as a woodland block within the view. The proposed development would Medium adverse have an important, but not defining influence on the view. Year 15 (Summer): New native hedgerow and woodland planting would Year 15 provide some screening to two storey lodges abutting the northern Site (Summer) Minor boundary. Small adverse Vp.4: Medium Existing: Open foreground looking over pasture and falling ground to a low- Haveringland (Users of a car point forming the southern boundary to the Site, beyond which landform rises Parish Church park) within the Site to a wooded backdrop of mixed woodland. Two, 2-storey Car Park buildings are visible on the edge of deciduous woodland within the left of the view, whilst, within the right of the view, existing lodges within the Site are visible within a view filtered by existing trees and shrubs within the Site.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 32 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Significance of Daytime Representative Magnitude of Effect Sensitivity Change to Existing Daytime View Viewpoints Impact Year 1 Year 15 (Winter) (Summer) Year 1 (Winter): Some of the mixed plantation woodland within the centre of the view would be removed to accommodate single storey lodges and several tree houses. Removal of some of the deciduous trees either side of Year 1 the mixed woodland would also reveal other single storey lodges within (Winter) Moderate filtered views. The two existing buildings within the left of the view would Medium adverse remain. The proposed development would be noticeable but would not be the defining element within the view. Year 15 (Summer): New native species woodland planting towards the crest Year 15 of the hill above the open grassland within the Site and visible within the (Summer) centre of the view would more or less screen the predominantly single storey Small Minor lodges within this part of the proposed development. Other existing retained adverse trees and vegetation, along with Heveringland Parish Church would also provide some screening. Removal of some mixed plantation woodland would remain noticeable. The change would be visible but not prominent. Vp.5: Medium Existing: The position of the view is different to that of representative Haveringland (Users of the viewpoint 4, but the character of the view is very similar; albeit the Parish Church Church) representative viewpoint is slightly nearer to the Site and more of Middle (Northside of Clump within the north of the Site is visible, along with existing lodges within Churchyard) Charmbeck Park and Woodland Park. Year 1 (Winter): Similar effects as to those upon the view from Year 1 representative viewpoint 4, albeit, set against a backdrop with more of the (Winter) Moderate existing lodges within the central north of the Site visible Medium adverse Year 15 (Summer): New lodges within the proposed development would remain partly visible, albeit the proposed native woodland planting along the Year 15 southern edge of the Site would reinforce existing retained vegetation. (Summer) Minor Lodges would remain partly visible, but not prominent. Small adverse
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 33 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Significance of Daytime Representative Magnitude of Effect Sensitivity Change to Existing Daytime View Viewpoints Impact Year 1 Year 15 (Winter) (Summer) Vp.6: Medium Existing: Filtered views to the reception building and existing lodges to the Haveringland (Users of the immediate north of the Pond within the Site are available from the Parish Church Church) churchyard, over an open foreground of pasture. Plantation woodland within (Eastside of Great Wood forms the backdrop and visual horizon to the view. Deciduous, Churchyard) developing woodland along the southern boundary of the Site fringing Haveringland Lake occupies the middle distance within the right of the view. Year 1 (Winter): Single storey lodges, bordering the Pond and Haveringland Lake would be visible within a view only partially filtered by retained Year 1 vegetation, including several mature trees, along the southern Site boundary. (Winter) Moderate The change would be prominent and lodges would form a more readily Medium adverse noticeable feature within the view. Year 15 (Summer): New native woodland and hedgerow planting along the Year 15 southern Site boundary would provide some screening to the single storey (Summer) lodges along the side of the Pond and Haveringland Lake. This would be Small Minor further reinforced by tree planting amongst the lodges themselves. Some of adverse the single storey lodges would remain visible, but not prominent. Vp.7: Medium Existing: Woodland within the Site and within Great Wood foreshortens the Heveringland (Users of a view. The foreground is open over cultivated ground and pasture. Glimpses Road local road) of existing lodges and other features of the Site, i.e. camper vans, are available, albeit these are reasonable well screened and relatively inconspicuous features within the view. Year 1 (Winter): New lodges within the proposed development would form a more noticeable element within the view. However, these would be Year 1 dispersed and some intervening retained vegetation would filter views. (Winter) Minor Haveringland Parish Church (and landform) would also largely screen the Small adverse view to lodges bordering the pond/ lake. Year 15 (Summer): Native species plantings implemented as part of the Year 15 proposed development would provide some screening to the predominantly (Summer) Negligible single storey lodges and occasional tree houses that characterise its Negligible adverse JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 34 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Significance of Daytime Representative Magnitude of Effect Sensitivity Change to Existing Daytime View Viewpoints Impact Year 1 Year 15 (Winter) (Summer) southern section. The proposed development may go unnoticed within views for users of the road. Vp.8: Medium Existing: Currently open foreground, albeit recently planted hedgerow Minor Road north (Users of a should screen the view in the longer term. Trees within the mixed woodland of Brandiston Hall local road) plantation at Middle Clump are visible within a view filtered by existing intervening trees within hedgerows and woodland. Woodland within Great Wood forms the visual horizon to the view. Year 1 (Winter): Very limited, heavily filtered views to lodges within the Year 1 proposed development potentially visible. The character of the view would (Winter) Negligible not be altered by the proposed development. Negligible adverse Year 15 (Summer): The existing (recently planted) hedgerow would be fully Year 15 established and in full leaf. This, alongside other intervening vegetation and (Summer) new planting within the Site, would screen the proposed development. There No Change No Effects would be no effects upon the view. Vp.9: Medium Existing: Trees within Middle Clump and Top Clump within the Site are Eastgate (Users of a partly visible above intervening hedgelines. However, the remainder of the roadside Site is screened within the view. footpath) Year 1 (Winter): The ZTV suggests that views would be available to the uppermost parts of some of the proposed new structures within the proposed Year 1 development, albeit at over 1km from the northern Site boundary, this is (Winter) Negligible considered unlikely. The character of the view would be maintained with Negligible adverse some tree removal in Middle Clump barely discernible. Year 15 (Summer): The proposed development would be screened within Year 15 the view. It would not be affected. (Summer) No Change No Effects Vp.10: School Medium Existing: Open foreground to view looking towards the coniferous woodland Lane (Users of a within Great Wood.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 35 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Significance of Daytime Representative Magnitude of Effect Sensitivity Change to Existing Daytime View Viewpoints Impact Year 1 Year 15 (Winter) (Summer) local road) Year 1 (Winter): Whilst the ZTV suggests that some structures within the Year 1 proposed development may be visible, it is considered this would be highly (Winter) Negligible unlikely due to intervening woodland and, most likely, landform. Regardless, Negligible adverse the character of the view would be maintained. Year 15 (Summer): The proposed development would be screened and the Year 15 view unaffected. (Summer) No Change No Effects
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 36 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
7 RESIDUAL EFFECTS AND CONCLUSIONS 7.1 The likely residual landscape and visual effects of the proposed development upon landscape character and views is described in the following section. Landscape Effects 7.2 The proposed development would broaden the footprint of the existing amenity landscape of lodges, access roads and pathways interspersed with trees, gardens and grasslands, into parts of the Site which are currently wooded or quite densely vegetated. Most of these areas are thus of a different landscape character to the developed parts of the Site. In response to this variation in landscape character within the Site, it has been sub-divided into 8 site specific character areas; two of which (‘Haveringland Hall Park Lodges and Amenity Landscape’ and ‘Haveringland Hall Coach House and Cottages’) are developed landscapes. The remaining 6 are either less developed or undeveloped. 7.3 The proposed development would be in-keeping with the existing landuse and landscape character over much of the Site. Whilst it would extend this landscape type into the 6 currently less developed or undeveloped site specific character areas within the Site, each of these are assessed as being capable of accommodating change of the type proposed with some effects upon their inherent landscape elements, features and character, i.e. they are assessed as being of Medium susceptibility and sensitivity. This is partly due to their close proximity to the developed parts of the Site and thus the partial characterising effects the managed amenity landscape exerts over them, but also because they are wooded landscapes (all or at least in part) and can thus accommodate lodges/ access tracks and pathways without necessitating the wholesale clearance of existing trees. This is most notably the case within the ‘Middle Clump Mixed Plantation Woodland’, within which existing mature trees would be retained, such that a ‘Mixed Plantation Woodland with Lodges’ landscape type would be established. In addition, some of these woodlands are plantation woodlands or secondary woodlands and are substitutable. 7.4 In terms of likely effects upon the district level landscape character areas, there would be a residual magnitude of change of ‘No Change’ and a ‘No Effects’ significance of effect upon landscape character area ‘B1: Horsford’, since there would be very little inter-visibility between this landscape character area and the proposed development. With respect to landscape character area ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’, the appraisal has concluded that there would be a Small magnitude of change and a Minor adverse significance of effect at winter Year 1, since lodges within the Site would form a more readily noticeably feature within views from the local area outwith the Site. However, by summer Year 15, these effects would be reduced to a residual Negligible magnitude of change and a Negligible adverse significance of effect, due to the screening provided by new native hedgerows and woodland planting along the Site boundaries. This would naturally reduce awareness of the proposed development from areas of countryside within the landscape character area locally adjoining the Site. 7.5 It is considered that the proposed development would have its main effects upon the ‘Haveringland Lake’ site specific character area. Whilst this landscape feature is man-made; the result of damming the watercourse running through the Site, it does have strong associations with the former parkland and estate of Haveringland Hall. It is also slightly more remote from the more central developed parts of the Site and retains some sense of wildness and tranquillity. There are also some special experiential qualities associated with water. As such, the magnitude of change to this site specific landscape character type is assessed as a residual Large magnitude of change and an overall significance of effect of Major adverse. 7.6 For most of the wooded site specific landscape character areas which would be substantially directly impacted by the proposed development, a residual Medium magnitude of change and a JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 37 rpsgroup.com
LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Moderate adverse significance of effect has been assessed. Whilst some sense of their former wooded landscape character would be retained, an amenity landscape with lodges would be established and would form a recognisable new landscape characteristic. In contrast, effects upon the ancient woodland of Great Wood and the South-western Semi-natural Broadleaved Woodland character areas would be less, given the very limited area of the woodland directly impacted and the fact that part of the latter is already developed degraded (in part). As such there would be a residual Small magnitude of change and a Minor adverse significance of effect upon each of these site specific character areas. 7.7 In terms of potential effects upon the already developed site specific landscape character areas, a residual Negligible magnitude of change and an overall Neutral significance of effect has been assessed for the ‘Haveringland Hall Park Lodges and Amenity Landscape’ character area, given that the likely adverse effects of the proposed development (Visitor Car Park and lodges adjacent to the Pond) would be offset and balanced by positive effects for the same landscape receptor, i.e. substantial new native broadleaved woodland within the south-west corner of the Site, meadow grassland and specimen trees). For the ‘Haveringland Hall Coach House and Cottages’ site specific character area, these likely effects would be a residual Negligible magnitude of change and Negligible adverse significance of effect, given the potential impacts upon the local landscape setting to this High value area of landscape within the Site due to some removal of existing trees, which would slightly reduce its existing sense of enclosure. Visual Effects 7.8 Ten representative viewpoints have been included in the appraisal to assess the potential effects of the proposed development upon existing views looking towards the Site. These are considered to be representative of the visual receptors most likely to be affected by the proposed development. Given that the Site is private and mainly used by residents within the permanent homes on the Site, users of the holiday lodges and visitors to the Coach House, all of the representative viewpoints are from locations outwith the Site itself at differing orientations and distances. 7.9 A residual Small magnitude of change and Minor adverse significance of effect has been assessed upon the existing view from the following representative viewpoints: ● Viewpoints 2 and 3: From the Public Footpath to the north of the Site which connects Haveringland Road with the B1149 (Holt Road) via Hall Farm; ● Viewpoint 4: Haveringland Parish Church Car Park; and ● Viewpoint 5 and 6: Haveringland Parish Church (both North and east sides of the churchyard). 7.10 Within the existing views from each of the remaining 5 representative viewpoints, a residual Negligible magnitude of change and Negligible adverse significance of effect has been assessed upon two views for users of Haveringland Road to the north-west and the south-west of the Site. For the remaining representative viewpoints, a residual magnitude of change of ‘No Change’ and a Neutral significance of effect has been assessed. The latter views being entirely screened by a combination of landform and intervening vegetation in full leaf. 7.11 New native species hedgerow planting is proposed along many of the Site boundaries which front onto open countryside. This would be further reinforced with new native species woodland plantings, especially along the currently open south-west boundary of the Site, fronting towards Haveringland Parish Church. By summer Year 15, these new plantings would largely screen the lodges, tree houses and tipi type cabins within views. The proposed lodges themselves would also use natural materials in their construction, i.e. stone, timber and would be of a naturally dark recessive character. This would further assist with their natural visual integration within existing views.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 38 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Overview 7.12 The proposed development would extend the amenity landscape of lodges within a managed landscape setting to parts of the Site which are currently wooded or in a more naturalistic state. Whilst each of the currently less developed or undeveloped site specific landscape character areas described in this study would be adversely affected to varying degrees, each would also retain something of their previous undeveloped character albeit each would become a landscape which is at least partly (and more strongly) characterised by an amenity landscape with lodges. However, it is considered that the most notable change would be within the south-east of the Site, where all existing terrestrial areas within the ‘Haveringland Lake’ site specific character area would be directly impacted. This part of the Site is somewhat remote from the remainder and has some sense of naturalness, wildness and tranquillity as a result. However, the planting implemented as part of the proposed development would essentially confine these residual adverse landscape effects to the Site itself. This is confirmed by the assessment of potential effects upon views from the representative viewpoints, for which a residual significance of effect of no greater than Minor adverse has been identified. The proposed new planting around the Site boundaries would substantially reduce awareness of the proposed development from the adjacent areas of countryside within the wider ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’ district level landscape character area.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 39 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
FIGURES
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 40 rpsgroup.com
©2020RPS Grou p N otes 1. This 1. drawing has been prepared inacc ordancwith e the sc opeof RPS’sappointment with its client and issu b jectto the term sand ± c onditionsof that appointment. RPS acc eptsno liability for anyuse of this doc u m entother than byits client andonly for the pu rposesfor whic hit wasprepared and provided. 2. If received If electronic2. allyitisthe recipients responsib ilityto print to c orrectsc Only ale. written dim ensionssh oube ldused.
Legend StudyArea(3km radiu s) SiteBou ndary ListedBuildings SSSI CRoWAcc essLand Anc ientWoodland Cou ntyWildlife Site (sitearea only)
Rev Desc ription By CB Date
Lakesb uHou ry Hiltingbu se, Road, ry Chandlers Ford,Hampsh ireSO53 5SS T:02380 810 440 E: rpsso@rpsgrou E:440810T:02380 p.com
Client JohBroom nL CBE e and HaveringlandHall Cou ntryPark Ltd
Project HaveringlandHall Resort
Title Landsc apePlanning Designations
Status DrawnBy PM/CheckedBy DRAFT SH PH ProjectNu m b er Scale@ A3 DateCreated JSL3155 1:24,000 JAN2020
FigureNu m b er Rev 2 - 0 0.225 0.45 0.9 1.35 1.8 rpsgroup.com Km ©Crown copyright, Allrights reserved. 2020Lic ensenu m b er0100031673,10001998,100048492. ©Crown Contains copyright, OrdnancAll rights reserved.Survey e 2017Licdata ©Crown ensenu copyright m b er0100031673 and©Naturaldatabase rightEngland 2020. copyright. Crown copyright and database right 2017 ©2020RPS Group N otes 1. This drawing1. hasbe e nprep aredinacc ordanc ewith thescop eof RPS’sapp ointmewithclient nt its and subjecis thetermsto and t c ond itionsappof that ointmeRPS nt. acc eno p liability ts forany useof this d oc umeothe nt than byclient r its and only forthepurposes forwhich it wasprep aredand provide d . 2. If rec If e 2. ivedelec tronicallytheisrec it ipients responsibility printto c orrecscale. Only t written dime nsionsshould be used .
Legend StudyArea(3km ) ± SiteBound ary
Z TVOrigin Log cabin
Z TVOrigin single storeyLod ge /Villa
Z TVOrigin Tree House
Rep resentativeViewpoints (seeFigures 3j) to 3a
Indicative extent of the surrounding area from which views to the proposed development may be available.
LowVisibility Origin (1 point)
9
3 HighVisibility Origin (6 Points) Wood land 8 1 2 Settlem e nts N ote: Z TVcom p iledassuming ob serverhe eye ight1.5mat as level, andtakeinto sacc ountscree ningeffec ofvege ts tation/wood land at a hea at ightof12m and settlemhe a eat ight nts of9m The origin p ointsusedthe illustrateZTV to are: (Blue) 2 storey(Blue)2Log Cabin @ 9.95m (Redsingle ) storeylake sidelod geand wood landvillas@ 7.25m (GreeTree n) Houses 9.95m
4 OSTerrainhasdatabe 5 e nused forge ne ratingtheground mod e l. 6 5
7 Rev Description By CB Date
10
Lake sburyHouse, Hiltingb Road, ury Chand lersFord,Hamp shireSO53 5SS T:02380 810 440 E: [email protected] E:440810T:02380
Client JohnBroomL eCBE and HaveringlandHall Country ParkLtd
Projec t HaveringlandHall Resort Z oneofThe oreticalVisibility (ZTV) Title and Rep resentativeViewpoint Loc ations Status DrawnBy PM/Che c ke dBy DRAFT SH PH ProjecNumb t e r Scale@ A3 DateCreated JSL3155 1:25,000 JAN2020
FigureNumb e r Rev 2 -
0 265 530 m rpsgroup.com ©Crown cop yright,Allrights reserved 2020Lice . nsenumb 0100031673,10001998,100048492. e r Contains Ordnanc eSurvey ©dataCrown cop yrightand database right2020. P:\3100 Series\JSL3155 - Haveringland Hall\Tec h\GIS\JSL3155_Figure 2 ZTV.mxd 2 h\GIS\JSL3155_Figure Hall\Tec Haveringland - Series\JSL3155 P:\3100 Middle Clump
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: 39.60 Representative Viewpoint 1 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3a Approximate position of Application Site within view
Middle Clump Top Clump
Note: For context only
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: approx.600 Representative Viewpoint 1 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3b Approximate position of application site within view
Middle Clump Top Clump
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: 900 Representative Viewpoint 2 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3c Approximate position of application site within view
Keepers Cottage Middle Clump Hall Farm
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: 900 Representative Viewpoint 3 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3d Approximate position of application site within view
Existing Reception Building
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: 900 Representative Viewpoint 4 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3e Note: Application Site occupies full width of the view
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: 900 Representative Viewpoint 5 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3f Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: 39.60 Representative Viewpoint 6 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3g Approximate position of Application Site within view
Existing Reception Building
Note: For context only
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: approx.600 Representative Viewpoint 6 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3h Existing building to be Existing reception building Haveringland Parish Church re-developed
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: 39.60 Representative Viewpoint 7 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3i Approximate position of Application Site within view
Middle Clump Evergreen Hedge on the Existing building to be Existing reception building Haveringland Parish Church eastside of Charmbeck Park re-developed
Note: For context only
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: approx.600 Representative Viewpoint 7 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3j Approximate position of Application Site within view
Middle Clump Top Clump Plantation woodland along Haveringland Hall Road
Haveringland Hall Resort 10/01/20 Date of photograph: Horizontal field of view: 39.60 Representative Viewpoint 8 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3k Approximate position of Application Site within view
Middle Clump Top Clump
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: 39.60 Representative Viewpoint 9 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3l Approximate position of Application Site within view
Haveringland Hall Resort Date of photograph: 10/01/20 Horizontal field of view: 39.60 Representative Viewpoint 10 JSL3155 To be viewed at comfortable arms length Figure: 3m P:\3100 Series\JSL3155 - Haveringland Hall\Tech\Acad\Current\JSL3155_Figure 4 Site Specific Landscape Character Areas.dwg Haveringland Lake Middle Clump Mixed Plantation Woodland South Western Semi - Natural Broadleaved Woodland Central Mixed Plantation and Semi - Natural Broadleaved Woodland (South) Central Mixed Plantation and Semi - Natural Broadleaved Woodland (North) MIDDLE CLUMP
CHARMBECK PARK CHARMBECK PARK MAINTENANCE 35.6m WOODLAND PARK
YARD 39.10 Track 56.81 TW (District level landscape character area as defined in the Broadland District Landscape Character Assessment 2013) D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland 36.82 TCB 37.7m (District level landscape character area as defined in the Broadland 38.4m District Landscape Character Assessment 2013) COACH HOUSE D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland EP POND EP EP
GREAT WOOD
Path (um) Path
31.68 31.66 FB HAVERINGLAND LAKE Sluice P e Description Rev KEY 1. Notes c 2020 RPS Group .Where applicable Ordnance Survey (c) Crown Copyright 2020 3. LANDSCAPE CHARACTER AREAS .If received electronically it is the recipients responsibility to print correct scale. 2. by its client and only for the purposes which it was prepared provided. Only written dimensions should be used. appointment. RPS accepts no liability for any use of this document other than appointment with its client and is subject to the terms conditions of that This drawing has been prepared in accordance with the scope of RPS’s All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 RPS Drawing / Figure Number Project rpsgroup.com Hampshire SO53 5SS Lakesbury House, Hiltingbury Road, Chandlers Ford, Client Status Job Ref Title T: 4 JSL3155 For planning 02380 810 440 Character Areas Site Specific Landscape Haveringland Hall Resort Haveringland Hall Country Park Ltd John L Broome CBE and EASTERN PLANTATION HOUSE AND COTTAGES HAVERINGLAND HALL COACH PLANTATION WOODLAND HAVERINGLAND LAKE HAVERINGLAND HALL PARK BROADLEAVED WOODLAND BROADLEAVED WOODLAND MIDDLE CLUMP MIXED LANDSCAPE LODGES AND AMENITY CENTRAL MIXED PLANTATION SEMI-NATURAL BROADLEAVED SOUTH WESTERN SEMI-NATURAL GREAT WOOD AND SEMI-NATURAL AND MIXED WOODLAND APPLICATION BOUNDARY E: [email protected] Drawn By JMB Scale @ A0 1:1000 EASY MAKING COMPLEX - Rev Date Created PM/Checked by January 2020 PH yC Date CB By N LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
APPENDICES
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 41 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Appendix A
Landscape Type ‘D: Tributary Farmland’ and Landscape Character Area ‘D1: Cawston Tributary Farmland’ (Extract from Broadland Landscape Character Assessment)
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 42 rpsgroup.com 64 3.7 D: TRIBUTARY FARMLAND
Location and Boundaries
3.7.1 There are four separate locations of this Landscape Character Type within the District. The first is located in the central western part of the District – Part of its western boundary is defined by the settlement edge of Reepham. The second is located in the central eastern part of the District – bound by Wooded Estatelands (Landscape Character Type E) to the west, Tributary Farmlands to the east (Landscape Character Type D) and Marshes Fringe to the north and south. Located to the east of Norwich, the third occurrence of this Landscape Character Type includes a pocket land south of the River Wensum (within Landscape Character Type A), and encompasses the Tud River valley. The fourth location forms a linear belt of land along the District’s northern boundary, northeast of the River Bure (within Landscape Character Type A)28.
Key Characteristics
3.7.2 The following Key Characteristics are typical of the Tributary Farmland Landscape Character Type:
The Witton Run is a tributary of the River Yare SSSI near Blofield Shelving and gently undulating landform, which is cut by small tributary valleys; Predominantly rural character throughout; Landscape predominantly underlain by sands and gravels, overlain by loamy soils; Dispersed but evenly distributed settlement pattern An intricate network of narrow, winding rural lanes often bounded by banks or ditches Medium to large scale arable farmland; Pockets of remnant parkland; Tributaries elusive- evident but usually hidden within the landscape by topography and trees
28 This Landscape Character Type continues outside the District within Breckland, North Norfolk and South Norfolk Districts.
Landscape Character Assessment SPD 65 Mixed settlement and architectural character;
Summary of Visual Character
3.7.3 This Landscape Character Type is predominantly underlain by a mixture of sand and gravels, which give rise to light and sandy soils. In places, pockets of Till are apparent, and where the Tributary Farmland occur in close proximity to the River Valley Landscape Character Type (A), fertile, loamy soils prevail.
3.7.4 There are gentle variations in the topography of this Landscape Character Type, where a series of small tributary valleys cut through the underlying topography and form landscape and nature conservation features. These tributary corridors are subtle features, which are often barely perceptible to the eye within views across the landscape.
3.7.5 This landscape has a predominantly rural character, which is heightened by the dispersed settlement pattern of small to large linear and medium to large nucleated settlements. It is accessed via a series of small, often narrow lanes, which are often bounded by banks or ditches. Small ponds are also a feature of fields, within this predominantly arable agricultural landscape.
3.7.6 Pockets of parkland add further visual interest, and introduce an ordered, human influence. Typical views from the edges of this Landscape Character Type, are often into adjacent river valleys, however in several places, views are limited by small clumps of trees, or subtle variations in topography.
Historic Environment Character
3.7.7 Palaeolithic to Iron Age occupation sites are represent in the Tributary Farmland Type by restricted and isolated findspots although additionally barrows are still visible in today’s landscape. Evidence is limited despite the fact that by the Iron Age open agricultural landscapes were widespread in the tributary farmlands, due to the relatively temporary nature of buildings during prehistory.
3.7.8 Again Roman and Early Medieval, presence is only reflected in recorded objects, such as coin hoards, metalworkings or pottery kilns. By the early 14th century, arable cultivation dominated. It is recorded that between 1500- 1750 that the tributary farmlands were a patchwork of landuses with intensive arable agriculture in extensive open fields, smaller enclosures, woods, heaths, cattle and cereal (especially wheat) or bullocks, dairies and sheep. Parliamentary enclosure took place predominantly between 1793 and 1815, which had a huge influence on field pattern and shape. However, today, the field pattern is predominantly 20th century in origin with some fragmented 18th – 19th century enclosures remaining along with, woodland blocks and inland managed wetland following river corridors. Ancient and semi-natural woodland as well as ancient replanted woods are present in the vicinity of Hemblington and Cawston.
Landscape Character Assessment SPD 66 3.7.9 Pockets of parkland also speckle this Character Type such as that of 18th century Salle Park, registered as Grade II on the English Heritage Register of Parks and Gardens of Historic Interest.
3.7.10 The settlement pattern is dispersed but evenly distributed, containing small to large linear and medium to large nucleated villages of mixed architectural character. Vernacular architecture is dominated by red brick, colour-washed brick and flint and brick with some timber frame buildings.
Ecological Character
3.7.11 The ecological character of this landscape character type is dominated by the following habitats29:
Species-rich chalk grassland Scrub Mixed woodland on river valley slopes Plantation woodland Bracken Heath Marshy Grassland Ponds Copes of mature trees Hedgerow network
3.7.12 The Nature conservation value of these habitats is recognised by the following designations:
Alderford Common Site of Scientific Interest (SSSI)
Key Forces for Change
3.7.13 The following Key Forces for Change have been identified for the Tributary Farmland Landscape Character Type:
Potential farm diversification, resulting in conversion of agricultural buildings to houses and recreational facilities; Potential loss of mature hedgerow field boundaries as a result of agricultural intensification; Small-scale, incremental development within villages, which may be inconsistent with local built character and materials; Potential wind turbine developments; Extension of road corridors and introduction of visually intrusive road signs and visual clutter; Potential loss of small ponds and extraction sites due to infill.
Evaluation
Landscape Condition and Strength of Character
3.7.14 Overall, condition within this Landscape Character Type varies. In places, hedgerows are well managed and continuous, whilst in other places, a gappy
29 Alderford Common SSSI (English Nature)
Landscape Character Assessment SPD 67 and less well managed character is apparent. As a result, overall condition is considered to be moderate. In certain places, recognisable sense of place is strong, as a result of views to landmark features such as churches and into adjacent Landscape Character Types. Overall strength of character is considered to be moderate, although several of the small villages retain their traditional form and exhibit a range of varied local materials.
Management Strategies and Objectives
3.7.15 The overall strategy for the Tributary Farmland Landscape Character Type should be to be to conserve and restore the hedgerow network; and conserve the tributary river corridors as important landscape and nature conservation features. Plantings to enhance hedges should be appropriate to the specific local character of the Landscape Character Areas. For more information refer to ‘Planting hedges in Norfolk – maintaining regional character; A guide to restoring and planting hedges’ www.norfolkbiodiversity.org/reports/ .
3.7.16 Specific management objectives are to:
Seek opportunities for the creation of all types of grassland and woodland, especially mixed habitats of grassland and scrub woodland; Seek opportunities for connectivity with Hockering Wood (outside the District); Seek opportunities for the enhancement and creation of wetland habitats, such as wet meadows and wet woodland; Seek opportunities for buffering the Rivers Wensum, Bure and Tud, through catchment sensitive farming; Conserve priority habitats of wood pasture and grassland (based on the existing parks at Salle, Heydon and Blickling); Seek to conserve and enhance the landscape structure within the area, including blocks and copses of woodland, mature parkland trees and intact hedgerows; Seek to conserve and enhance the mature landscape structure in central and eastern parts, including blocks of woodland, which contributes to a small-scale and intimate character.
3.7.17 Within this Landscape Character Type, the following Landscape Character Areas have been defined:
D1: Cawston D2: Weston Green D3: Coltishall D4: Blofield
3.7.18 A summary of each area’s visual character, inherent landscape sensitivities and landscape planning guidelines are set out below.
Landscape Character Assessment SPD 68 D1: CAWSTON
Summary of visual character
3.7.19 Cawston Tributary Farmlands is situated in the central western part of the District, stretching north from the upper Wensum River Valley (A1). The sands and gravels of this area form a gently rolling landscape. The land becomes increasingly undulating where tributaries of the Wensum and the Upper Bure rivers incise it. The loam geology produces fertile soils and the area has a long established agricultural history. The mosaic of parkland, arable fields, woodland, copses of mature trees and clipped hedgerows creates a diverse and interesting landscape character. However, in central parts, the intensification of farming techniques has resulted in hedgerow and woodland losses.
3.7.20 Historic maps show a number of medieval market towns located within and adjacent to this area. Some such as Reepham and Cawston have expanded around a strong nucleated core and are busy towns today. Others such as Salle, have declined as the rural population fell or were incorporated into the large estates as ‘closed villages’. Today the settlement pattern reflects a long history of development with numerous nucleated settlements and towns. The settlements have many historic buildings and features and a strong local vernacular. To the north, grand houses, estate settlements and churches are distinctive features, and strongly contribute to the area’s rich and distinctive character. In particular, Salle Park, a large parkland estate, is a key feature in the northern parts of the area. Developed on poorer soils, the estate is centred on a grand house, and includes landscaped gardens, parkland and plantations. Surrounding medium scale rectangular arable fields represent an extension of the park landscape. Further south, smaller red brick and pantiled manors and halls, dating from the seventeenth and eighteenth century litter the landscape. Here, the landscape is smaller in scale and more intimate, but with an equally rich historic character.
3.7.21 The diverse collection of landscape features, creates a strong landscape structure, with an interesting visual mosaic. In particular, the large designed parkland landscapes to the north, specifically designed to create an ‘idyllic natural landscape’ are very scenic. For the most part, the distinctive character of the area remains unspoilt and the arable landscape is well cared for. Historic associations and distinctive features give the area a rich character and a strong sense of place.
3.7.22 Loss of hedgerows creates an open skyline in central parts. Vertical elements, including lines of steel pylons that slice through field systems with overhead wiring that connect to an electrical substation west of Cawston, are prominent and repeated skyline features within central parts.
Landscape Character Assessment SPD 79
E1
C1 E2
B1
Reepham
D1
A1
KEY D2 LCA D1
0 500 1,000 mE3 This map is based on Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown Study Area Boundary copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. OS Licence Number 100018156 - 2007 S:\projects\11107301 Broadland LCA\GIS\Projects\11107301_LCAs\11107301_LCA_D1.mxd CHRIS BLANDFORD ASSOCIATES BROADLAND DISTRICT LANDSCAPE Landscape Character Area D1: www.cba.uk.net CHARACTER ASSESSMENT Cawston Tributary Farmland MARCH 2008 70 Evaluation Inherent Landscape Sensitivities
3.7.23 The following inherent landscape sensitivities have been identified:
Mosaic of parkland, arable fields and woodland, providing a diverse and interesting landscape character. Mature landscape structure including substantial blocks of woodland, copses of mature trees and intact hedgerows, providing a robust visual mosaic. Historic and architectural landscape features of large seventeenth and eighteenth century estates, including scenic parkland landscapes rich in idyllic components such as rides, parkland trees and lakes. Landscape setting of grand houses, manors, estate settlements, churches, and halls. Nucleated medieval market towns with a strong historic core. Landscape setting of villages. Distinctive and largely unspoilt landscape character. Rich historic character and a strong sense of place. Characteristic views across the farmland to landmark, often isolated, churches.
Landscape Planning Guidelines
3.7.24 The following Landscape Planning Guidelines apply to the Cawston Tributary Farmland Landscape Character Area:
Seek to conserve the diverse and interesting landscape pattern and character; Seek to conserve distinctive, historic features architectural and landscape features including seventeenth and eighteenth century parkland landscapes and their setting, which contribute to the area’s rich historic character and strong sense of place; Seek to ensure the sensitive location of development involving further tall structure (such as steel pylons and telecommunication masts) in relation to prominent skyline locations both within the character area and within adjacent character areas; Seek to ensure that potential new small-scale development within villages is consistent with the existing settlement pattern, density and traditional built form; Seek to conserve the landscape setting of market towns and villages such as Cawston and Salle, and seek to screen (where possible) harsh settlement edges and existing visual detractors (such as the electrical substation); Seek to promote use of local vernacular buildings materials, including red brick and pantiles; Seek to ensure new development does not reduce the vertical significance of important historical and architectural features within the landscape, such as church towers; Seek to conserve the landscape setting of grand houses, manors, estate settlements, churches, and halls; Seek opportunities to restore the hedgerow network where fragmented.
Landscape Character Assessment SPD LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Appendix B
Summary of Landscape Appraisal
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 43 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
Landscape Receptor
Description of Condition Value Sensitivity Magnitude of Nature/Duration of Year 1 (Winter) Year 15 (Summer) Character Area or Proposed proposed Change Type Change
District Level Landscape Character
‘B1: Horsford’ Ordinary Medium Medium No Change No Change No Effects No Effects
‘D1: Cawston Ordinary/ Medium Medium Small Direct/ Indirect, Minor Negligible Tributary Farmland’ Poor Adverse, Long term
Site Specific Landscape Character Areas Haveringland Hall Good Medium Medium Negligible Direct/ Indirect, Neutral Neutral Park Lodges and Adverse/ Beneficial, Amenity Landscape Long term
Haveringland Hall Good High High Negligible Indirect, Adverse, Negligible Negligible Coach House and Long term Cottages
Middle Clump Mixed Ordinary Medium Medium Medium Direct, Adverse, Moderate Moderate Plantation Woodland Long term Central Mixed Ordinary Medium Medium Medium Direct, Adverse, Moderate Moderate Plantation and Semi- Long term natural Broadleaved Woodland Eastern Plantation, Ordinary Medium Medium Medium Direct, Adverse, Moderate Moderate Semi-natural Long term broadleaved and Mixed Woodland South-western Semi- Poor Medium Medium Medium Direct, Adverse, Moderate Moderate natural Broadleaved Long term Woodland Haveringland Lake Good High Medium Large Direct, Adverse, Major Major Long term Great Wood Good High Medium Small Direct, Adverse, Minor Minor Long term
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 44 rpsgroup.com LANDSCAPE & VISUAL APPRAISAL
REFERENCES
Ref 1: Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2013) ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment’ (GLVIA) 3rd Edition;
Ref 2: Broadland District Council (2013), ‘Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk’ (adopted March 2011);
Ref 3: Broadland District Council (2015), Development Management DPD;
Ref 4: Landscape Institute (17th September 2019), ‘Visual Representation of Development Proposals’, Technical Guidance Note 06/19;
Ref 5: Natural England (2013), National Character Area 178: Central North Norfolk;
Ref 6: Department for Communities and Local Government, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) March 2012 and updated February 2019;
Ref 7: Department for Communities and Local Government (2014), National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG);
Ref 8: Broadland District Council (2013), Landscape Character Assessment Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) September 2013.
JSL3155/170 | Land at Haveringland Hall | 2.0 | 31 January 2020 Page 45 rpsgroup.com