Land at Rose Farm, Longwick, Buckinghamshire Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

L H L A Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Land at Rose Farm, Longwick, Buckinghamshire Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

April 2021

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL L H L A t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Notice: Report reference & issue This report was prepared by Louise Hooper Landscape Architect (LHLA) solely for use by J Walker and Son (Developments) Ltd (the client) and Sawkings Harper Architects to address the reserved matters for 287- LVIA Baseline doc 001 draft issued 3rd August 2020 approved outline planning application ref 16/06673/OUT for residential development at Rose Farm, Long- 287- LVIA doc 002 draft issued 8th March 2021 wick. This report is not addressed to, and may not be relied upon by any person or entity other than by the 287 - LVIA doc 003 issued 19th April 2021 client and their design team for any purpose without the prior written permission of LHLA. 287-LVIA doc 004 issued 20th April 2021

LHLA accepts no responsibility or liability for reliance upon or use of this report (whether or not permitted) other than by J Walker and Son (Developments) Ltd and their design team for the purposes for which it was originally commissioned and prepared.

In producing this report, LHLA has relied upon information provided by others. The completeness or accu- racy of this information is not guaranteed by LHLA.

The Environmental Design team included: Louise Hooper CMLI Chartered Landscape Architect Luke Engleback CMLI Chartered Landscape Architect

All photographs, drawings and text in this report have been produced by, and are the copyright of, LHLA unless otherwise stated. Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 2

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Contents

1 Introduction p5 5 Landscape Baseline p16 8 Landscape Impacts p57 The Site Geology Landscape Fabric Site Context Topography and Water Landscape Character Access Biodiversity Sensitivity of Landscape and Landscape Fabric History Landscape Impact Assessment 2 Methodology p7 The Site Mitigation for Landscape Effects Site Context Landscape Effects before and after Mitigation 3 Landscape & Village Character p8 Views from the site Visibility and Views of the Site National Character Areas 9 Summary p61 Close Neighbours County Landscape Character Assessment Visual Effects District Landscape Character Assessment Landscape Effects Chilterns AONB 6 Proposed Development p45 Conclusions Longwick 7 Visual Impacts p47 4 Planning Policy p14 Visual Receptors Zone of Visual Influence Appendices Introduction Sensitivity of Visual Receptors National & International Policy Visual Impact Assessment Relevant National Legislation Mitigation for Visual Effects A1 Assessment Methodology p66 Local Policy Visual Effects before and after Mitigation A2 Tree Report by GRS Arboricultural p72 Consultant

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 3

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Figures and Tables 1 Introduction p5 Figure 21 Geology 6 Proposed Development p45 Figure 22 Topography Figure 1 Site Location Figure 23 Flood risk Figure 55 Masterplan Figure 2 Site Boundary Figure 24 Flood risk Figure 56 Landscape masterplan Figure 3 Context Figure 25 Groundwater vulnerability Figure 57 Masterplan Figure 26 Priority habitats Figure 58 Landscape masterplan 2 Methodology p7 Figure 27 Habitat networks Figure 28 Historic photographs Figure 29 Historic maps Figure 4 Guidelines for LVIA Figure 30 Historic maps 7 Visual Impacts p47 Figure 31 Historic maps Figure 59 Location of viewpoints Figure 32 Historic map and aerial overlay 3 Landscape Character p8 Figure 60 Likely zone of visual influence Figure 33 Aerial photo Table 3 Sensitivity of Visual Receptors Figure 34 Aerial photo and Chilterns Figure 5 Natural Areas - England Table 4 Sensitivity of Close Neighbours Figure 35 Longwick and surroundings Figure 6 Natural Areas - NCA 108 Figure 61 Close Neighbours Figure 36 Site and immediate context Figure 7 Bucks Landscape Assessment Table 5 Magnitude of Change to VRs Figure 37 Annotated site survey Figure 8 Bucks Landscape Assessment Table 6 Magnitude of Change to Neighbours Figure 38 Site landscape character Figure 9 Wycombe Landscape Assessment Table 7 Visual Impact on VRs Figure 39 Site assets and landscape fabric Figure 10 Wycombe Landscape Assessment Figure 62 VR1 Figure 40 Site context and landscape fabric Figure 11 Chilterns Landscape Assessment Figure 63 VR2 Figure 41 Site context and landscape fabric Figure 12 Wycombe Landscape Assessment Figure 64 VR3 Figure 42 Site context and landscape fabric Figure 13 Chilterns AONB Management Plan Table 8 Visual Impact on Neighbours Figure 43 Location of viewpoints Figure 14 Longwick Figure 65 Close Neighbours Figure 44 Views towards the site Figure 15 Longwick Figure 16 Longwick Figure 45 Views from the site Figure 46 Viewpoint 1 8 Landscape Impacts p57 Figure 47 Viewpoint 2 Figure 48 Viewpoint 3 Table 9 Sensitivity of Landscape Fabric 4 Planning p14 Figure 49 Viewpoint 4 Table 10 Magnitude of Change to Fabric Figure 50 Viewpoint 5 Table 11 Magnitude of Change to Fabric Figure 17 Neighbourhood Plan Figure 51 Location of viewpoint 6 Table 12 Visual Impact on Landscape Fabric Figure 18 Neighbourhood Plan Figure 52 Whiteleaf Hill Figure 19 Neighbourhood Plan Figure 53 Viewpoint 6 9 Summary p61 Table 1 Visual receptors 5 Landscape Baseline p16 Table 2 Close neighbours Figure 54 Location of close neighbours Figure 20 Geology Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 4

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 1 Introduction Farm is in the centre of the village, to the south west of the A4129. It is bordered by existing and newly built housing, with open farmland on the remaining sides.

This landscape is a flat and gently undulating lowland farmland with large arable fields interspersed with a mosaic of smaller paddocks; frequent shelterbelts with poplar are a remnant of former orchards.

There are long views towards the Chiltern escarpment from the village.

0 0.5 1 2 2.5km

Figure 1 Site Location (Source: OS Explorer 181) LHLA has been appointed by J Walker & Son (Development) Limited to undertake a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment of land at Rose Farm, Longwick.

The site has existing outline planning permission for 65 dwellings, with all matters apart from access reserved.

The site fronts onto Thame Road with an existing farm access. It is predominantly pasture with some distinctive tree groups, a partially culverted water course and some agricultural barns.

The village of Longwick lies some 2 kilometres northwest of Princes Risborough. The site at Rose Figure 2 Site Context (Source: GoogleEarth Pro) Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 5

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 1 Introduction

0 1km Owlswick

Small field system Wayfarers End New development ROSE FARM SITE Walnut Tree Lane Railway embankment New development site Footpath

PRINCES RISBOROUGH

Figure 3 Location of Rose Farm and immediate context Image: Google Earth elaborated by LHLA

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 6

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 2 Methodology Appendix 1 sets out the methodology and terminology of ecosystem services include provisioning, regulating used for establishing a Landscape Baseline, against and supporting. Provisioning services include water, which a systematic assessment of the potential foods, timber and fuels; regulating services include estimated effects of the proposed development can pollination, decomposition, water and air purification, be measured. This follows the guidance for Landscape flood control, carbon storage and climate regulation; and Visual Impact Assessment set out in GLVIA 3rd supporting services include photosynthesis, nutrient edition 2013. Only Chartered Landscape Architects and cycling and soil creation. chartered members of the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment are permitted to carry The visual assessment considers views, visibility and out this work. visual receptors - the people who will see those views such as local residents, close neighbours, walkers and The assesment begins with a desk study to consider the cyclists. context, topography, landcover and planning policies in place at national, district and local levels. There follows a field survey to establish views of importance The criteria for judgements on sensitivity of landscape and a zone of visual influence. Data from this excercise fabric, landscape character and visual receptors are is then assessed using the GLVIA guidance. divided into high, medium and low impacts. How these judgements are made is set out in Appendix 1. It There is an appreciation of the proposed scheme should be notied that impacts can be positive, neutral to be assessed and a visual and landscape impact or adverse; there are also direct and indirect effects. assessment is made of these proposals, followed by mitigation recomendations. These recomendations are then incorporated into the developing design prior Figure 4 Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact to planning application. It is therefore, an iterative Assessment Third edition (2013) process.

The landscape assessment is considered in terms of potential effects on the character of the landscape and on the existing Landscape Fabric; this includes natural assets such as soil, water and vegetation. Today these assets are referred to as Natural Capital, which are understood to deliver a series of ecosystem services which benefit mankind. The broad categories

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 7

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 3 Landscape and Village Character

108 Upper Site Thames Clay Vales

Figure 6 Natural Areas (Natural England) showing the site located in Natural Character Area 108, Upper Thames Clay Vales. It lies adjacent to NCA110, Chilterns

Figure 5 Natural Areas in England (London and the South East Region, English Nature 1999) 3.1 National Landscape Character Natural England has defined Natural Areas at a national scale across England. The site lies within NCA 108, Upper Thames Clay Vales.

The Upper Thames Clay Vales cover a wide belt of gently undulating lowland farmland which extends from Gloucestershire and Wiltshire in the west to Buckinghamshire in the east. The area wraps around NCA 109, the Midvale Ridge, and is overlooked by NCA 110, Chilterns. There are many streams and water courses, including the Thames and its tributaries, and important lowland meadow and wetland habitats.

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 8

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 3 Landscape and Village Character 3.2 County Level The Buckinghamshire County Integrated Landscape Assessment was undertaken between 2008 and 2011 with parallel assessments carried out for the various districts. The site lies in Landscape Type 8: Vale.

Aylesbury Vale District

Site

Chiltern District

Wycombe District

Figure 8 Buckinghamshire Landscape Character Areas showing the extent of the District boundaries within the county. The site lies within County Landscape Character Type 8: Vale, coloured light blue, within Wycombe District. Figure 7 Landscape Character Type 8, Vale shown as (Source: Wycombe District Landscape Character Assessment LUC 2011) black within the Buckinghamshire boundary. (Source: Wycombe District Landscape Character Assessment LUC 2011) Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 9

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 3 Landscape and Village Character 3.3 District Level The Wycombe District Landscape Character Assessment was completed in 2011. Longwick The site lies within Landscape Character Area 8.13, Vale Longwick Vale, which forms the northern part of LCA 8.13 Wycombe District, and follows the foothills of the Chiltern escarpment. Site Longwick Vale has the following characteristics:

• Gently undulating low-lying topography • Easily viewed from Chiltern escarpment • Gault Clay with alluvium & river terrace deposits • Numerous small rivers & streams • Large to medium scale open arable fields • Mosaic of small paddocks and pasture • Low density dispersed settlements with Longwick the dominant village • Parliamentary field enclosure • Dense high hedgerows, poplar shelter belts • Tree cover mainly linear, along hedgerows, streams and rivers • Some long views towards Chiltern escarpment to the southeast and across Ayelsbury Vale to the north • Good network of footpaths, bridleways and winding rural lanes; railway

Figure 9 Extract from Wycombe Landscape Character Assessment 2011, showing LCA 8.13, Longwick Vale covering the northern part of Wycombe district, following the foothills of the Chiltern escarpment (Source: Source: Wycombe District Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 10

Site

Figure 10 Extract from Wycombe Landscape Character Figure 12 Wycombe Landscape Assessment 2011, showing LCA 8.13, Longwick Vale Character Assessment 2011 (Source: Source: Wycombe District Landscape Character Site (Source: Source: Buckinghamshire Assessment LUC 2011) Council website)

3.4 Proximity to Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)

The boundary of the Chilterns AONB lies just 2.5km to the east of Rose Farm, and the Chiltern scarp slopes form a backdrop to the village of Longwick.

The Chilterns AONB Management Plan (2019-24) Figure 11 Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural identifies Forces for Change relevant to the Chilterns Beauty Landscape Character Areas (Source: Source: landscape. A key issue is: chilternsaonb.org)

‘unprecedented housing and infrastructure • habitat severance, degradation/loss Figure 13 Chilterns AONB Management Plan 2019-24 growth within and in setting of AONB’ • less enjoyable to visit (Source: chilternsaonb.org) • new building designs not locally distinctive Predicted trends and impacts on the AONB include: • housing even less affordable for local community • erosion of character • increased noise, air/light pollution Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 11

Longwick is a predominantly linear village that has developed gradually over time. Its rural and agricultural setting is part of its character. Thame Road provides the spine of the village. Key characteristics of Thame Road, include: • native hedging and grass verge bordering front gardens along much of the road • many roadside trees • most houses along Thame Road front the road and are accessed from it • houses mainly 2-storey, with varied set-backs (from Thame Road looking south past Rose Farm site entrance Recent development with hedge-lined front gardens 1 to 10m) • historic ‘green gap’ at Rose Farm between the northern and the southern parts of the village • many public footpaths leading out of the village • attractive walks and ‘recreational routes’ close to village • Red Lion pub, village shop, school, garage and village hall • several historic working farms remain on edge of village, often set further back from the road, indicating the village’s agricultural roots Red Lion Public House Post office and village shop

Primary School Laurels’s Farm at southern end of Thame Road Play area and public open space (not visible from Thame Figure 14 Longwick Road) Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 12

PRoW Anderdons Farm Important remaining green gap on western side of PRoW Thame Road at Rose Farm Strattons Farm Redhouse Farm Recent Hamlet Grove development which has Home Farm filled in the ‘green gap’ on the eastern side of Thame Road Rose Farm Walnut Tree Lane Rose Farm site development in progress Shop and Post Office Village recreation ground School Laurels Farm Future development site PRoW Village identified in Longwick Hall Red Lion Neighbourhood Plan

Railway Figure 15 Longwick in its rural setting Source: Magic A 4129 to Princes Risborough Swan’s Way PRoW Ivy Farm and Midshires Way PRoW

0 100 500m B4444 to Bledow and Chinnor

Figure 16 Longwick showing current extent of the village, recent and planned expansion, and key features of the village such as the remaining green gap at Rose Farm, working farms at the north and southern ends of the village and the many footpaths out of the village into the surrounding countryside Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 13

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 4 Planning 4.1 Introduction the European Landscape Convention still applies as 4.4 Local Policy it is not an EU agreement. The European Landscape Legislation, national and local planning policy are Convention (ELC) reflects European identity and The Wycombe District Local Plan was adopted in in a moment of change. The UK exited the European diversity recognising the landscape as our “living August 2019; it sets out strategic policies and allocates Union at the end of January 2020, and since January natural and cultural heritage”. This came into force in new areas for housing growth. 2021 has been fully outside EU jurisdiction; a number the UK in 2007. of UK laws and regulations have changed to take this In April 2020 Wycombe District Council was one of 4 into account. However, other international agreements Overall the ELC, which covers 40 states in Europe. It is districts (the others being Ayelsbury Vale, Chilterns such as the European Landscape Convention are not concerned about achieving “sustainable development and South Bucks) which merged into Buckinghamshire part of the EU and that wider agreement includes non- based on a balanced and harmonious relationship Council to create a new unitary authority. EU countries in Europe. between social needs, economic activity and the environment”. It recognises the importance of cultural, The Longwick cum Ilmer Parish Neighbourhood Plan ecological, environmental and social issues and that 2017-2033 was adopted in March 2018 and should be “the landscape is an important part of the quality of life used alongside the Local Plan. 4.2 National and International Policy for people everywhere”. This extends to all landscapes, Guidance not just special areas such as and AONB or Area of The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate LocalLandscape Importance. Change (IPPC), and Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) address 4.3 Relevant National Legislation and Climate Change and Biodiversity loss respectively - they agreements: present a risk to wellbeing and economy far greater • The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 than Covid19, and both are close to tipping points and • Natural Environment & Rural Communities Act have been declared environmental emergencies. 2006 • The Conservation of Habitats and Species Both the IPCC and IPBES have stated that we have to Regulations 2017 make major changes in ‘businessness as usual modes’ • The 25 Year Environment Plan (25YP, 2018) now and in future to halt accellerating global heating • The UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework and biodversity loss, and to turn them around before 2030. The UK Government’s 25 Year Environment Plan (2018) is working in that space, and it has led to a revision of the NPPF and set in train a number of initiaitves. Figure 17 Longwick cum Ilmer Parish Neighbourhood Plan (Source: Source: Although Britain is exiting the EU at the end of 2020, Buckinghamshire Council website)

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 14

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 4 Planning

The figure ground of the village changed in the 1960s with the development of the suburban style Walnut Tree Lane. Although a cul-de-sac for vehicles, this continues as a bridle path under the adjacent railway The Site embankment, and it forms a cross road with Bar Lane on the north east side of Thame Road.

The first development site (L1) has now been built: it is accessed from Thames Road and has a boundary on Bar Road, which leads to Owlswick. The Rose Farm Site under consideration is L4b which has an entrance almost opposite to L1 (Wayfarers End), and a long boundary to the rear of houses on Walnut Tree Figure 18 Policy L4b of the Longwick cum Ilmer Parish Lane. A smaller development area L4a immediately to Neighbourhood Plan shows proposed development at the north of the existing main entry to Rose Farm is Rose Farm (Source: Source: Buckinghamshire Council designated for very low density residential, since there website) are proposals to place Tree Preservation Orders on a stand of mature trees in the centre of that land parcel. Longwick Neighbourhood Plan Figure 19 Development parcels in Longwick adopted in Historically, Longwick developed as a strip village either The largest development site (L2) in-fills land between policy by the Longwick-cum-Ilmer Parish Neighbourhood Plan side of a drove road along which farmers from Wales the village and the railway embankment and is and Herefordshire took cattle to the London Market; currently under construction. This will enclose the this later became a Turnpike Road between Princes school and playing fields, shifting the school’s location Risborough and Thame with a Toll House at each end from the edge of the settlement to its heart. of the village. Several development sites have come forward which will double the size of the village and sinificantly change its historical form and character.

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 15

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline 5.1 Geology

The tilted beds of Grey and White Chalk that form the Chilterns are layered over impermeable Gault Clay, Greensand and Kimmerage Clay, soft rocks that create the gently undulating landscape. Gault Clay is LONGWICK impermeable, and tends to shrink and crack during late summer after dry weather. This allows rain to penetrate and re-hydrate the soil, consequently its swelling and shrinking is notorious.

Vegetation and sealing of clay soils affects how they Figure 20 Illustrative section of the Chilterns geology Source: GC3EWA6 Lewknor view of the Chiltern Hills act. Sealing surfaces prevents re-hydration, vegetation extracts water, especially during dry periods. Poplars, willows and oaks can have a considerable effect on soil moisture.

Climate Change in the UK forecasts wetter winters but drier summers with heavier rain events, which will affect how soils act. Clays become firmer with depth, this means that foundations in clay soils tend to be deeper, and so there are more arisings from excavations.

Tree roots tend to be in the top 1-3 metres of soils, this is expecially so where clay soils become dense and anaerobic at depth restricting root growth. Where drainage runs are backfilled with gravels, this becomes an easy source of air and water for roots to exploit. Longwick Root guards can be used to deflect roots, but positive measures can also be deployed - such as using swales and channels for surface water drainage and planting trees in the swales.

Figure 21 Chilterns geology Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 16

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.2 Topography

The Longwick Vale is a gently undulating seemingly almost level landscape. Around the village the levels Owlswick vary between 80m -90m AOD and with the backdrop of the Chilterns, which rise to 220 -240m AOD. Ilmer Land drains generally to the river Thame to the north and there is a spring line at the base of the scarp slope to the Chilterns. ROSE FARM Rose Farm sits on and slightly above the 85m contour. The London to Stratford-upon-Avon railway Longwick embankment is a significant feature in such a level landscape and it effectively ‘contains’ Longwick to the west visually and physically, since there are few ways past it. This includes Ilmer, the village twinned with Longwick in the parish. Princes Risborough To the north of the site the landscape dips before rising very gently to slightly higher ground at Owlswick and Little Meadle. Henton The Chilterns Bledlow

Figure 22 Topography of part of the Longwick Vale around Longwick showing site context. Contours at 5m intervals Sources: base- Google Earth, elaborated by LHLA, contour information interpolated from OS Explorer 181

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 17

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.3 Hydrology The land drains to the north towards the river Thame, Streams/drains runs parallel to, on either side of Thame The Environment Agency designates three types of which flows into the Thames. The clay soils of the Road through Longwick on slightly lower ground. As flood zones: Low-Medium, High, and Bank Topping risk Longwick Vale are likely to make this catchment the village has developed in the second half of the of flooding. For surface water they have designated area susceptible to flash flooding, a feature that may twentieth century, much of the stream on the western areas to be in Low, Medium or High risk. Flood plans become more pronounced with climate change. side appears to have been culverted under the have been produced by Wycombe District Council, and development. There appears to be a +/-20m culverted a drawing dated 2015 shows these risks along the main section on site just south of the willow pollards stream corridors. emerging from a head wall.

ROSE FARM SITE

Figure 24 Flood Risk mapping for the site & immediate surroundings; source: Longwick-cum-Ilmer Neighbourhood plan 2016 Figure 23 Flood Risk map for Longwick-cum-Ilmer 2015 source: Longwick-cum-Ilmer Neighbourhood plan 2016

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 18

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.3 Hydrology (contd) The stream passing through the site is considered to be at low risk of surface water flooding, but this has occurred from time to time, especially where it has been culverted. Presumably, the conventional street drainage in the development to the south cannot manage heavy downpours or prolonged rain. Of concern on the Rose Farm site is the risk to most of the small paddock on the site between the stream corridor and Thame Road. This is the lowest part of the site. The rest of the farm is very slightly higher, but it will have to attenuate surface water flows to be no more than current greenfield rates. This has required a water sensitive drainage approach across the whole site.

There is a high risk of flooding immediately to the north of Rose Farm at Wayfarers End, the recently built residential development to the north of Thame Road. This development has a large shallow retention basin, and extensive areas of porous paving in a conventional layout of residential streets. Additional development on the Rose Farm site will add to the run off and this may raise the risk level of flooding on this site.

Figure 25 Groundwater vulnerability; source: Magic

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 19

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.4 Biodiversity

In March 2019, the UK Chancellor’s spring statement announced that new English developments will be required to demonstrate biodiversity net gain (bng) compared to pre-development conditions. The Environment Bill is currently passing through 2 km parliament and will become law when Royal Assent is given.

1km The Rose Farm site is located in a habitat network expansion zone, placing a higher bar for biodiversity conservation and creative ecology on site. An ecological study has been undertaken by Aspect Ecology to calculate if the proposed development will deliver ROSE FARM SITE the required increase in bng, and that it is achieved in a way that is inter-connected and contributes to the wider wildlife network.

There are no SSSIs within 2km of the site. Within and just outside the 2km radius are priority habitats for lowland meadows, good semi-improved grassland and broadleaf woodland. These appear to be the basis for the proposed Habitat Network Enhancement and Extension zones. There is also recognition of habitats targeted for Corn Bunting, Lapwings, Grey Partridge, Yellow Wagtail, Curlew, and assemblages of arable Figure 26 Priority Habitat Inventory areas within 2km of the site Purple: Good quality semi-improved grassland cropland and grassland birds. Bright Green: Priority Habitat inventory - lowland meadows Dark Green: Priority Habitat inventory - deciduous woodland

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 20

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.4 Biodiversity (contd)

Habitat Network Habitat Network Extension Zone Enhancement Zone

ROSE FARM SITE

Figure 27 Habitat Network Enhancement & Expansion Zones. Source: Magic

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 21

The village landscape changed with the Parliamentary which would have been lost from 1973 onwards. The enclosure of open fields, (18th and 19th centuries) but line of pollard willows is stronger, crossing the whole the small enclosures adjacent to the farm and houses site, and a hedgerow with large trees (as seen from may well date from an earlier time. By 1878 when the shadows) appears to divide the orchard from the the first Ordnance Survey map was published for this remnant open field and its ridge and furrow. The farm area, a grid of orchard trees is the unifying feature of lane curves around a large barn or dwelling, which had the village, and it would have had a garden quality disappeared by 1945. especially in spring. Walnut Tree Lane is shown passing though an orchard C The OS map of 1897 is essentially the same but with - there is one older house in the street, still [recent, to far less detail, however, the Aerial photograph taken in the north. The 1897 map clearly shows the cross roads 1945 shows that the orchards are still present, although where Bar Lane and Walnut Tree Lane meet Thame little remains of the orchard on the site. That to the Road. south east is remembered in the name - Orchard Close, built in the 1970s.

The line of the stream is still apparent in 1945, the shadows from the willows on the site are clear , and there appears to be a kink to the east (highlighted in blue). Today there is a head wall at the south eastern end of the line of pollard willows on site and an opportunity to daylight a section of the stream. A D Figure 28 Photographs from the mid-1950s showing: A The 1878 map shows that the main field we have today The old school house (now a residence), B The Mill (at was divided into the three parts. This map has been the south end of the village off Chestnut Way), C The overlaid onto an aerial image in Figure 28 to illustrate Toll Gate Lodge (new demolished), D The north end of the changes Longwick source: The Frith Collection The boundary with Thame Road is shown as lined with hedgerow trees in 1878, photographs from the mid 1950s show the distinctive outline of mature elm trees, B Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 22

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.5 History - Maps

Stream course

Figure 29 OS Map 1878 Figure 30 OS Map 1897 Figure 31 Aerial photograph 1945 source: oldmaps.co.uk screenshot elaborated by LHLA source: oldmaps.co.uk screenshot elaborated by LHLA source: google earth

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 23

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.5 History - Landscape Changes

Stream corridor

Orchard

Shelterbelt

Farm buildings - now gone

Orchard

Shelterbelt

Medieval ridge & furrow field pattern

Shelterbelts

Orchard

Figure 33 2018 Aerial view of the site Image: Google Earth

Figure 32 Part of the 1878 OS map overlaid onto a 2003 aerial of the site which shows the ridge & furrow most clearly, as well as a now demolished barn Image: Google Earth elaborated by LHLA Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 24

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.6 Site Context Longwick is a small, linear village that grew up around a drove road that later became a turnpike, located on the level vale at the foot of the scarp slope for the 10 km Chilterns. The village sits between the 85-90m contours, 9 km with the Chilterns (rising to 248m at Pulpit Hill to the 8 km 7 km north east, 245m at Whiteleaf Cross to the east, and Haddenham 244m at Hempton Wainhill to the south) providing a 6 km 5 km backdrop. Views from the Chilterns offer a panorama of 4 km patchwork fields, small settlements and barns. 3 km Owlswick 2 km The nearest town is Princes Risborough, some Thame Ilmer 1 km Towersey Chequers 2 kilometres to the south east. Thame is some 6 Rose Farm kilometres to the west, and Haddenham 4 kilometres 1 km Longwick to the north west. 2 km 3 km Princes Risborough The vale is characteriesed by scattered farm settlements 4 km and small villages. Longwick is linked to nearby Ilmer 5 km within Longwick-cum-Ilmer Parish. There is no direct 6 km 7 km road route between the linked settlements, although 8 km there is a footpath crossing large ploughed fields. The 9 km Chinnor Chilterns AONB topography is visually very level, and varies generally between the 75 and 90m contours with some local slightly lower or slightly higher areas. The overall drainage is towards the river Thame to the north west. Figure 30 shows the contrast between the undulating Chilterns with woodlands, and the level Vale of Longwick, which is sparsely wooded.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10km

Figure 34 Location of Rose Farm and Longwick in relation to the Chilterns AONB and its rural setting Image: Google Earth elaborated by LHLA

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 25

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.6 Site Context Figure 35 shows the application site which lies towards the centre of the village, and a zone of a kilometre around it, most of which is farmland.

The London Marylebone to Stratford upon Avon railway passes on a 4-5m high embankment to the south west, and roughly parallel to the village. Because the land varies by only a few metres this creates an effective visual stop to the south west.

Much of this area had been farmed from Norman times in the open field system, characterised by ridge and furrow subdivisions. Parliamentary enclosure Acts, especially through the 18th and early 19th centuries, brought about land reform to feed a growing industrialised nation. However, whilst the ridge and furrow in many areas has been largely ploughed out, it remains in more marginal areas that supported pasture. The western half of the application site still has a clear ridge and furrow topography.

Around settlements there were smaller paddocks and orchards, and these smaller fields can be seen adjacent to the Longwick. In the 19th century many were planted as orchard, and protected from cold winds by high edges and shelter belts. The site also has small enclosures. The contiguous hedge boundaries and trees are important wildlife corridors. Figure 35 Longwick and surroundings within 1km of the site boundaries & local footpaths, noting field types and new development sites Image: Google Earth elaborated by LHLA

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 26

0 1km The Site Survey shows the figure ground of barns and farm houses to which we have rendered in the adjacent Owlswick suburban style street, Walnut Tree Lane to provide context.

Stream A stream runs through the village parallel to Thame Small field system Road behind the houses fronting it. It appears that over time parts of this have been culverted. A depression Wayfarers End New development dividing the small paddock and larger field supports ROSE FARM veteran pollarded willows - currently over-stood and Walnut Tree Lane SITE in urgent need of pollarding, and on the north side Railway of the farm lane there is standing water in a longer embankment depression. This is a key asset for drainage, wildlife and New development site Footpath sense of place.

Existing trees There is a spine of trees that extends from the Thame Road frontage to the Shelterbelt forming the western PRINCES RISBOROUGH boundary. This does not all appear to be ancient. The 1945 aerial view confirms that the shelterbelt was present on the western boundary, as well as the section of the northern boundary between the new barns and the western edge. The 2003 aerial shows very new tree planting, to the south of the large barn and along the frontage to Thame Road, and recently established tree planting on the north side of the farm lane.

Figure 36 Location of Rose Farm and immediate context Image: Google Earth elaborated by LHLA Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 27

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline 5.7 Site Appraisal 0 10 20 30 40 50 100m Ridge and Furrow Indicative The main field still has clear signs of ridge and furrow cultivation dating for the mediaeval period, but this finishes just west of the curved section of the farm lane, old maps show a field division between the indent of themain field and the barns, filled with lines of orchard trees, a few of which were still present in the 1945 aerial image. Location of former Barns and Farm Yard barn removed between 2003 There are four large barns with an area of 1932m2 still and 2006 standing. Until between 2004 and 2006 there had been Location of former house a fifth large barn on the eastern side of the yard. The existing in 1878 & reason for curved farm lane hard standing for part of it still remains, but about 7m Woodland strip to the east was taken up and used to extend gardens planted around the the adjacent dwelling. This barn had covered about 2000 630m2.

The Farm Lane The curve in the lane is shown on the 1978 OS map Likely culverted part of stream passing around a large house or barn.

Figure 37 Site survey elaborated by LHLA Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 28

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline 5.8 Local Landscape Character Key Configuration of the site creates areas of different char- 1 Farm Lane with trees planted to north acter that are informed by the ‘time depth’ of the fea- 2 Hayfield east tures they contain. FIgure 37 shows the current survey annotated to show some former features. Figure 38 3 Former Orchard 12 shows the landscape character zones. The main field 4 Hayfield west divides into three sections, hayfield east (2), the former 5 Shelterbelt 1 orchard (3) and hayfield west (4). There are two further 11 6 Tree belt small paddocks, (9) around which the lane curves, and (11) on the north side of the entrance. The almost ex- 7 Small plantation planted c.2000 10 clusively hard farm yard (8) has some trees, but most 8 Barns and farmyard 2 are just outside the site boundary. The main tree spine 9 Paddock - former large house 8 9 comprises a series of elements (5) and (10) are old, 10 Stream, basin & pollarded willows whilst (6), (7), (11), and (12) are about 20-30 years old. 11 Paddock 7 3 12 Hedge + trees (planted c.w1990s) 5.9 Site Assets and Landscape Fabric The key assets on the site are the trees which together 6 provide a wildlife corridor and wind break from the northwest and southwest winds. In addition there are well established, but species-poor thorn hedges 4 fronting Thame Road. 1. A mainly hawthorn and blackthorn hedge +/- 3m high 5 2. A thorn hedge with a strip of Leylandii, birch and field maple with ivy. 3. Planting on the north side of the drive contains a mix of mostly native species including alder, elder, holm oak (non-native) silver birch, Leyland cypress 1878 map overlaid onto aerial showing farm lane 0 10 20 30 40 50 100m Note: site boundary indicative only curves around a large house (non-native), oak, ash, spruce (non-native) field maple, Indicative whitebeam, and wild cherry. Figure 38 Site landscape character Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 29

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.9 Site Assets 4/5 Old pollarded crack willows in a hollow. To the south east (5) this was damp, to the north of the lane (4) there was open water, but one willow had been 2 wind-felled, due to being over stood and there was evidence of rot in the crown. 6. A stand of mature sycamores and Lombardy poplar. 3 4 1 7. Poplar shelterbelt, now close to maturity, with a thick understorey including elm regrowth suggesting 5 this had been a line of elms prior to1973, along with 9 thorns, and some cherry. 3 8 Former shelterbelt with a mix of species including, 10 6 unusually, London plane. 9. Copse 8 10. Mixed woodland strip that appears to have been 11 planted around 2000 containing some spruce as well as native deciduous trees - in need of some management 11. Remains of the former mediaeval open field system with eleven clear ridge and furrow strips (the Key 1 High thorn hedge dotted lines indicate the dips). 7 2 Thorn hedge + strip of trees The contours at one metre intervals are interpolated 3 Mixed small trees 4 Pollarded willows & stream basin from the Ordnance Survey map, and show a gentle fall 5 Pollarded willows in hollow from west to east of under 4 metres, an average fall of 6 Sycamores and Lombardy poplar about 1 in 55, equivalent to the cross fall on a football 7 Shelter belt with poplars pitch. 8 Mix tree belt 9 Copse 10 20 year old copse

0 10 20 30 40 50 100m 11 Remains of mediaeval ridge & furrow strips Indicative Figure 39 Site assets and landscape fabric

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 30

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.10 Immediate surroundings In general, land to the west is farmland with long 5 range views limited by a high railway embankment (about 4-5m high plus thorns growing on it) which is Wayfarers End 4 15-170m away. To the south and east is the village 6 fabric and to the north the Rose Farm residential Rose Farm buildings.

Beyond the high poplar shelterbelt that forms the 3 Thame Road site’s western boundary is an open arable field (1) 7 bounded to the west by the railway embankment.

The barns and farm yard are screened to the north and south by trees, some of which are within the site. Beyond the trees is agricultural land enclosed by high hedges (3) and a shelterbelt (2), with further layers of 2 hedges to the north. Key

Orchard Close 1 Arable field 2 Poplar shelter belt 8 3 Paddock 4 Older houses with large gardens & mature trees 1 5 New Public Open Space 6 New housing development 7 Older residential Walnut Tree Lane 8 1960s residential 9 Playing fields 0 10 20 30 40 50 100m Note: site boundary indicative only 9 Indicative 10 10 School Figure 40 Site context and landscape fabric Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 31

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.10 Immediate surroundings

Rose Farmhouse and associated buildings are located in a well-established landscape with mature trees adjacent to the northern part of the site (4). There are porous boundaries allowing filtered views to the northern part of the site from Mistlethrush Barn and the Cart Shed. 1-2, Jubilee Cottages have views into the site, but homes on Orchard Close, with the exception of one dwelling, do not have direct views overlooking the field. 1 Shelterbelt-western boundary of site 8 Walnut Tree Lane There are two dwellings on the lower section of Walnut Tree Lane that overlook the main field, across long gardens (about 20m long), with trees to filter the views.

There is mainly late 20th century housing in a close and also addressing Thame Road to the north west (7). The new development called Wayfarers End (6), is generally set back from Thame Road, behind existing development and a large water attenuation basin/ 3 Rose Farm amenity greenspace (5). Barns partially screened by the copse

The village school (10) and playing field (9) lie to the east of Walnut Tree Lane.

Wayfarers End amenity space/ Rose Farm Thame Road 5 flood attenuation 4 Entrance 4 boundary Figure 41 Site context and landscape fabric Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 32

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.10 Immediate surroundings

6 Wayfarers End 7 Centenary Cottage

8 8 Thame Road south of the site Orchard Close looking towards the site (gap in fence)

Figure 42 Site context and landscape fabric

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 33

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Views of the site Six typical viewpoints (VPs) have been selected. Of these, only the closest Viewpoints (VP1-3) would have potential views of the development. VP 4 is on a local high point only 300 metres from the site, but the view would be screened by the railway embankment and only the tops of the shelterbelt trees would be visible. VP5 is from Owlswick, 900 metres from the closest part of the site and also sited on a local high point. Several layers of hedges and trees in the view mean that only the tops of the shelterbelt at the far end of the site would be apparent from this VP. VP6 is an elevated viewpoint in the Chilterns AONB, almost 4 kilometres from the site boundary. The site can be identified by the dark conifers around Rose Farmhouse immediately to the north.

Viewpoints VP1 and VP2 are from Thame Road and any alteration to the vegetated boundary would allow sight of development; where hedges are retained, views would be restricted to the roofs and upper floor of two storey buildings. VP3 would have only a glimpsed view past off-site trees and houses through a visually porous post and rail fence. VP6 is shown in figures 47-49. KEY VP3 Viewpoints where site can be identified Viewpoints used to test intervisibility

Field of view from passing trains Figure 43 Location of viewpoints and checking intervisibility The blue arrows indicate images taken to establish public right of way, but was taken with a view to more

0 100 200 300 400 500 1000 m the zone of visual influence, of which one in the field distant views from this direction which are interrupted Indicative to the north of the site within Rose Farm is not on a by layers of hedges and a shelterbelt. Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 34

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Views of the site and intervisibility Intervisibility is a useful tool in assessing visual impact, as it suggests where a proposed development might be seen from.

Distance plays a part in noticing features, and where there are wide panoramas, such as those from the Chilterns, the patchwork of fields, copses and hedgerows can make identification of small developments less easy to perceive (3). The level landscape of the Longwick Vale is characterised by country lanes that often have high hedgerows (#2) that limit views. #1 View south from Manor Farm Lane, Owlswick In the local vicinity the very small changes in elevation mean that vegetation plays a prominent role in screening. #1 is a view towards the site from a local high point at Owlswick, where only the tops of the shelterbelt bordering the site can be seen, with the Chilterns forming the backdrop.

The bridlepath extending from Walnut Tree Lane is close to the site, but screened by a relatively high #2 View northwest on lane to Owlswick #3 Chilterns view to Longwick Vale hedgerow (#4) and then by a high railway embankment (#5). The ground rises to some 5 metres above the site, but the view towards it is partially obscured by the railway embankment (#6.)

From the site, vegetation limits views beyond the site perimeter, with the exception of direct intervisibility with dwellings on Walnut Tree Lane, the semi detached house fronting Thame Road, and oblique views to homes in Orchard Close. #4 Hedges to Walnut Tree Lane PRoW & bridlepath #5 PRoW under railway embankment Figure 44 Views towards the site Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 35

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Views from the site

#6 Railway embankment #7 View across front field to 2, Jubilee Cottages #8 View towards Orchard Close from farmyard

Identifying where the site may be seen from The visual baseline fieldwork was carried out in July 2020. Visual receptors were sought on public rights of way, but private property was not entered. This fieldwork involved driving or walking routes in the vicinity to test whether the site was visible or not at pedestrian eye level. There were a number of impediments to views which are typical of this landscape – in particular, high hedges and low hills. We used the OS map to suggest where the potential visual envelope of the site was, this #9 Intervisibility with properties on Walnut Tree Lane was cross referenced with views out from the site, and Figure 45 Views from the site - checking intervisibility then tested by visiting the locations and looking back towards the site.

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 36

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Viewpoint One View south along Thame Road Elevation +/- 85m AOD

Site entrance

Site boundary to Thame Road

Figure 46 Viewpoint One Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 37

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Viewpoint #2 View north along Thame Road Elevation +/- 85m AOD

Site entrance

Site boundary to Thame Road

Figure 47 Viewpoint Two

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 38

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Viewpoint #3 View north along Orchard Close Elevation +/- 86m AOD Distance from view 50m

Site

Figure 48 Viewpoint Three Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 39

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Viewpoint #4 View northeast across field from Walnut Tree Lane bridlepath Elevation +/- 91m AOD Distance from view 380m

The site - western boundary shelterbelt London to Stratford-upon-Avon railway

Figure 49 Viewpoint Four

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 40

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Viewpoint #5 View south along Manor Farm Lane, Owlswick Elevation +/- 90m AOD Distance from view 1000m

The site

Figure 50 Viewpoint Five

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 41

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Viewpoint #6 View from Whiteleaf Hill, Chilterns AONB Elevation +/- 237m AOD Distance from site 3.78 km

Figure 53 Viewpoint Six (continued on p43)

VP6 0 1 2 3 4 km

Figure 51 Location of Viewpoint Six Figure 52 Whiteleaf Hill with Bledlow Ridge in the distance Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 42

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Viewpoint #6 View from Whiteleaf Hill, Chilterns AONB Elevation +/- 237m AOD Distance from site 3.78 km

Longwick Rose Farm

Figure 53 Viewpoint Six The site is embedded into the village and landscape The London to Stratford-upon-Avon railway line of the under storey of the western shelterbelt, this with few viewpoints from public rights of way. Within passes immediately west of the site roughly 5 metres would be limited largely to rooftops and the upper a 1 kilometre radius, most levels vary by only around 5 above grade on an embankment. The potential views parts of houses and any planting within the site to metres, the exception being Chadwell Hill to the south are indicated as a dotted blue line. There are views to break this up. east which rises to 20 metres above the lowest part of the site - screened in summer when leaves are on the the site within this radius. In such a level landscape the shelterbelt trees, but more apparent in winter when nature of the lanes and paths is key to what is or is not the branches are bare. However, since the train pass visible, and a characteristic here is of relatively high at around 60mph there would be an opportunity to hedges - at least as high or high than a pedestrian or view the site for about 25 seconds on the up-line, and cyclist’s eye level, and higher than most vehicle drivers’ 35 seconds on the down-line - this is long enough to level of view. register and see development, but owing to the height

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 43

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.11 Views from the site

Visual Location Distance from site Elevation Comments Receptor VR1 Thame Road looking south along 1.5 to 20m 85m aod View along the length of the site’s Thame Road frontage and site entrance. site frontage VR2 Thame Road looking north along 40-125m 85m aod Foreshortened view along the Thames Road frontage showing the site entrance and the back- site frontage drop of trees flanking the existing farm track. VR3 Orchard Close off Walnut Tree 50m 86m aod Private residential cul-de-sac with narrow view into the site. Lane VR4 Bridlepath extension to Walnut 380m 91m aod View across farmland towards railway and poplars lining the south west site boundary. Tree Lane at crest of gentle rise VR5 Manor Farm Lane at Owlswick 1000m 90m aod View across farmland towards the site. junction with Bar Lane VR6 Whiteleaf Hill 3.7km 237m aod Wide panorama across Aylesbury Vale and Longwick.

Table 1 Visual Receptors

Property Approximate Comments distance from site boundary Rose Farmhouse and 10 and 20m Farmhouse and barn to north of site both well concealed by mature tree cover. Crabtree Barn respectively Mistlethrush Barn and 8.5 and 7m Barn conversions to north of site looking out directly across paddocks forming the northern part of the site. the Cart Barn respectively 5-6, Centenary Cottages, 44m, 16m and Properties on east side of Thame Road facing the site. Wayfarers End and 20m Chapel House respectively 1-2, Jubilee Cottages 26m, 1m 1, Jubilee Cottages has an oblique, filtered view; 2, Jubilee Cottages is on the site boundary and has a direct view. Orchard Close 10 to 23m Three properties at the northern end of private cul-de-sac.

Walnut Tree Lane Average 20m Nine properties at the western end of Walnut Tree Lane with direct, filtered and oblique views

Table 2 Close Neighbours

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 44

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 5 Landscape Baseline

5.12 Close Neighbours

Crabtree Cart Centenery Rose Barn Shed Farmhouse Wayfarer’s Cottages End Chapel House Mistlethrush Barn Jubilee Cottages

Orchard Close

Walnut Tree Lane

Figure 54 Location of close neighbours

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 45

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk h o

h o

h 6 Proposed development o

h o

h o o h

o h h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o o h

o h h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o o h

o o h

h o o h

h o h o

o h h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o o h

h o o FH h

h o o h

h o h o

o h h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o o h

h o 6.1 Site masterplan o h

h o o h

o h h o

h h o

o h h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o

o h

h o o h

h h o o h

o h o

h o h

h o o o h

o h

o h h o

o h

h o h h o

h o o

h h h o

o o h h o h h o

o h

h o o

o h

o o

h o o h h

h o

o o h h o

h o o h o

h h o o h

h h

o o o

h h

o h

h o o

o h

o h o h o o h h h o o

o o h h h TP o h o h o A1 h o h o h o h o h o o h

h o h o h o h h o o o h h o h o o o h h h o h

o h o h h o o o h h o h o o h h h EP o o o h o h o h o h o h o h o h o h o h h o h h o o

h o h

o o o o o h o

h h h o o h h h o h h o o

h o h o h o o o o o h h

h h h o h o h o h o o o h h h h o o o o

h h h o h h o o o h o h h o h h

o o o o

h h h o h o h o h o o h h o h h o o o o o h

h h h h o o o h h o h h o o h o h o o o o h h h h o h o h o o h h o h o o h o o o h h h h h o o o h h o h o h o h o h o

o o o h h

h h h o o h o h o h o h o h

o o o h A3

h h h o o h h o o h o h o h

o o o o h h h h o o h h o h o h h o o

o o o o h h

h h h o h o h o h o h o h

o o o o h

h h h o h o h o h o h o h

o o o o h

h h h h o o h o h o h o h o

o o o o h h

h h h o h o h h o o o h h o o o o h

h h h o h

o h o o h h o h

o o o o h

h h h o h o h o h o h o h

o o o o h o h h h h 0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 M o h TP o h o h o o h h

o o o o h h

h h h o o h o o h h o h

o o o o h

h h h h o o h o h h WM o

o o o o h o h

h h h o h o h

o h o h h o o o o

h h h o h o h o o h h o h

o o o h h h h o o h

o o o o

h h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o

h h h h

TOS TOS TOS o h

o o o

h h h TOW

83.95 o 83.24 83.30 83.53 h

o o o

h h h 84.51 o 84.46 SV h

o o o o

h h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o k h

o o o

h h h o n h o o o o h h h i h

o h

o o o

h h h

L o h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o h h h n h

o h

o o o

h h h

e o 84.61 h o o o 84.40

h h h

o e h

o o o o h h h r h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h G To P P VP h

o o o o

h h h h

o h

o o o

h h h 1 o h

o o o o h h h h 84.47

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o o

h h h h

o o o h h h h 84.53 84.54

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o

h h h h

o o o h

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o 84.49 h

o o o

h h h 1 o h

o o o o 85.14 h

h h h 85.34 TOW

o h

o o o

h h h 84.83

o h

o o o

h h h 85.07 G o h

o o o o

h h h h

o o o h

h h h 84.45 r o h

o o o

h h h e o h

o o o 1

h h h o e h o o o o

h h h h

o h

o o o

h h h n o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h o L h o o o o h

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h P i P o V h

o o o n

h h h P

o h

o o o o

h h h 2 ri k h o

o o o v h

h h h

o a h

o o o

h h h

o 85.24 t h

o o o

h h h e o h

o o o o

h h h D h

o h

o o o

h h h

o r h

o o o

h h h i o v h

o o o

h h h o e h

o o o h

h h h w

o h

o o o o

h h h h a o h o h

o o o

h h h

o o y S h h

o o o o h o

h h h 2 h

o h o

o o o h

h h h 85.12 o h

o h o

o o o h

h h h

o o h E h

o o o h

h h h o h

o h

o o o o

h h h h o h

o h

o o o o h

h h h

o o h h

o o o

h h h G o o h 2 h

o o o o

h h h o h h

85.29 o PR h o o o o h

h h h

o h o h

o o o 85.49

h h h o h A o h

o o o h

h h h o h

o h

o o o o

h h h h o h

o o o o h h h h h T 85.34 o o h h

o o o

h h h

o P o h P V h

o o o o

h h h h o h

o h

o o o o h

h h h 3 T

o h o h

o o o

h h h o h

o h

o o o h

h h h

o h o h

o o o

o h h h h o h

o o o O o h

h h h h

o PR o h h

o o o

h h h Rose Farm

o o h h

o o o o

h h h h o h

o h

o o o o

h h h h C o h

o h

o o o

h h h 2 o h

o h

o o o h

h h h

o h o h

o o o

h h h o o h h

o o o o o h

h h h h 3

o o TOW h h Y

o o o

h h h

o h o 86.66 h

o o o

h h h o h o h

o o h o o

h h h h

o o o h

h h h R

o h

o o o

h h h 1 84.87 o h

o o o

h h h o 3 h

o o o o

h h h h A

o h

o o o

h h h

o T2 n h

o o o

h h h 85.24

o 85.25 io h

o o o

h h h t o c h o

o N o o h

h h h e o l h

o o o

h h h l

o o t h

o o o

h h h 84.82 o C in h

o o o o

h h h E The Cart Shed o h

o o o n h

h h h i P

o h

o o o

h h h B

o 85.34 h

o o o T

h h h o h

o o o o

h h h 85.87 h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h o N h

o o o

o h h h 85.45 h o

o o o h

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h E

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o

h h h h

4 o

o o o h

h h h T2

o h

o o o C

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o h

h h h 85.55

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h B h o

o o o h

h h h

o i h

o o o

h h h n

o h

o o o

h h h o C h

o o o o

h h h h

o o h

o o o

h h h 85.65 k P o l h

o o o

h h h l o P n o e h

o o o 4

h h h o i in c h

o o o o h

h h h L t t i o h

o o o

h h h 85.78 o o h

o o o 85.72

h h h n 4 n o h

o o o o

h h h e Cycleway - Pathway h

o o o h

h h h 86.02

o e h

o o o

h h h

o r h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o

h h h G h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h SV o h

o o o h

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o o

h h h 84.71 P h o

o o o h

h h h P r V o h

o o o

h h h i

o v h

o o o

h h h o PR a Th P

o o o o h o

h h h t h o h e h o

o o o

h h h

o h h Attenuation o

o o o o

h h h D h h PR o

o o o h

h h h h r o o TOS h

o o o h i o h h h

v o TOS 83.70 h h o

o o o

h h h o e h 83.77 h o

o o o o h

h h h w h o TCB o h

o o o 85.21

h h h h a o o Basin h h

o o o o

h h h

o y h

84.90 h o

o o o o

h h h P h

h V o o

o o o Crabtree Barn h

h h h

h o

o TOW h

o o o h

h h h o

o 85.32 h h

o o o o

h h h o h

h o o

o o o h

h h h

h o o h

o o o

h h h h P o o V h

o o o h

h h h o o h

o o o o o

h h h h

h o o

o o o h

h h h

o o h

o o o 5 h h h h o o h

o o o h

h h h o o P h

V h

o o o o o h

h h h

h o o h

o o o

h h h

h o o h

o o o

h h h h o o h

o o o h o

h h h o h

P h o o

o o o h

h h h P h o o h

o V o o

h h h

h o 5 o h o o o

h h h h o o h

o o o h h o

h h h

o h TP h h o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h o P h

o o o 8 o o

h h h h

h h h o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o P h

o o o

h h h o h

h o

o o o

o h

h h h P W 6 7P P o h

o o o

h 8 h h

o 65 5 h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o o

h h h Mistlethrush Barn a h

h h

o o o PR

h h h

o h

o o o t o

P o

h h h

o P 7 h e h

o o o

h h h V o h

h o

o o o h o

h h h r o h

o o o

h h h

o c h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o o

h h h o 64 6 h

P o

h h

o o o

h h h

o u h

o o o

h h h

65 o h

o o o

o o h h h r h

h o

o o o

o h

h h h s o h

o o o

h h h 6

o h

o o o e o o

h h h o h

o o o o o

h h h 65 C h o

h h

o o o

B o

h o h h

l i o l n h

o o o e

P o

h h h c o o h

t h

o o o

i o

h h h i o n o h t n h o

o o o

o h

h h h 63 o h

o o o

h h h 8

o h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o

o o

h h h h

h h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

o o

h h h h

h o h

o o o P o h

h h h V

o h

o o o

h h h 7

o h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o o

h h h h Cycleway - Pathway o

h h h

o o o

h h h

9 o h

o o o

h h P h

o V h

o o o

o o h h h 62 h

h o

o o o o h

h h h

o h h

o o o o

h h h

o h

o o o o

h h h o P h

o o o o o

o h h h h P 9

h h h

o o o o

h h h

o h

64 h

o o o o

h h h

o h

o o o o

o o

h h h h

h o

o o o o h

h h h

o h

o o o o

h h h

o h

o o o o

h h h P o 10 h

P h

o o o o P o

o h

h h h V

h h

o o o o

h h h P 61 61 o h

o o o o

h h h

o k h

o o o o

64 o o

h h h h

h o

o o o o h

h h h n

o h

i h

o o o

h h h

o P h

o o o

h h h o 49 L 9 h

o o o o o h

h h h P h o h

2 o o h h

o o o

h h h o h

o o 63 n h h

o o o o h

h h h

o o h h

o h

o o o o

h h h o e h h P o h

o o o o h h

h h h

o h P o o h h

o o o e

h h h 61 o 62 h o o h h

o o o o P r 10 10 h h h h o o h h

o h

o o o o o h

h h h h

63 o h o o h

o o o h

h h h G o h o o h h

o o o o

h h h h o o h h

o h

o o o o

h h h o h h

o P h o

o o o o h h

h h h 62 o h P o o h h

o o o

h h h o h o h o h

o o o o h

h h h 60 o h o h

o h o o o o h

h h h o h

o h o 1 h o o o o h

h h h o h o P h o h

o o o

h h h 48 o h o h o h

o o o h o

h h h h o P h

o h o

o o o h o

h h h h

o h o h o h

o o o 59

h h h o h o h o Attenuation h

o o o o

h h h h o h o h

o h o

o o o h

h h h o h TP P o h o h

o o o o 47 h

h h h o h o h o h o h o h o h o h o h o h h o h o o o h o h o h o h h o h o h o o o h o h h o h o h h o h o h

o o o o h o h o h o h o h h h h P o h o o h o h h o h o h o h o h o h o h h o h o o o h o o h o h h h o h o h o h o h o h o h o h o h

o o o o h o o h o h h h o h h h o h o h o h o o 58 h h o h

o o o o

h h h TP h

Basin o

o o o h

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o P h

o o o 46

h h h

o h F

o o o e o

h h h 60 h

o o o h

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o o

h h h P h

o o o 45 h

h h h a

o h

o o o

h h h ile o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o o

h h h h

o o o h

h h h

o b h

o o o

h h h

o h r

o o o

h h h W o s h

o o o o

h h h WM h

o o o h

h h h P a u 60 o t h

o o o

h h h

o 59 h

o o o 2

h h h t e o e h

o o o o

h h h P h h n J

o o o h

h h h o r

45 i o h

o o o

h h h t c

o g h c

o o o

h h h

o e o h

o o o l o

h h h l t h

o o o u h

h h h o in n

o i h

o o o

h h h C a r o o h

o o o

h h h s o in P h

o o o o

h h h t P B e h o

o o o h

h h h 59

o t h

o o o

h h h

58 o h

o o o

h h h

o P h

o o o o

h h h h g o

o o o 1 46 h

h h h o

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o P o

h h h h

o o o h

h h h 45 47 o h s

o o o C

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o o

h h h P h o

o o o h

h h h 58

o h

o o o

h h h P 57 o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o o

h h h 48 h

o o o h

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

e o e h

o o o

h h h h o P c h

o o o c o

h h h h

o o o h

h h h 46 49 G a a o h

o o o

h h h

o r p p c h

o o o

h h h e o h

o o o o

h h h e P S S h o

o o o n h

h h h 57

o h

o o o y

h h h L y y o e h a

o o o

h h h i s o n a a h

o o o w o h h h l e k l h o

o o o h

h h h v

o i P h

o o o P

h h h r o e h

o o o

h h h e D o h

o o o P o

h h h e h

o o o t h

h h h V o a 47 h

o o o

h h h

v o h

o o o i

h h h g B o r h

o o o

h o h h P h

o o o h

h h h

P o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o a

h h h 57 o h

o o o

o h h h h

o o o t h

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o t h o o o

h h h

o P h

o o o

h h h o DRAWING DATE: 12/03/2021h

o o o h

h h h 56 48

o h

o o o

h h h

o o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h o h h h

o o o o h

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h Cycleway - Pathway o C h

o o o

h h h o P h

o o . o h

h h h

B o h

o 55 o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h o h d e h

o o o o h

h h h e rt o h

o o o

h P h h 49 e This drawing must not be reproduced in part or whole without prior written consent.

o c v h

o o o

h h h l

o 54 k u h

o o o a

h h h a o C e h o o o o h

h h h in p s o o h

o o r o t h h h 44

u o l 85.9h m

o o o l

h h h L S o o P a c Scale to be checked against scale bar as thhis drawings has been provided o o o

h h h o W r h

o o o o e h

h h h r 53 n y t

o d h

o o o a

h h h

a o e a h

o o o

h h h H l e W o h

o o o e h h h H P o P electronically. h o o o o r h

h h h P 44 To P h

o o

h h h

o h L o h

o o o G

h h h 52

o h o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h o h

o o

o o o h

h h h Check and confirm all dimensions on site prior to commencing work.

o h

o o o

h h h P e o r P h

o o o a

h h h o 51 o h

o o o t o

h h h h 43

o h

o o o S

h h h o h

o o o u

h h h n o i IF ING DOUBTP ASK. h

o o o o

h h h B h

o o o P h

h h h n

o 44 h o o o

h h h

o 50 h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o h

h h h s

o h

o o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h 11 e o 4 h

o o o o

h h h P h

11 o h o o

h h h

o e h

o o o

h h h 43 o h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o h

h h h

o h

o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h o h

o o o o

h h h P h

o 11 h

o o

h h h

o h

o o o

h h h

o 43 h

o o o o h h h SV h

o o o h

h h h

o h

o o

h h h

o 11 h 5

o o o o h o h

h EP h h EP o o o h o h o h h o h o h

o h o o h

o o

o h h

o o

h h

h 50-56 TP

o h

o P

o 12

o h SV o P

h 43

o h P1 12/04/21 Issue for Planning

o P

o 12

o h 12

o P

o 13

o Orchard

o h P o 12

o V

o h 41 o

h SV

o 41

o h P Cottage

o SV h 13

o h P

o h V

o FH

o h P P

o h 40 V 42

o h P o W

o h V

o h P 8

o h 41

o 13

h 40

o h 40 P

o h V

h Cycleway - Pathway

h P

o A

o 42

h P

o k

o h 39 o V 13 h n

o h i

o SV

o h L L

o h

h n

h P

o e h 42

o 40

o h e

h 42

o N

h r

o G

h P

o h 14

o P

o h 39

o h U

o h 39

h SV

h T

o 14

h 7

o h

o C

o 14

h 38

o 38

o h R

h 2

o Affordable Units h

o 37

o h 1

o h P

h 38

1b2p - 5no. (2SO) o h

h P

o h 37

o P

o 16

o h O

h 37

o P

o 2b4p - 12no. (4SO) h o 16

o h R

o h V 1P5 C 3b6p - 10no. (2SO) Attenuation 1P5 H 36 36 A Basin R C B 35 P o 31 i 4b8p - 1no. n lle P c o ti in o t n D 3P6 32P P r iv R P Total = 28no. 3P9 a C P te id la 3 35 D g y ri L v e P e S 38 w a r a p 35 32 y e n a 15 1 te d c y n F e a P t . ew 37 io u iv P r Rose Farm, Longwick r D 32 n o e w at 3P6 riv P Market Units C 16 o B ll in P P e c P o t V i i 31 n o 1b2p - 2no. t n 32 31 17 31 17P 2b4p - 5no. 33 VP 7

3P3 P Cycleway - Pathway J Walker and Son Developments Ltd r VP iv 1P8 a 17 te D 3b4p - 8no. r 3P5 3P4 iv e P w 19 a 3b5p - 7no. 33 30 y 18 34 P 18 34 30 1P9 0 4b6p - 8no. 2P9 3 30 19

4b7p - 6no. 29 29 20 9 5b8p - 1no. 3P0 20P

21P Total = 37no. 20P C P 2 1 o 29 m z m 3 o P 1 Sawkings Harper Architects n o 21 e n

to a re o a 21 p 1 The Quarry, e la n n f d ie s 28 l c d a 28 s p Betchworth, b e e y b o u n ff d e r Surrey RH3 7BY . 27 22 187 Spaces 2P8 22P P 27 23P 27 22P T 01737 845580 PV E [email protected] 23P

y a 23 W www.sawkingsharper.com w 27 e P v ri D te a HAZARDS LEADING TO UNUSUAL OR SIGNIFICANT RISK DURING THE iv r P CONSTRUCTION PROCESS ARE IDENTIFIED ON THIS DRAWING AS: 24 P 24P SAWKINGS + NORTON ARCHITECTS SPECIFIC RISKS & HAZARDS: V

25P 24P VP CC SBS Cycleway - Pathway 25 25P

26P 0 2000 P1 4

26P

NOTE: THE LIST ABOVE IDENTIFIES CERTAIN RISKS WHICH ARE DEEMED TO BE UNUSUAL, ABNORMAL OR UNEXPECTED TO A COMPETENT CONTRACTOR CARRYING OUT WORK OF THIS Proposed Masterplan NATURE BUT DOES NOT COVER ALL POSSIBLE SITUATIONS WHICH MAY BE ENCOUNTERED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. IT IS THEREFORE THE MAIN CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO E IDENTIFY ANY FURTHER RISKS/HAZARDS AND TAKE APPOPRIATE ACTION. N A L E E CycleCwoanyn e- cPtiaotnh wpoaiynt R T T Figure 55 Site masterplan U N L A W Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 46

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 6 Proposed development

6.2 Landscape masterplan

Thame Road

scrub 1

verge 3

Location of detail area Stream 4

5 Attenuation basin and pond 6 8 7 9 Informal amenity space 10 Attenuation Local area for play basin and pond

Local area for play 0 10 20 30 40 50m

Local area for play A 16 April 2021 Pond added to attenuation basins Continued on LHLA drawing 287-P202 11 A

Figure 56 Landscape Masterplan (1 of 3) Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 47

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 6 Proposed development

6.2 Landscape masterplan

Continued on LHLA drawing 287-P201

64 65 scrub mix 63 62 61 scrub

60 Continued on LHLA 59 drawing 287-P201 58 Location of detail area Site boundary 57 45 46 47 48 49 44

11 50-56 43

12 41 40 42 13 39

Continued on LHLA 14 drawing 287-P203 Continued on LHLA drawing 287-P203

0 10 20 30 40 50m

Figure 57 Landscape Masterplan (2 of 3) Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 48

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 6 Proposed development

6.2 Landscape masterplan

50-56

41 Continued on LHLA drawing 287-P202 40 42

39 Attenuation basin and pond 14 38

Retained ridge and furrow 37 Local area for play Location of detail area 36

35 32 15 16 17 31 33 scrub 30 34 18 19 29 20

Attenuation basin 21 28 native reeds and native 22 water-loving shrubs to extend the pattern of 27 furrows from the 23 retained ridge and furrow 24 into the attenuation area

25 Cycleway and footpath 26 A 16 April 2021 Pond added to attenuation basin to be continued into Walnut Tree Lane, see LHLA drawing A 287- P210

0 10 20 30 40 50m

Figure 58 Landscape Masterplan (3 of 3) Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 49

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 7 Visual Impact This section considers the likely visual effects of the The visibility baseline identifies a number of viewpoints receptors are carefully considered with reference to the proposed development and proposals to mitigate (VPs) which are reflective of the key Visual Receptors Assessment Methodology (see Appendix 1) in terms of their effects. (VRs) from PRoWs, including roads and footpaths. These their sensitivity to change. This is explained in Table A2. For example, a stationary visual receptor such as a resident of a nearby property facing the development or someone sitting on a bench at a scenic viewpoint, or someone moving slowly towards the development, such as a walker or cyclist, and likely to be in that location to enjoy the surroundings, will be assessed to have a high sensitivity. Moving visual receptors such as motorists, those from further away or residents of residential properties with no direct or distant views of the proposed development will be assessed as having a low sensitivity. 7.1 Visual Receptors

Visual Receptors (VRs) have been identified at each of the selected Viewpoints. These may include drivers, walkers and cyclists, dependant on the location of the Viewpoint.

KEY VP3 Viewpoints where site can be identified Viewpoints used to test intervisibility

Field of view from passing trains

0 100 200 300 400 500 1000 metres Indicative Figure 59 Location of Viewpoints Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 50

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 7 Visual Impact (continued) 7.2 Likely Zone of Visual Influence 7.2 Zone of Visual Influence The blue arrows in Figure 57 indicate images taken to establish the likely zone of visual influence, of which one in the field to the northwest of the site within Rose Farm is not on a public right of way, but was taken to confirm more distant views from this direction which are interrupted by layers of hedges and a 95 shelterbelt. 90

85 The London to Stratford-upon-Avon railway line passes 80 immediately west of the site roughly 5 metres above grade on an embankment. The potential views are indicated as a dotted blue 1km line. There are views to the site - screened in summer when leaves are on the shelterbelt trees, but more apparent in winter when 1km the branches are bare. However, since the trains pass at around

60mph there would be an opportunity to view the site for about 85 25 seconds on the up-line, and 35 seconds on the down-line - this

500m is long enough to register and see development, but owing to the 400m height of the under storey of the western shelterbelt, this would

90 300m be limited largely to rooftops and the upper parts of houses and 200m

100m any planting within the site to break this up. A likely Zone of Visual 85 Influence has been mapped out by using photographs from and towards the site, site visits, walking and driving along all public roads and footpaths in the vicinity. 100m 200m The site is embedded into the village and landscape with few 300m

90 viewpoints from public rights of way. Within a 1 kilometre radius,

400m 95

85 100 500m most levels vary by only around 5 metres, the exception being 105 Chadwell Hill to the south east which rises to 20 metres above the lowest part of the site within this radius. In such a level landscape 90 the nature of the lanes and paths is key to what is or is not visible, and a characteristic here is of relatively high hedges - at least as 1km high or higher than a pedestrian or cyclist’s eye level, and higher 90 than that of most vehicle drivers. Figure indicative 60 Likely Zone of Visual Influence 0 100 200 300 400 500 1000 metres Indicative

indicative Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 51

Visual Location Distance from site Elevation Comments Receptor VR1 Thame Road looking south 1.5 to 20m 85m aod Busy A road between Thame and Princes Risborough used by local residents, commuters, along site frontage commercial vehicles; drivers, passengers, cyclists, pedestrians; medium to high sensitivity. VR2 Thame Road looking north 40-125m 85m aod Busy A road between Thame and Princes Risborough used by local residents, commuters, along site frontage commercial vehicles; drivers, passengers, cyclists, pedestrians; medium to high sensitivity. VR3 Orchard Close off Walnut Tree 50m 86m aod Local residents; high sensitivity Lane VR4 Bridlepath extension to 380m 91m aod Local residents on foot or on horseback; high sensitivity Walnut Tree Lane at crest of gentle rise VR5 Manor Farm Lane at Owlswick 1000m 90m aod Junction of country lane and long distance footpath Outer Aylesbury Ring, used by local junction with Bar Lane residents on foot, horseback, cyclists and drivers; high sensitivity VR6 Whiteleaf Hill 3.7km 237m aod Elevated viewpoint near nature reserve between Whiteleaf Hill and Kop Hill offering a wide panorama across the Vale of Ayelsbury. Used by visitors, walkers and local residents; high sensitivity Table 3 Sensitivity of Visual Receptors

Property Approximate distance Comments and sensitivity from site boundary Rose Farmhouse and 10 and 20m Filtered and oblique views towards the farmyard area. Low to medium sensitivity. Crabtree Barn respectively Mistlethrush Barn 8.5 and 7m Both properties face directly towards the proposed site. High sensitivity. and the Cart Barn respectively Centenary Cottages, 44m,15m and 20m 5-6, Centenary Cottages have an oblique view of the site; the property at the southeast corner of the recent Wayfarer’s End development Wayfarers End and respectively also has an oblique view of the site; Chapel House has a direct view. Medium sensitivity. Chapel House 1-2, Jubilee Cottages 26m and 1m 1, Jubilee Cottages has an oblique, filtered view of the site; 2, Jubilee Cottage shares two boundaries with the site, and has been extended close to the site boundary; low to medium sensitivity; high sensitivity. Orchard Close 10 to 23m Three properties at the northern end of the Close have views towards the site: 7, Orchard Close has direct views of the site, the other two have oblique and/or filtered views. High sensitivity. Walnut Tree Lane Average 20m Nine properties at the western end of Walnut Tree Lane have views towards the site; five properties have a direct view, the remaining properties have a filtered and/or oblique view. High sensitivity. Table 4 Sensitivity of Close Neighbours Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 52

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 7 Visual Impact (continued) 7.3 Sensitivity of Visual Receptors and Close Neighbours (contd) The sensitivity of Visual Receptors was assessed for each of the Viewpoints and Close Neighbours, using Rose Wayfarer’s the Methodology described In Appendix 1 and Table End Farmhouse Cart A2. Barn Crabtree Barn Visual Receptors are the people who would typically Centenery see the view described, such as motorists, bus or Cottages car passengers, cyclists or pedestrians/walkers. Fast moving visual receptors such as motorists were assessed to have a lower sensitivity than slow moving Mistlethrush receptors such as walkers. The importance of the view Jubilee to the receptor was considered: for example, people stopping to enjoy a scenic view would be considered Cottages to have higher sensitivity than commuters or local residents on a regular journey.

Orchard When considering the sensitivity of Close Neighbours, Close the orientation of the property, the direction and openess of outlook, the proximity of the proposed development and the landscape context were all taken into account. For example, a property facing the development, and having an open view of it, would be considered to have a higher sensitivity than another property perhaps sited closer to the development but orientated away from it, with no view of it.

Walnut Tree Lane

Figure 61 Close Neighbours

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 53

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 7 Visual Impact (continued) 7.4 Visual Impact Assessment The assessment of the significance of visual impacts A scheme causing a noticeable improvement to an depends on the predicted magnitude of change existing view could result in a ‘moderately to major affecting the visual receptors as well as the sensitivity benefical’ impact. of the visual receptors.

The magnitude of change to visual amenity depends upon the extent of the view affected by the proposed development, the angle of view and the level of integration of the proposal in the view as set out in Table A6.

For example, where the proposed development would dominate the view and fundamentally change its character and components, the predicted magnitude of change is high. Where the proposed development would only be a minor element of the overall view that is likely to be missed by the casual observer and/or scarcely appreciated, the magnitude of change is low or negligible.

The definition of Visual Impact Significance Criteria is explained in Table A7. Visual Impact can range from ‘Major Adverse’ to ‘Major Beneficial’.

Where the proposed scheme would cause a very noticeable deterioration to the existing view, affecting visual receptors of high or medium sensitivity, a ‘major adverse’ visual impact would result.

Where a scheme would cause a barely perceptible deterioration in the existing view, affecting visual receptors of low to medium sensitivity, a ‘minor adverse’ visual impact would be the outcome.

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 54

Visual Location Sensitivity Magnitude Visual Impact Significance Criteria Receptor of VRs of Change VR1 Thame Road looking Medium Medium The site frontage to the north of the proposed access road is the main feature in this view: this is currently dominated by south to site frontage to high leylandii creating a strong but gloomy character. The proposed boundary treatment would replace the conifers with large deciduous street trees, retaining the green frontage, with new houses set back behind a retained and enhanced low native hedge. This change would be noticeable in the view and would affect its character, but would be in keeping with the local village character; the visual impact is considered to be moderately beneficial. VR2 Thame Road looking Medium Medium The site frontage to the south of the proposed access road is noticeable in this view: this is delineated by a high thorn hedge, north to site frontage to high with a green backdrop formed by the groups of trees to the north of the site. The existing and historic green gap between the southern and northern parts of Longwick would be lost, as farmland would be replaced by housing. The proposed boundary treatment, with new houses facing Thame Road, but set back behind a retained, lower hedge with a retained green backdrop would, however, be in keeping with the local character of the village and Thame Road; a green street frontage would be retained. This change would be noticeable in the view and would affect its character; the visual impact is considered to be moderately adverse. VR3 Orchard Close off High Medium There is a narrow, framed view of the site through a porous boundary fence. The proposed site boundary treatment would Walnut Tree Lane include a new native boundary hedgerow, replacing the porous fence. The upper storeys of the proposed houses would be noticeable in the view, affecting its character; the visual impact is considered to be moderately adverse. VR4 Bridlepath extension High Low/ The 4-5m high railway embankment provides a strong visual screen, as does the shelter belt beyond, along the south west to Walnut Tree Lane at negligible site boundary. There could be some filtered views of new rooftops through the shelterbelt, particularly during the winter crest of gentle rise months; the visual impact is considered to be low/negligible. VR5 Manor Farm Lane, at High No change The site cannot be seen. No change. junction with Bar Lane VR6 Whiteleaf Hill High Negligible This is a distant, elevated view, with the site on the far, western site of the village: some of the trees to the north of the site can be discerned as a dark patch. It is unlikely that additional roof tops would be visible from this distance, as they would be screened and well filtered by retained and proposed tree belts.The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. Table 5 Magnitude of Change and Likely Visual Impact to Visual Receptors

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 55

Property Sensitivity Magnitude Visual Impact of Change Rose Farmhouse and Medium Low to Some oblique, filtered views of the proposed development in the farmyard area are likely, particularly in winter when there is less leaf Crabtree Barn medium cover. The magnitude of change would be low to medium for neighbours of medium sensitivity, giving rise to a minor adverse visual impact. Mistlethrush Barn and High High There would be direct views of the proposed development from the Cart Shed; from the Mistlethrush Barn there would be a direct the Cart Barn view of a planted attenuation basin, with any views of new housing screened by retained trees, giving rise to a moderate adverse visual impact and a minor adverse visual impact respectively. Centenary Cottages, Medium Low to There would be framed and filtered views across Thame Road of the proposed development from the upper windows; the magnitude Wayfarers End, Chapel medium of change would be low to medium, for neighbous of medium sensitivity; this would give rise to a minor adverse visual impact. House 1-2, Jubilee Cottages High; High; low From 1, Jubilee Cottages, there may be filtered views of the new development through the retained mature trees at the bottom of the medium to medium garden, giving rise to a minor adverse visual impact; from 2, Jubilee Cottages there would be oblique and direct, filtered views of the rear gardens of new houses from the rear conservatory, giving rise to a moderate adverse visual impact. Orchard Close High Medium There would be a narrow, framed view of the rear gardens of new houses through the post and rail fencing which forms the existing site boundary, giving rise to a moderate adverse impact. Walnut Tree Lane High Medium There would be a range of direct and filtered views of the rear gardens of new houses, giving rise to a minor to moderate adverse impact. Table 6 Magnitude of Change and Likely Visual Impact to Close Neighbours 7.5 Mitigation for Visual Effects 7.6 Visual Impact before & after mitigation

A key element to mitigate visual effects of the proposed • form, massing and colour of buildings and roofs The important visual receptors and close neighbours development is to strengthen the existing site • new native hedgerow planting with hedgerow to consider are those identified before mitigation to boundaries where there is any weakness or potential trees along site boundaries have a minor or moderately adverse visual impact. visual porosity. This will have the effect of reducing the These are visual receptors VR1, VR2 and VR3, and zone of visual influence of the proposed development. close neighbours at the Cart Shed, 2, Jubilee Cottages, Orchard Close and Walnut Tree Lane. Several mitigation measures for visual effects have already been incorporated into the design and layout of the proposed development; these include: • design of site frontage along Thame Road • the retention and enhancement of existing hedges and trees forming site boundaries wherever possible Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 56

Visual Location Visual Impact before mitigation Visual Impact after mitigation Receptor VR1 Thame Road Moderately adverse. The proposed boundary treatment would replace the conifers with large deciduous street trees, retaining the green frontage, looking with new 2-storey houses set back behind a retained and enhanced low native hedge. This change would be noticeable south to site in the view and would affect its character, but would be in keeping with the local village character; the visual impact is frontage considered to be minor adverse. VR2 Thame Road Moderately adverse. The proposed boundary treatment, with new 2-storey houses facing Thame Road, but set back (in line with the existing looking north building line) behind a retained, lower hedge with new hedgerow trees and a retained green backdrop would, however, be to site in keeping with the local character of the village and Thame Road; a green street frontage would be retained. This change frontage would be noticeable in the view and would affect its character, but that change would be in keeping with the adjacent local character; the visual impact is considered to be minor adverse. VR3 Orchard Moderately adverse. The proposed site boundary treatment would include a new native boundary hedgerow, replacing the porous fence. The Close off upper storeys of the proposed houses would still be visible, but cause a barely perceptible deterioration in the existing view; Walnut Tree the visual impact is considered to be minor adverse. Lane Table 7 Visual Impact of Visual Receptors before and after Mitigation

Site entrance

Site boundary to Thame Road

Figure 60 VR1 Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 57

Site entrance

Site boundary to Thame Road

Figure 61 VR2

Site

Figure 62 VR3 Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 58

Property Visual Impact before mitigation Visual Impact after mitigation The Cart Shed A moderate adverse visual impact The proposed boundary treatment would include a native hedgerow with hedgerow trees, to screen the outlook from the Cart Shed, giving rise to a minor adverse visual impact. 2, Jubilee Cottages A moderate adverse visual impact. The proposed boundary treatment would include a native hedgerow and there would be a fruit tree in every rear garden; proposed planting includes streamside planting to the south west of both gardens, giving rise to a minor adverse impact. Orchard Close A moderate adverse impact. The proposed boundary would include a native hedgerow and there would be a fruit tree in every rear garden, giving rise to a minor adverse visual impact. Walnut Tree Lane A moderate adverse impact. The proposed boundary would include a native hedgerow and there would be a fruit tree in every rear garden, giving rise to a minor adverse visual impact. Table 8 Visual Impact of Close Neighbours before and after Mitigation

The Cart Shed Mistlethrush Barn Wayfarers End, Centenary Cottages Walnut Tree Lane

2, Jubilee Cottages 1, Jubilee Cottages Chapel House, 2, Jubilee Cottages Orchard Close Figure 63 Close neighbours viewed from the site

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 59

Reference Description Condition Landscape Value Sensitivity to change A Landscape Fabric within the site 2 #1 +/- 3m high mixed thorn hedge Good High Medium #2 Mixed species, predominantly Leyland cypress, Fair Medium Medium 3 T16-T28 and G29, all category C 4 1 #3 Mixed species tree belt, G1 & G3, category B & C Fair High High #4 Ancient willow pollards, T38 (C), T39 (C), T40 (B), Fair/poor in need of High High 9 5 T41 (B), T42 (B), T44 (stump), T45 (C), T46 (C) and management 3 stream north of track 10 6 #5 Ancient willow pollards and stream south of Good - in need of High High track, T3 (C), T4 (B), T5 (B), T6 (C), T7 (C) management 8 #6 Stand of sycamores & Lombardy poplar G8 (B) Good High Medium 11 #7 Boundary shelterbelt – mature poplars with un- Fair/good - in need of High Medium der storey of elm, ash, cherry, thorn G9 (C) management #8 Shelter belt of native and exotic species includ- Good High High ing London plane and Leyland cypress G13 (B) #9 Copse of native trees G14 (B) Fair/Good High High 7 #10 Screen plantation containing spruce, birch, Fair – in need of Medium Medium cherry, oak G14 (B) management 0 50 100m #11 Medieval ridge and furrow Good High High Indicative remnant from former open field system Figure 64 Landscape fabric within the site Reference Description Condition Landscape Value Sensitivity to change 16 15 Wayfarers B Landscape Fabric outside the site End Rose Farm Thame Road #12 Arable field Good Medium Medium 14 #13 Poplar shelter belt Good High High #14 Paddock Good High High 13 #15 Mature trees around Rose Farm cluster Good High High Orchard Site Close #16 New public open space Good Medium Medium

#17 Longwick Vale Landscape Character Area Good Medium High 12 #18 Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Good High High Tree Lane

Walnut 0 50 100m Table 9 Sensitivity of Landscape Fabric to Change FigureIndicative 65 Landscape fabric outside the site

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 60

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 8 Landscape Impacts 8.2 Likely Significant Effects on the Landscape Fabric This section outlines the assessment of the likely effects landscape, plus the effects of new elements introduced of the proposed development on the Landscape Fabric into the landscape as part of the proposed scheme of the site and its setting. The impacts on the existing will be cumulative. Reference is made to Tables A3, A4

Ref Description Landscape Magnitude of Change Landscape Impact A Landscape Fabric within the site #1 +/- 3m high mixed thorn This hedge to be retained. No change. No change to a landscape feature of high landscape value and medium hedge sensitivity would give rise to a negligible adverse impact. #2 Mixed species, mainly Leyland Hedge to be retained; category ‘C’ trees and non-native conifers to be A medium magnitude of change to a landscape feature of medium value cypress with native hedge removed. Medium magnitude of change. and sensitivity gives rise to a moderate adverse impact. #3 Mixed species tree belt on Most of these category ‘B’ and ‘C’ tree groups to be retained; a few Low magnitude of change to a landscape feature of high value and sensi- north side of farm track to peripheral trees likely to be removed due to the construction of the tivity gives rise to a moderate adverse impact. east and west of stream new access road. Low magnitude of change. #4 Ancient willow pollards and Most of these willows and stream to be retained; two willows, T42 A medium magnitude of change to a landscape feature of high landscape stream to north of track (category ‘B’) and T46 (category ‘C’) likely to be removed due to the value and high sensitivity gives rise to a major adverse impact. construction of the new access road, stream crossing and attenuation basin. Medium magnitude of change. #5 Ancient willow pollards and These willows and stream to be retained; low magnitude of change. A low magnitude of change to a landscape feature of high landscape value stream to south of track and high sensitivity gives rise to a moderate adverse impact. #6 Stand of sycamores and This tree belt to be retained. No change. No change to a landscape feature of high landscape value and medium Lombardy poplar sensitivity would give rise to a negligible adverse impact. #7 Shelterbelt – mature poplars This shelterbelt follows a historic field boundary and is to be retained. No change to a landscape feature of high landscape value and medium with under storey of sucker- No change. sensitivity would give rise to a negligible adverse impact. ing elm, ash, cherry, thorns #8 Shelter belt of mixed native Most of this tree belt to be retained; a few peripheral trees likely to be A low magnitude of change to a landscape feature of high landscape value and exotic species including removed due to the construction of units #50 to #56 to the north. Low and high sensitivity gives rise to a moderate adverse impact. Plane and Leyland Cypress magnitude of change. #9 Copse of native trees Most of this tree belt to be retained; a few peripheral trees likely to be A low magnitude of change to a landscape feature of high landscape value removed due to the construction of units #50 to #60. Low magnitude and high sensitivity gives rise to a moderate adverse impact. of change. #10 Screen plantation containing This plantation to be retained. Low magnitude of change. A low magnitude of change to a landscape feature of medium landscape spruce, birch, cherry, oak value and sensitivity gives rise to a low adverse impact. #11 Medieval ridge and furrow Some of the ridge and furrow to be retained. Medium magnitude of A medium magnitude of change to a landscape feature of high landscape change. value and sensitivity gives rise to a moderate adverse impact. Table 10 Magnitude of Change and Landscape Impact to Landscape Fabric within the site

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 61

Ref Landscape Magnitude of Change Landscape Impact

B Landscape Fabric outside the site #12 This field to be retained, new development may be visible as No change to a landscape feature of medium landscape value and me- filtered views of roof tops during the winter months. Negligible dium sensitivity would give rise to a negligible adverse impact. change. #13 Shelter belt to be retained. No change. No change to a landscape feature of high value and sensitivity gives rise to a minor adverse impact. #14 Paddock to be retained, new development would not be visible. No change to a landscape feature of medium landscape value and me- No change dium sensitivity would give rise to a negligible adverse impact. #15 Mature trees to be retained. No change. No change to a landscape feature of high value and sensitivity gives rise to a minor adverse impact. #16 Public open space to be retained. No change No change to a landscape feature of medium landscape value and medium sensitivity would give rise to a negligible adverse impact. #17 Negligible change to LCA as site cannot be seen from the Negligible change to a landscape of medium landscape value and high surrounding farmland due to strongly vegetated boundaries, sensitivity to change would give rise to a minor adverse impact and low-lying topography. There could be some impact on the tranquility of the surrounding landscape #18 Negligible change as site cannot be clearly identified from the Negligible change to a landscape of high landscape value and high distance of the AONB; any new development would be seen as an sensitivity to change would give rise to a minor adverse impact extension of the existing settlement pattern of rooftops set within the strong tree cover around Longwick village

Table 11 Magnitude of Change and Landscape Impact to Landscape Fabric outside the site

The Landscape Baseline (Chapter 5) considers the of distinctive character or age, such as a category landscape character and landscape fabric within and ‘A’ tree or ancient hedgerow is considered to have a around the site. The condition and sensitivity of these high sensitivity to change. Landscape fabric of little elements is considered with reference to Appendix 1, character or in poor condition, such as a power line, or Assessment Methodology, and Table A1, Landscape a diseased or category C tree, is considered to have a Value and Sensitivity to Change. Landscape fabric low sensitivity to change.

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 62

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 8 Landscape Impacts 8.4 Landscape Effects before and after Mitigation The important landscape effects to consider are those effects on Landscape Fabric elements #2, #3, #4, #5, identified before mitigation to have a moderately #8, #9 and #11, all within the site or forming the site or major adverse landscape impact. These are the boundaries. Reference Description Landscape Impact Landscape Impact after Mitigation before Mitigation #2 Mixed species, predominantly Leyland A moderate Proposed boundary treatment to the Thame Road frontage includes the retention of the large ash tree T28, the cypress with native hedge adverse impact. retention and enhancement of the native boundary hedge, and the planting of 4 no. 16-18cm diameter new street trees giving rise to a minor adverse impact. #3 Mixed species tree belt A moderate Proposed replacement of any lost trees with new native scrub planting; new woodland edge planting would adverse impact. strengthen the ecological value of the tree belt, and retain its landscape value, giving rise to a minor adverse impact. #4 Ancient willow pollards and stream to A major adverse Proposed replacement planting of the affected willows, appropriate ongoing management through pollarding, the north of track impact. retention of the stream course and pools, and the careful detailing of the proposed attenuation area to minimise incursion into root protection zones would give rise to a moderate adverse impact. #5 Ancient willow pollards and stream to A moderate A culverted section of the stream is to be opened up, new native planting to include white willow, black poplar, south of track adverse impact. downy birch and hazel, creating a mosaic of habitat types; this would give rise to a moderate beneficial impact. #8 Shelter belt of mixed native and exotic A moderate Proposed replacement planting of any lost trees with new native scrub planting; new woodland edge planting species including plane and Leyland adverse impact. would strengthen the ecological value of the tree belt, and enhance its landscape value, giving rise to a minor cypress adverse impact. #9 Copse of native trees A moderate Proposed replacement planting of any lost trees with new native scrub planting; new woodland edge planting adverse impact. would strengthen the ecological value of the copse, and retain its landscape value, giving rise to a minor adverse impact. #11 Medieval ridge and furrow remnant A moderate A strip of ridge and furrow would be retained, approximately 45 to 50 metres in length and 8 metres in width from former open field system adverse impact. between units #29 to #32 and the central attenuation basin; this would give rise to a moderate adverse impact.

Table 12 Landscape Impact before and after mitigation

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 63

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 9 Summary 9.1 Visual Effects

The visual effects of the proposed development would proportion of the mature trees within the ‘green gap’, and rail fence. The proposed development would result be likely to impact adversely on Visual Receptors at but would respect the character of the historic village in a noticeable change to this view; after mitigation, the Viewpoints One, Two and Three. settlement pattern, by retaining a green frontage with existing view would be replaced with a view of a native native hedging, street trees and two-storey houses hedge and hedgerow trees, with glimpses of roof tops Viewpoints One and Two were taken from the A4129 fronting Thame Road and set back in line with adjacent and back gardens beyond, affecting visual receptors Thame Road, looking south and north respectively housing. moving slowly, on foot and in vehicles. The visual past the site frontage. This section of Thame Road impact on those VRs after mitigation was assessed to contains part of the remaining ‘green gap’, a stretch of These changes would be noticeable in the view, and be minor adverse. undeveloped farmland and mature trees which have affect visual receptors in vehicles as well as pedestrians historically divided the northern and southern halves and cyclists, local residents as well as visitors, The proposed development would not adversely affect of Longwick village. The eastern side of this ‘green gap’ commuters and commercial drivers. The impact on other VRs. was recently developed and now contains Wayfarer’s those VRs after mitigation was assessed to be minor End, fronted by a large grass attenuation area and adverse. Close neighbours adversely affected by the proposed open space. development include the Cart Shed, 2, Jubilee Cottages, Viewpoint Three was taken from Orchard Close, a Orchard Close and Walnut Tree Lane. The visual impact The proposed development at Rose Farm would residential cul-de-sac to the south of the site with a on those close neighbours after mitigation was change the appearance of the farmland and a narrow, framed view across an open field through a post assessed to be minor adverse.

9.2 Landscape Effects

The landscape effects of the proposed development future development areas to the north west and south (category B). With mitigation including replacement would be likely to impact adversely on several items west of this site. As a result we have been unable to planting, the impact on these trees was assessed to be of landscape fabric within the site or forming the site include a reduced-width, single carriageway crossing moderate adverse. boundaries: this includes some important items of as preferred, and have shown a two-way adoptable high landscape value, sensitive to change including carriageway and pedestrian route over the culverted Three high-value and sensitive tree groups would be the willow pollards lining the stream to the north of stream crossing. The alignment of the existing farm affected by the proposed development: landscape the track, 2 category B tree groups and the ridge and track has been followed as closely as possible, but fabric items #3 (G1), #8 (G13) and #9 (G14). Most furrow. the construction work of the new crossing would still of these will be retained but a few peripheral trees impact on a willow, T46, and a Leyland cypress, T2 to are likely to be affected by construction works; with The proposed development includes a new stream the north of the track; these are both category C trees, mitigation including replacement planting, the impact crossing suitable for an adoptable road serving not just and will have to be removed. A proposed attenuation on these trees was assessed to be minor adverse. this site of 65 units, but with an ability to connect to basin would require the removal of a second willow, T42

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 64

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk 9 Summary 9.2 Landscape Effects (contd)

The ridge and furrow, a remnant of a medieval open development would mean that it would be in an field system is an unusual and valuable landscape area of publicly accessible open space rather than on feature; we have worked hard to conserve this within private land, inaccessible to the public. The impact on the proposed development and have retained a linear the ridge and furrow was assessed to be moderate strip to best show its undulations. Although the area adverse. of ridge and furrow would be reduced, the proposed

9.3 Conclusions

The site at Rose Farm is located in the centre of on the western side of Thame Road is at Rose Farm, the site entrance; a linear strip will best show the gently Longwick village, close to local services, on former and includes the application site as well as an area of undulating landform. farmland with a rich landscape fabric including a mature trees around the historic cluster of Rose Farm. stream, ancient pollarded willows, an area of medieval Most of the existing trees and tree groups on site will ridge and furrow and many semi-mature trees, mostly The proposed treatment of the Thame Road frontage be retained. Some of these tree groups will suffer planted within the last thirty years. includes the retention of existing hedges, the planting minor incursion from the construction works, but this of new street trees and the set back of new houses to would only affect a few peripheral trees which would It is an inward-looking site, with few outward views; as follow the building line of adjacent Jubilee Cottages be replaced. a result, it is well-contained and not easily visible from and Beech Cottages to the south. This would respect the surrounding countryside, roads and footpaths or the historic village settlement pattern and retain the One group of category C Leyland cypress to the north by close neighbours. green frontage to Thame Road. of the site would be replaced by a native woodland scrub mix including small-leafed lime, oak, field maple, The site has a frontage along Thame Road, which is an The landscape fabric of the site will be retained, crab apple, hazel, hawthorn and guelder rose. important feature. Longwick is a linear village, with conserved and enhanced wherever possible. A section Thame Road acting as the village spine. Thame Road of the stream is currently culverted; this section will be The biodiversity of the site would be improved by the features hedges, grass verges and street trees for much opened up and used as part of the public open space, replacement of non-native trees with native trees, by of its length, with two-storey houses generally fronting and planted with willow pollards and black poplar, a the opening up of the culverted stream, by the planting the road, with varied depths of set-back and front rare native tree usually found by rivers and streams. of species-rich native hedgerow, by the inclusion of garden. Two of the existing willow pollards lining the stream permanent ponds, water-loving native trees, scrub will have to be replaced, as they will unavoidably be and reeds within the attenuation basins, the retention Historically there has been a ‘green gap’ between the affected by the new stream crossing and an attenuation and enhancement of grassland, the planting up of northern and southern parts of the village; the gap basin. An area of ridge and furrow will be retained rain gardens with perennials and grasses and by the on the eastern side of the road has recently been lost as part of the central open space which provides the ongoing management of all planted areas to enhance following the construction of Wayfarer’s End. The gap green heart of the development and can be seen from biodiversity.

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 65

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Appendix 1 Assessment Methodology

1 Introduction • desk top Ordnance Survey map analysis of how these features combine and interact to give the This section presents an assessment of the likely land cover, landform and land use elements, and landscape its particular character. The field survey also landscape and visual effects of the proposed residential identification of the visibility of the site; confirmed the location of key visual receptors with development at Rose Farm, Longwick. Two distinct but • review of existing assessments, plans and other views of the proposed site and of the visibility of the inter-related types of impacts have been assessed. relevant documents; site in the local and wider landscape. The character These are: • field survey work to validate and refine existing and condition of existing landscape elements and • the effect on landscape resources (changes assessments; features was recorded by photographs and described. in the physical fabric and character/quality of the • identification of landscape character areas, The initial field survey work was undertaken in July landscape); and and an analysis of their sensitivity; and 2020, with a return visit in February 2021. • the effect on views and viewers (changes in the • analysis of the current visibility of the scheme visual amenity of recreational users and residents). and an assessment of the type number and sensitivity This fieldwork involved driving all the roads and lanes, The approach to assessing landscape and visual impacts of viewers. and walking public footpaths to check the height of has followed the Landscape Institute/Institute of hedgerows and other vegetation identified in the desk Environmental Management & Assessment’s Guidelines The following published landscape character study. The purpose was to establish where the site for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA, assessments and other relevant information have been might be seen from. Private property was not entered 3rd Ed 2013) and the Countryside Agency jointly with reviewed to provide an understanding of the landscape but locations and setting of dwellings in proximity Scottish Natural Heritage Interim Landscape Character context for the site: to the application site were noted. From this data, an Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland (2002). • Natural England: National Landscape and indicative visual envelope was interpolated, to show The approach is described in Section 2 Landscape Seascape Character Assessments 2014 areas from which the site could be seen within the Character Context. • Wycombe District Landscape Character surrounding countryside. Assessment (2011) 2 Baseline Assessment Local landscape character areas and key landscape The baseline assessment identifies the existing A preliminary desk study was carried out to establish features within the study area were identified and the character of the site and the surrounding landscape, the physical components of the local landscape, to overall sensitivity of each such area to change was and considers the quality and character of available locate the site within its context, and to establish evaluated, taking account of its intrinsic landscape views for recreational users and local residents. The boundaries of the study area. Ordnance Survey (OS) character condition/quality and value, and defined as baseline assessment provides the ‘reference point’ maps were used in combination with Google Earth and shown in Table A1. In addition, the relative sensitivity of against which the extent and significance of predicted Multimap Aerial Photographs to identify local features visual receptors associated with the key representative landscape and visual impacts have been assessed. The such as topography, woodland and hedgerows, viewpoints was evaluated taking account of the type of study area has been defined to include the zone of existing settlement pattern, roads and footpaths in the viewer, importance/value of the view to the receptor, visual influence of the site, and the hinterland of the wider area. orientation of the receptor in relation to the scheme, zone of visual influence, which influences its character. the landscape context and the importance of the view/ Beyond this, the visual influence of the proposed The desk study was verified on site through a field survey location. Relative sensitivity was then defined as shown scheme is considered to be negligible. The baseline of the site and surrounding areas. This determined in Table A2. assessment comprised: the existing land cover, landform and land use, and

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 66

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Appendix 1 Assessment Methodology

Table A1 Landscape Value and Sensitivity to Change Criteria

Table A2 Sensitivity of Viewpoints/Visual Receptor

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 67

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Appendix 1 Assessment Methodology

3 Landscape Impact Assessment change to the landscape and landscape sensitivity the criteria low/medium/high represent levels on a The evaluation of landscape impacts considered two (as defined in Table A3). The magnitude of changes continuum or continuous graduation, application of the types of effect: to landscape character and fabric depends upon the framework also required the application of professional • changes to the fabric of the landscape resulting nature, scale and duration of change and was defined judgement and awareness of the relative balance of from loss / addition of key features (e.g. foreshore, as in Table A4 below was then used to determine importance between sensitivity and magnitude. The embankments, access points, sand dunes); and adverse or beneficial significance thresholds from the significance criteria have been textually defined in • changes to the intrinsic character of the local differing combinations of levels of landscape sensitivity Table A5 as follows. and wider landscape (the degree to which the proposed and magnitude of impact. scheme affects the overall pattern of elements that give the landscape its particular character and / or It should be noted that Table A4 is only a framework distinctiveness). to aid consistency of reporting and provide an The assessment of the significance of landscape initial indication of the likely impact arising from the impacts depends upon the predicted magnitude of assessment of magnitude and sensitivity. Given that

Table A3 Landscape Magnitude of Change Criteria

Table A4 Impact Significance Criteria for Landscape Assessment

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 68

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Appendix 1 Assessment Methodology

Table A5 Landscape Impact Significance Criteria Definitions

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 69

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Appendix 1 Assessment Methodology

4 Visual Impact Assessment The frameworks shown in Table A4 and Table A6 were The assessment of the significance of visual impacts used to determine adverse or beneficial significance depends on the predicted magnitude of change thresholds from the differing combinations of levels affecting visual receptors and the visual receptor of visual sensitivity and magnitude. The significance sensitivity (as defined in Table A2). criteria are described in Table A7.

The magnitude of changes to visual amenity depends upon the extent of view affected by the proposal, the angle of view and the level of integration of the proposal in the view and was defined as shown in Table A6.

Table A6 Visual Magnitude of Change Criteria

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 70

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Appendix 1 Assessment Methodology

Table A7 Visual Impact Significance Criteria Definition

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 71

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Appendix 2 GRS Arboricultural Report

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 72

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 73

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 74

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 75

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 76

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 77

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 78

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 79

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 80

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 81

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 82

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 83

Louise Hooper Landscape Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 L H L A 84

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711829575 e: [email protected] w: louisehooper.co.uk Louise Hooper LouiseLandscape Hooper Landscape Architect Architect Rose Farm, Longwick, Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment April 2021 LHLA L H L A 86

Louise Hooper CMLI BA (Hons) L Arch Latterhams Penshurst Tonbridge Kent TN118DL t: 01892 870211 m: 07711820575 e: [email protected] w: http://www.louisehooper.co.uk