West of the Redeveloped Part of Hatfield Aerodrome

Appendix 5 - Broad Location D: West of the redeveloped part of Hatfield Aerodrome

Contents Location Map: ...... 2 Views and Directions: ...... 3 Photographs: ...... 4 Desktop Study: ...... 8 Field Record Sheet: ...... 10 Species Present in the Area: ...... 11 Landscape Sensitivity Matrices – WredevHatAER ...... 12 Total Landscape Sensitivity ...... 18 Total Landscape Value ...... 19 Landscape Capacity Matrix ...... 20 Sensitivity Map ...... 21 Capacity Map ...... 22

Location Map: Broad Location D:

Views and Directions: West of the redeveloped part of Hatfield Aerodrome

V3 V4 V5 V2

V1 Key:

Broad Location Boundary Key:

Site 1 (NWHAT1) Area Boundary

WredevHatAER

V Views (and direction)

Photographs:

View 1 (V1): Looking north east into Broad Location D from St Albans district.

View 2 (V2): Looking north east towards the redeveloped part of Hatfield Aerodrome. Contamination trench on the left.

View 3 (V3): Looking north towards Round Wood.

View 4 (V4): Looking south east from centre of Broad Location D.

View 5 (V5): Looking south west from centre of WredevHatAER. Home Covert on the right.

View 6 (V6): Looking south east across WredevHatAER towards the University of Hertfordshire.

View 7 (V7): Looking north east towards Astwick Manor from edge of Round Wood.

View 8 (V8): Eastern boundary of WredevHatAER with redeveloped part of Hatfield Aerodrome..

Desktop Study:

Historic Landscape 1.1 The Historic Environment Characterisation for Welwyn Hatfield indicates that the area falls within the ‘Hatfield Aerodrome (part)’ character area. This was characterised by the airfield, mineral extraction, ancient woodland, and post 1950s fields. The settlement pattern is dispersed and the location has undergone a significant level of change.

1.2 The Landscape Character Assessment identifies the area as being within the ‘De Havilland Plain’ character area. The Assessment notes that the vast majority of land has been disturbed over the last century and only small parcels of pre-18th century enclosure remain. The cultural pattern is noted as declining.

1.3 In the north of the area, Astwick Manor (a grade 2 listed building) abuts the location and includes an Area of Archaeological Significance noted as a mediaeval moated area. The airfield itself also has significant heritage value and dominated the landscape for many years. The location now forms part of Ellenbrook Fields; a publically accessible recreation area.

Environmental Designations 1.4 Home Covert and Round Wood, both a designated Ancient Woodland and County Wildlife Site, are located within the area to the west. Flood zone 2 extends into the location on the southern edge (Environment Agency) and the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment notes that flood zone 3b runs across the western side of the location running from Ellenbrook, across the location and along the western boundary of the area at the edge of Home Covert.

Scarcity of Landscape 1.5 The Landscape Character Assessment notes the landscape as being of an ‘unusual’ type due to its flatness and open character. There is no evidence of regionally-rare landscape features.

Size and Height of Area

1.6 The area has a size of 98.0ha (medium). The area is flat at 78m above sea level.

Field Record Sheet:

Date: 05/05/11 Broad Location D: WredevHatAER* Time: 4pm-5.30pm New housing would bring edge of Hatfield closer to Home Covert Surveyed by: AM, CJ, MJ (ancient woodland) and St Albans. Old Hanger (and control tower) visible (on former Hatfield Notes (e.g. possible Aerodrome site) – edge of Aerodrome development is very visible. mitigation, impact of The area is flat with some raised mounds – possibly a result of development on building work. Field pattern has been altered (new fencing) and landform): there is little evidence left. Tranquil – difficult to detect noise from New fencing to enclose roads. gazing area for cattle. The area is currently screened from roads. Need for new planting on edge of any new development. Landscape Sensitivity Ecological Vegetation Type Grassland Scrub Woodland Wetland Small Large Tree Cover Low/limited Sparse Woodland Woodland Tree Age New Young Established Mature Extent and Pattern of Fragmented Scattered Widespread Extensive Semi Natural Habitat Improved Unimproved Land Use Arable Set Aside Grassland Grassland Cultural Land Use Urban Arable Grazing Fallow New landscape / no evidence of Significant Historic Landscape Interrupted Ancient historic change landscape Field Boundaries Varied Uniform Small Large Small Field Size / Pattern Large Regular Regular Irregular Irregular Intactness Broken Disjointed Grouped Uniform Urban Managed Fallow Character Urban Fringe Countryside Countryside Semi- Enclosure Pattern Contained Open contained Visual Small Large Tree / Woodland Cover Low/limited Sparse Woodland Woodland Rolling / Form / Line Flat Low-lying Sloping Undulating Interrupted Man-made Natural Landform Influences No landmark Landmark Landmark Landmark Levels of Openness Adjacent Limited / No Medium Long (photos and views in / out area (e.g. view distance distance of the area) field) Number of Residents <5 5-25 26-50 >50 People Visitors <5 5-25 26-50 >50 Scope for Mitigation No Yes Landscape Value Tranquillity Low Moderate High Cultural Associations Low Moderate High Conservation Interests Low Moderate High

10 * Results in Yellow

Species Present in the Area:

 Ash;  Bluebell;  Hazel;  Hornbeam;  Lapwing (Northern) – a rare breeding bird in Hertfordshire;  Longhorn Cattle;  Oak;  Silver Birch.

Landscape Sensitivity Matrices – WredevHatAER

- Ecological Sensitivity

0 1 2 3 4 Very Low Low Medium High Very High

Sensitivity to Change

Large Wood 3 3 4 4

Small Wood 2 3 3 4

Tree Cover Sparse 1 2 2 3

Low/Limited 0 1 2 3

Grassland Scrub Woodland Wetland

Vegetation Type

Large Wood 3 3 4 4

Small Wood 2 3 3 4

Tree Cover Sparse 1 2 2 3

Low/Limited 0 1 2 3

New Young Established Mature

Tree Age

Large (>50ha) 2 3 3 4

Medium (25 – 1 2 3 3 Size 50 ha)

Small (<25ha) 0 1 2 3

Fragmented Scattered Widespread Extensive

Extent and Pattern of Semi-Natural Habitat

Ancient 3 3 4 4

Interrupted 2 2 3 4

Historic Significant 1 2 2 3 Landscape Change

No Evidence 0 1 2 3

Grassland Scrub Woodland Wetland

Vegetation Type

Large (>50ha) 2 3 3 4

Medium (25 – 1 2 3 3 50 ha) Size

Small (<25ha) 0 1 2 3

Arable Improved Unimproved Set Aside Grassland Grassland

Land Use

Total Ecological Score 10 (out of 20):

- Cultural Sensitivity Matrices

0 1 2 3 4 Very Low Low Medium High Very High

Sensitivity to Change

Ancient 4 4 4 4

Interrupted 2 3 3 4

Historic Significant 1 2 2 3 Landscape Change

No Evidence 0 1 2 3

Urban Arable Grazing Fallow

Land Use

Small Irregular 4 4

Large Irregular 3 4

Field Size / Small Regular 2 3 Pattern

Large Regular 1 2

Varied Uniform

Field Boundaries

Fallow 3 3 4 4 Countryside

Managed 2 3 3 4 Countryside

Character Urban Fringe 1 2 2 3

Urban 0 1 2 3

Broken Disjointed Grouped Uniform

Intactness

Large (>50ha) 2 3 4

Medium (25 – 50 1 2 3 Size ha)

Small (<25ha) 0 1 2

Semi- Contained Open contained

Enclosure Pattern

Total Cultural Score 13 (out of 16):

- Visual Sensitivity Matrices

0 1 2 3 4 Very Low Low Medium High Very High

Sensitivity to Change

Large Wood 3 3 4 4

Small Wood 2 3 3 4

Tree Cover Sparse 1 1 2 3

Low/Limited 0 1 2 3

Rolling / Flat Low-lying Sloping Undulating

Land Form

Long 2 3 4 4 Distance

Medium 2 2 3 4 Distance

Levels of Adjacent 1 2 2 3 Openness Area

Limited / No 0 1 2 2 View

Interrupted Man-made Natural No landmark Landmark Landmark Landmark

Land Form Influences

Number of People (Residents)

<5 5-25 26-50 >50 1 2 3 4

Number of People (Visitors)

<5 5-25 26-50 >50 1 2 3 4

Scope for Mitigation

Yes No

1 4

Total Visual Score (out of 20): 10

Total Landscape Sensitivity Score 33 (out of 56):

Total Landscape Sensitivity 0 – 14 15 – 28 29 – 43 44 – 56 Very High / No Low Medium High Development

Landscape Value Matrices

European / Local Environmental Designations

None Within 50m Adjacent Partial Whole 0 1 2 3 4

Landscape Value Criteria - Yes = 1; No = 0:

Criteria Score Tranquillity Low 0 Moderate 1 High 2 Cultural Associations Low 0 Moderate 1 High 2 Conservation Interests Low 0 Moderate 1 High 2

Scarcity of Landscape

Common Frequent Unusual Unique 1 2 3 4

Agricultural Land

Urban Non Agricultural Grade 4 Grade 3 Grade 2 0 1 2 3 4

Total Landscape Value Score 11 (out of 18):

Total Landscape Value 0 – 4 5 – 9 10 – 14 15 – 18 Very High / No Low Medium High Development

Landscape Capacity Matrix

Very High Low Very Low Very Low Very Low

High Medium Low Low Very Low

Landscape Medium to Medium Medium Low Very Low High Sensitivity

Medium to Low High Medium Low High

Low Medium High Very High

Landscape Value

Very Low Capacity within the Landscape – development is likely to be precluded by the high sensitivity and / or value of the landscape. Low Capacity within the Landscape – development is likely to have an adverse effect on the quality and value of the landscape. Medium Capacity within the Landscape – mitigation would be required to offset or balance any negative effects that development would have on the quality and value of the landscape. Medium to High Capacity within the Landscape – appropriately designed development could be accommodated within the landscape. Some mitigation required. High Capacity within the Landscape – development is likely to have no overall (net) adverse effects on the quality or value of the landscape. Some mitigation may still be required.

Sensitivity Map

Not to

Scale

Capacity Map

Not to Scale Planning Policy