16 April 2013 Land to the South of Mitton Road, Whalley Proof of Evidence for Jonathan Berry BA (Hons), Dip LA, AIEMA, CMLI, M.Arbor.A Landscape and Visual Matters On behalf of David Wilson Homes North West and A C Surveyors & Valuers Volume 2: Appendices, Plans & Photographs Planning Inspectorate ref: APP/T2350/A/12/2188887 Planning Authority ref: 3/2012/0637/P Report Number: 1490/R02b_JB_RW Author: Jonathan Berry CMLI Volume 1: Text Contents Section 1: Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………1 Section 2: Landscape Character and Context of the Appeal Site …………………………….7 Section 3: Visual Context of the Appeal Site ………………………………………………….19 Section 4: Review of Relevant Policy, Consultation Responses and Landscape Response to Reasons for Refusal …………………………………………………………………………33 Section 5: Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………41 Volume 2: Appendices, Plans & Photographs Appendix 1: Extract of the RVPBC Rule 6 Statement of Case Appendix 2: Pre-Application Meeting Minutes dated 28th March 2012. Appendix 3: Pre-Application email Letter from RVBC dated 15th November 2011. Appendix 4: Extract of the Landscape Character Assessment – Guidance for England and Scotland, Scottish Natural Heritage and The Countryside Agency, 2002 (known as SNH guidance). Appendix 5: Extract from the Countryside Agency, Character Area 35 Description. Appendix 6: Extract of the Lancashire County Council - Landscape and Heritage Joint Core Strategy Adopted SPD (July 2006). Appendix 7: Extract of the Lancashire County Council with English Heritage – Lancashire Historic Characterisation Programme (December 2002). Appendix 8: Extract of the Lancashire County Council - Landscape Strategy for Lancashire - Landscape Character Assessment (December 2000). Appendix 9: Extract of the Forest of Bowland AONB - Landscape Character Assessment (September 2009). Appendix 10: Extract of the Lancashire County Council - Lancashire Historic Town Survey – Whalley (2006). Appendix 11: Whalley Conservation Area Townscape Appraisal Map. Appendix 12: LVIA Assessment Criteria Tables (Sensitivity, Magnitude of Change and Significance of Effect). Appendix 13: Photomontage Methodology. Appendix 14: Pre-Application email from RVBC dated 20th April 2012. Appendix 15: Penny Bennett Landscape and Visual Assessment (January 2013). Land to the South of Mitton Road, Whalley Proof of Evidence for Jonathan Berry BA (Hons), Dip LA, AIEMA, CMLI, M.Arbor.A 1490_R02b_16 April 2013_JB_RW Plans Plan 1: Topography & First Sieve GIS Visual Analysis (1490/01 03/12 JB/MP) Plan 2: Photoviewpoint Locations (1490/02b 05/12 JB/JJ) Plan 3: Verified Visual Envelope (1490/03a 05/12 JB/JJ) Plan 4: Landscape Planning Context & Public Rights of Way (1490/04a 05/12 JB/JJ) Plan 5: Landscape Character (1490/05a 05/12 JB/JJ) Plan 6: Landscape Strategy (1490/06a 05/12 JB/JJ) Plan 7: Indicative Planting Strategy (1490/21 06/12 JB/JJ) Photoviewpoints 1 – 24 (1490/07a to 20a 06/12 JB/JJ) Photomontages 1 – 11 (1490/18a 05/12 JB/MP) Land to the South of Mitton Road, Whalley Proof of Evidence for Jonathan Berry BA (Hons), Dip LA, AIEMA, CMLI, M.Arbor.A 1490_R02b_16 April 2013_JB_RW Appendix 1: Extract of the RVPBC Rule 6 Statement of Case Land to the South of Mitton Road, Whalley Proof of Evidence for Jonathan Berry BA (Hons), Dip LA, AIEMA, CMLI, M.Arbor.A 1490_R02b_16 April 2013_JB_RW Landscape/Visual Impact Considerations 4.7 The Council will demonstrate that there will be a loss of visual amenity experienced by residents and visitors to Whalley as a result of the appeal proposals which willbe of an adverse permanent nature, some of which will be considered significant in terms of the EIA regulations. 4.8 By reason of extending development beyond the village boundary and into open countryside, the proposals will result in a permanent adverse change on the character of this high sensitivity settlement edge river corridor landscape, introducing urban elements besides the new homes themselves, which will include lighting and other infrastructure. 4.9 The Council will show that the open river corridor landscape within which the site is located forms the immediate rural setting to the conservation area as well as a number of important heritage features which are an intrinsic part of Whalley’s identity as a village. It is also important as this open landscape is also associated with the former historic gateway to the village, and which is reinforced in the iconic design of the railway viaduct piers at this location. The Council will show that if the proposals were to proceed this important landscape and amenity asset would be permanently lost. This would result in the extension of the village beyond its historic edge in to the open rural landscape and thereby having a detrimental impact on the townscape character and amenity of the conservation area and associated heritage features. 4.10 The Council will conclude that the proposals will harm landscape and townscape character and visual amenity and will be contrary to Policy G1 and ENV3 of the Districtwide Local Plan, Policies DMG1, EN2 and DME2 of the Regulation 22 Submission Draft Core Strategy and the requirements of NPPF. Planning Considerations 4.11 The Council will demonstrate that the appeal proposal is outside the present settlement boundary and is an urban extension to Whalley. As an urban extension the Council will show that there is need to consider as part of the planning balance whether there is a need for additional housing that outweighs the identified harm to the loss of open countryside and related harm to landscape visual impact and amenity, the Conservation Area and identified heritage assets as an unsympathetic Page 5 of 9 Appendix 2: Pre-Application Meeting Minutes dated 28th March 2012. Land to the South of Mitton Road, Whalley Proof of Evidence for Jonathan Berry BA (Hons), Dip LA, AIEMA, CMLI, M.Arbor.A 1490_R02b_16 April 2013_JB_RW MEETING NOTE 1 New York Street Manchester M1 4HD T: 0161 233 7676 F: 0161 233 7677 www.turleyassociates.co.uk Client: David Wilson Homes Project: Land at Broad Lane, Whalley File Ref: BARM2006 Meeting Date: 28/03/2012 Venue: Ribble Valley Borough Council Offices, Clitheroe Present: John Macholc RVBC Head of Planning Dave Hewitt RVBC Countryside Officer Sarah Westwood RVBC Planning Gareth Fort RVBC Planning Adrian Dowd RVBC Conservation & Design Colin Hirst RVBC Regeneration & Housing Andrew Taylor David Wilson Homes Phil Livesley David Wilson Homes Jon Berry Tyler Grange Graham Love Turley Associates Katy Lightbody Turley Associates Laurie Lane Turley Associates Notes Action GL confirmed the last pre-application meeting was in September, with advice issued in December. The objective of this meeting is to address remaining issues of design, heritage & landscape GL said that since the last meeting, the NPPF has been published and various appeal decisions have been made. At the moment, we are not aware of any reason why an application cannot come forward. GL reviewed the previous advice and provided an up-to-date position, prior to discussing the 3 key issues for the meeting. GL confirmed the scheme will accommodate 30% affordable housing. SW said RVBC requires a split of affordable rent and shared ownership. The requirement cab include the 15% elderly provision. BELFAST | BIRMINGHAM | BRISTOL | CARDIFF | EDINBURGH | GLASGOW | LEEDS | LONDON | MANCHESTER | SOUTHAMPTON Srtvr rq v @tyhq U yr 6pvhr Gvvrq !!"$"'& GL confirmed we are reviewing how best to deliver the elderly provision. Potentially this may include standard bungalows or a specialist extra-care facility. CH confirmed that as long as they’re lifetime homes, the type of building does not actually matter. GL referred to the recent application at Accrington Road, Whalley which is a market scheme for the over 55’s. JM said Members always raise the issue there are no bungalows and therefore the application may be pitched to satisfy this view. GL confirmed ecology and tree reports have been prepared and there are no issues for the development. GL confirmed a tree constraints plan will be included in the application. GL said that for Highways, surveys are being progressed and discussions are ongoing. AT asked whether the renewable energy policy was specific in terms of how provision is delivered. SW confirmed normally 10% and RVBC expect it being provided across site with at least some visible measures, such as solar PV. GL said we have consulted LCC as local education authority and spoken with Lynn MacDonald. We have confirmed the approach and that there is no objection, subject to financial contribution. GL said that we are still in discussion with the EA & UU on drainage. AT added that we’re conscious anything approved will come off 222 unit capacity; however, he pointed out there is the potential to provide further measures if required. GL confirmed flood risk is not a problem and a land quality assessment is being prepared. A Phase I geo-technical will be submitted with the application. JM confirmed the site will not comprise high grade agricultural land. CH provided an update on planning policy. The Reg 27 Core Strategy is soon to be submitted. It still requires additional housing in Whalley. Subject to Members’ approval, consultation on this document will be held in April. RVBC is accelerating the timetable to bring the Core Strategy forward as soon as possible, but Members are concerned about development pre-empting the Core Strategy before it is adopted. Members may want to adopt the Core Strategy for DC purposes before full adoption. Page 2 of 6 GL asked how the 3.3 years’ supply was calculated in the Clitheroe appeal? CH said it was based on RSS. Inspector thought RSS was the key consideration and CH said they want to use this until consultation is undertaken on the revised figure. GL asked whether there is still political pressure to resist the figure of 4,000 dwellings over the plan period? CH said they took advice from NLP. The working group went for the middle requirement.