LSC301 Environmental Impact Assessment Registration Number: 100214020
HOWBROOK Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment
Content 1. Preface 1.1. Introduction - 1.1.1. What is an Environmental Impact Assessment? ..............................................................................................pg 3 - 1.1.2. key Definitions ..................................................................................................................................................pg 3 - 1.1.3. Landscape Impacts ..........................................................................................................................................pg 4 - 1.1.4. Visual Impacts ..................................................................................................................................................pg 4 - Fig. 1...........................................................................................................................................................................pg 4 1.2. Policy Context - 1.2.1. The National Planning Policy Framework .........................................................................................................pg 5 - 1.2.2. Barnsley Borough Council Local Development Framework .............................................................................pg 6 1.3. Relevance of an EIA - 1.3.1. Open Cast Coal Mining .....................................................................................................................................pg 7 - Fig. 2. ..........................................................................................................................................................................pg 7 - 1.3.2. Why is it Relevant to perform an EIA on Howbrook? ........................................................................................pg 7 2. Baseline 2.1. Project Details - 2.1.1. Phase 1 .............................................................................................................................................................pg 8 - 2.1.2. Phase 2 .............................................................................................................................................................pg 8 - 2.1.3. Phase 3 .............................................................................................................................................................pg 9 - 2.1.4. Phase 4 .............................................................................................................................................................pg 9 2.2. Landscape Description - 2.2.1. Regional ..........................................................................................................................................................pg 10 - Fig. 3. ........................................................................................................................................................................pg 10 - Fig. 4. ........................................................................................................................................................................pg 10 - 2.2.2. Local ...............................................................................................................................................................pg 11 - Fig. 5. ........................................................................................................................................................................pg 11 - 2.2.3. Individual Landscape Receptors .....................................................................................................................pg 11 - Fig. 6. ........................................................................................................................................................................pg 11 2.3. Visual Description - Fig. 7. ........................................................................................................................................................................pg 12 - Fig. 8. ........................................................................................................................................................................pg 13 - 2.3.1. Visual Scope ...................................................................................................................................................pg 13 - 2.3.2. Viewpoint A .....................................................................................................................................................pg 14 - 2.3.3. Viewpoint B .....................................................................................................................................................pg 14 - 2.3.4. Viewpoint C .....................................................................................................................................................pg 15 - 2.3.5. Viewpoint D .....................................................................................................................................................pg 15 - 2.3.6. Viewpoint E .....................................................................................................................................................pg 16 - 2.3.7. Viewpoint F .....................................................................................................................................................pg 17
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment
This assessment is a detailed analysis of the Landscape and Visual impacts likely to arise from the Cobex Howbrook Development Proposal. Page 1
Content 3. Impact Assessment 3.1. Landscape Impacts - 3.1.1. Potential Landscape Impacts ..........................................................................................................................pg 17 - 3.1.2. Predicted Landscape Impacts ........................................................................................................................pg 18 - Fig.9. .........................................................................................................................................................................pg 18 - Fig.10. .......................................................................................................................................................................pg 18 - Fig.11. .......................................................................................................................................................................pg 19 3.2. Visual Impacts - 3.2.1. Potential Visual Impacts ..................................................................................................................................pg 20 - Fig.12. .......................................................................................................................................................................pg 21 - 3.2.2. Predicted Visual Impacts ................................................................................................................................pg 21 - Fig.13. .......................................................................................................................................................................pg 21 - Fig.14. .......................................................................................................................................................................pg 22 - Fig.15. .......................................................................................................................................................................pg 22 - 3.2.3. Viewpoint C .....................................................................................................................................................pg 22 - Fig.16. .......................................................................................................................................................................pg 23 - 3.2.4. Viewpoint E .....................................................................................................................................................pg 23 - 3.2.5. Viewpoint F .....................................................................................................................................................pg 24 4. Mitigation and Restoration 4.1. Mitigation - 4.1.1. Avoidance .......................................................................................................................................................pg 25 - 4.1.2. Reduction ........................................................................................................................................................pg 25 - 4.1.3. Compensation .................................................................................................................................................pg 25 4.2. Restoration - 4.2.1. Key Restoration Principles ..............................................................................................................................pg 26 - Fig.17. .......................................................................................................................................................................pg 27 5. Final Statement 5.1. Summary - 5.1.1. Remaining Impacts Unresolvable by Mitigation ..............................................................................................pg 28 - 5.1.2. What must be considered when making the Decision? ..................................................................................pg 28 6. Bibliography ..........................................................................................................................................................pg 29
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment
Page 2
1.1. Introduction
1. Preface
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) ‘..aims to protect uncultivated land and semi-natural areas from being damaged by agricultural work, and to guard against possible negative environmental effects from the restructuring of rural land holdings’ [Natural England, 2010] 1.1.1. What is an Environmental Impact Assessment? Prior to a proposed development taking effect, it is fundamental to carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA); a systematic procedure which takes into consideration the hypothetical effects which a development proposal may impose on the local and surrounding environment. This is essential for certifying that developments are evaluated for their environmental significance in order to anticipate and prevent possible negative impacts at the source, rather than undertaking costly procedures to counter-act them later. The outcome is a more holistic process for effectively informing and deciding upon the approval, adaption or decline of a proposal. UK EIA regulations define two schedules of developments: • Schedule 1: an EIA must always be carried out. E.g. for major powerplants, chemical works, waste disposal and mineral excavation covering a site over 25 hectares - The Cobex Proposal covers 47 hectares, so therefore must carry out an EIA. • Schedule 2: an EIA must be carried out if the development is likely to have a significant impact on the environment by virtue of its nature, size or location. E.g. Quarries and Open Cast Mines
1.1.2. Key Definitions... • Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a term used to describe the total process of assessing the environmental effects of a development project. • Environmental Statement (ES) is used to describe the written material submitted to the local planning authority in fulfilment of the EIA regulations. • Landscape Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) is used to assess the effects of change on the landscape, to make suggestions so that negative effects are avoided, reduced or offset.
In October 2006, Natural England became responsible for overseeing ‘The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 2006’ which states:
‘the requirement for an assessment of the impact on the environment of projects likely to have significant effects on the environment’
Requirement for an EIA comes from the European Directives and UK country regulations, concerned with the protection of uncultivated or semi-natural land from threats posed by proposed agricultural developments, including: • Developments which increase the productivity of agriculture by physical or chemical cultivation, drainage or clearing of vegetation on 2 hectares (or greater) of land. • Developments that physically restructure the land holdings, such as changing field boundaries or re-contouring the topography through addition, removal or redistribution of 10,000 cubic metres or more of earth - This point relates directly to the Howbrook Proposal. Developers are required to produce an Environmental Statement (ES) for describing the likely significant effects of the development on the environment and proposed mitigation measures. This is to be read and approved by to statutory consultation bodies and the public, to be taken into account by the Local Planning Authority for granting consent.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 3
1.1. Introduction
1. Preface
Landscape and Visual Impacts Key Issues.. • Relationship to/conservation of valued Visual landscape features • Relationship to landscape character, particularly topography, scale, landform and landscape pattern • Appearance from sensitive viewpoints and designated landscapes.
This Assessment will focus only on Landscape and Visual Impacts. An Environmental Statement (ES) considers a variety of factors explored through performing an EIA. This document will focus purely on the ‘Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) process. However closely related, Landscape effects and visual effects must be considered separately. When assessing the visual value and condition of the site in its surrounding context a range of effective visual indicator tools are used. For this visual analysis the following tools were implemented: • Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI) - Mapping of the area from which development could be seen, allowing for obstacles like landform, trees, woodland etc • Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) or Viewshed - Mapping of Landform visibility. Similar to a ZVI, but only considering Landform.
1.1.3. Landscape Impacts - Effects on the Landscape as a resource consisting of changes predicted as a result of development, such as: • Effects on Landscape Character (Rural, Urban, Naturalistic, Historic) • Effects on Landscape Elements, such as displacing existing features or adding new • Impacting Landscapes of Great Value, such as National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) 1.1.4. Visual Impacts - Change in the perceived Landscape predicted with effects of landscape changes on the public and residents, such as Landscape Receptors, from views of development, from: • Intrusion - from the new features on desirable views • Obstruction - of views by new Landscape Elements or developments • Changes in character - of views due to new Development features.
Fig.1. A Diagram showing the basic process framework for assessing the Landscape and Visual Impact of a Scheme. Judgement of Sensitivity and Change can be analysed through a Landscape Character Assessment (LCA), which through identifying the scope of the scheme can identify how significant the current character is, and how this may change after development.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 4
1.2. Policy Context
1. Preface
‘Planning ensures that the need for minerals by society and the economy is carefully balanced against the impacts of extraction and processing on people and the environment’ [Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005] The EIA process derives from the European law ‘Directive 85/337 – ‘the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment’. This is implemented in UK legislation through the Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations. In recent years greater emphasis has been put on safeguarding the environment against unsustainable development, under the European Landscape Convention (ELC). The ELC aims at providing local authorities with a means of protecting and planning their Regional landscapes effectively, now in effect in the UK. The need for assessing whether a coal mining proposal is eligible is explained in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which has formed its landscape policies in conjunction with the ELC standards. The NPPF informs upon landscape impact indicators such as Visual and landscape which local planning authorities must consider when weighing a proposal.
1.2.1.The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) States... ‘planning applications will be assessed so as to ensure that permitted operations do not have unacceptable adverse impacts on the natural and historic environment’... ‘including from noise, dust, visual intrusion’...’and take into account the cumulative effects of multiple impacts from individual sites and/or a number of sites in a locality’ [pg 33]. *This means that the proposal must go to great lengths to ensure that it meets the standard of Mitigation for reducing visual and landscape impacts on the surrounding Local area. If it fails to do so the application will be rejected.
‘ensure worked land is reclaimed at the earliest opportunity’...’ and that high quality restoration and aftercare of mineral sites takes place, including for agriculture (safeguarding the long term potential of best and most versatile agricultural land and conserving soil resources), geodiversity, biodiversity, native woodland, the historic environment and recreation’ [pg 33]. *This means that the proposal must clarify the duration in which it will be in effect and must work on a strict time schedule; therefore ensuring that temporary adverse effects are minimised to a shorter timescale, allowing for quick and efficient restoration and aftercare. *Mitigation and restoration measures after excavation must ensure that adverse effects on the natural and cultural environment are minimised to a satisfactory standard. Failing to propose successful restoration will result in rejection.
The NPPF implemented in 2012 sets out the Government’s economic, environmental and social planning policies to be acquired by Local Authorities for establishing a Local Development Framework; within which local people and County councils can produce their own distinctive local and neighbourhood plans, which reflect the needs and priorities of their communities. An underlying theme expressed in the NPPF is the ‘Golden Thread’ practice, in which development must be approved with ‘a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking” (NPPF, Page 4).
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 5
1.2. Policy Context
1. Preface
1.2.2. The Barnsley Borough Council Local Development Framework Core Strategy States... the requirement for ‘Minimising the environmental and social effects of existing and proposed minerals sites, while recognising that the minerals industry forms an important contribution to sustainable development, the economy and employment in the borough’ [pg 134]. * Consistent with the aims specified in the NPPF, Barnsley Borough Council gives concent to the exploitation of local mineral resources, which works in the proposals favour. However in conjunction with the ‘Golden Thread’ practice expressed in the NPPF it must be classified as a sustainable development, meeting economic needs with respect to the environment to be granted permission.
CSP 38 Minerals ‘All minerals proposals should: • Be of limited duration • Have no unacceptable adverse environmental or amenity impacts • Be subject to high quality and appropriate reclamation and afteruse within a reasonable timescale • Result in a net increase in biodiversity and/or geodiversity interests’ [Pg 135]. *In support of the NPPFs aims for keeping to a strict time limit it appears to be essential that Cobex provide sufficient information of efficient measures to be implemented in order to keep to a schedule; ensuring that it does not surpass the specified 20 month duration. *In conjunction with the NPPF the Borough Council propose that negative impacts to the environment as a result of excavation must be effectively mitigated. However the council go further to say that restoration must provide net gains in biodiversity and environmental benefits. Therefore effective restoration proposals developed by Cobex for enhancing the site are a necessity for heightening the prospect for granted permission.
Mineral Safeguarding ‘MPS1 and the RSS require that Mineral Safeguarding Areas are identified so that proven resources are not sterilised by non-mineral development. With reference to minerals found in Barnsley borough...Annex 4 requires Mineral Planning Authorities to identify the extent of the coalfield to depths between 22m and 1500m. Policy ENV4 of the RSS requires coal resources to be safeguarded’ (pg 137, 7.281). ‘Although Barnsley has considerable amounts of mineral resources, there is currently very little demand. The main mineral resources in the borough are coal with associated minerals ...Unlike aggregates, there is no formal framework, such as the Regional Aggregates Working Parties, for the future supply of these minerals’ (pg 137, 7.286). *Although demand for coal excavation is in low demand in Barnsley Borough at present, with the recent implementation of the NPPF there is expected to be a significant rise in the near future. The new national framework emphasises the need for Local councils to re-evaluate the landscape to promote coal mining where appropriate for economic benefits, while sustainably balanced with environmental concerns. As the Local Region is renowned for its vast reserves of coal measures it is near certain that mining proposals will be undertaken in the near future; these considerations could prove highly beneficial for shifting the decision process in favour of approving the Cobex proposal, c onsidering it meets all the sustainable development requirements.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 6
1.3. Relevance of an EIA
1. Preface
1.3.1. Open-Cast Coal Mining Open cast mining occurs when coal is extracted on a mass scale for revenue, transpiring where coal layer lie close to the grounds surface and can be easily extracted through the removal of the top layers of soil. Prior to 2009 there were 38 active open cast coalmines in the UK which harvested just under 10,000,000 tonnes of coal [Source: open cast coal statistics 2009]. The coal is cut out in strips of a maximum depth of 30 metres over a staggered timescale, and is systematically filled following excavation. Once the coal is removed the top soil, sub-soil and overburden can be reclaimed to reform the original site conditions. Although there is the removal of a substantial amount of coal the ground can be restored to fill the void to its former level despite the lower volume, partially due to the bulking out of the soil to a lower compression and density.
Fig.2. A Graph by the Minerals UK association showing the Change in Open Coalmine Produce from 1985 - 2009 The overal trend shows a significant decrease in coalmine produce since 1985, with odd fluctuations. It is also apparent that in the previous half of the decade there has been a steady increase, a result of more Coalmines such as Howbrook being granted. Available at: <http://www.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/ mines/coal/occ/home.html> [Accessed December 22 2012].
1.3.2. Why is it Relevant to Perform an EIA on Howbrook? It is clear that an Open Cast Coalmine is likely to have a significant impact on the visual and physical characteristics of Howbrookâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Landscape. As the site is presently and has beenused mostly for arable farming and pasture far back in history, a coalmine is very sudden and highly contrasting change from the current landform use. This could have a detrimental effect on a range of receptors, impacting the surrounding residents of Howbrook village and High Green housing area. Combined with concerns for the Natural and Historic Environment the proposal interests a wide variety of stakeholders who may wish to express their concerns. This may advise greatly upon how the scheme may be successful or unsuccessful, and how it could be mitigated in order to address key dilemmas. Due to the scale and classification of the proposal which involves physically restructure the land holdings, through re-contouring the topography of a highly valued semi-natural rural area, it is essential to perform an EIA.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 7
2.1. Project Details
2. Baseline
The Proposal is driven by the desire for Cobex to extract approximately 160,000 tonnes of underlying coal measures, along with 15,000 tonnes of associated clays from a site covering 47 hectares of agricultural land. Coal is to be extracted from roughly 18 hectares of the site, while the rest remains untouched or used for the storage of topsoil and overburden which results from coal excavation. 2.2.1. Phase 1 • 2 month site preparation before excavation: Top soil and subsoil is stripped from excavation areas • Top soil placed in screening mounds around the site (Shown in Green) • Top soil from field 5 stored in a separate mound 300mm deep. • Subsoil stored in mounds 10 metres high (Shown in Purple) for screening • Access into site from the south east formed 2.2.2. Phase 2 • Coal excavation begins in Area C • Overburden removed will create a mound 10 metres high around the coal screening area, seeded with grass on the outer face for improved physique • Coal is cleaned and loaded into a dump truck via hydraulic excavated
KEY
Cut
Fill
Topsoil Mound
SubSoil Mound
Overburden Mound
Topsoil Removed
Field 5 Removed Soil
Field 5 Topsoil Mound
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 8
2.1. Project Details
2. Baseline
After the duration of excavation it has been proposed that the land be restored through backfilling with overburden, in order to restore the approximate original landform topography. The project is expected to occur over a timespan of 20 months in total. 2.2.3. Phase 3 • Area B is excavated through a series of 40m wide dip cuts (over an approximate time of 24 weeks) • Overburden from Area B will be used to backfill Area C and continue to extend overburden mound 1, further material will be stored in Overburden Mound 2 reaching 15 metres in height • Coal will be cleaned, lifted and loaded by hydraulic excavators into an articulated dump truck
2.2.4. Phase 4 • Area A is lastly excavated in a series of 40m wide dip cuts (Over an approximate time of 40 weeks) • Overburden used to fill the void in Area B, excess will be stored in overburden mound 2. Further material will be stored in overburden mound 3. • Slopes facing Howbrook and High Green will be graded and seeded to grass for improved appearance
KEY
Cut
Fill
Topsoil Mound
SubSoil Mound
Overburden Mound
Topsoil Removed
Field 5 Removed Soil
Field 5 Topsoil Mound
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 9
2.2. Landscape Description 2.2.1. Regional: The area of Yorkshire, Humber and east midlands is filled with a vast variety of land-uses, with major Industrial settlements such as Leeds, Barnsley and Sheffield; bounded by Green Belt land and landscapes of national significance, such as the Peak District. An expanse of underlying coal measures resulted in the dominance of current and past industrial processes within the region; with railway construction, housing development and deep/ open-cast mining being the major factors contributing to the man-made shaping of the landscape. Business and industrial developments pose a threat to the well-appreciated rural and cultural landscape value.
2. Baseline Howbrook is situated within the Landscape Character Area 38 of the Natural England National Landscape Character Database, situated in Yorkshire/ the Humber and the East Midlands
Fig. 3. Natural England National Landscape Character Areas Map (Natural England)
Much of the landscape is made up of low, undulating hills and broad river valleys with a patchwork of pasture agricultural fields fragmented by river valleys and seminatural woodlands. Despite the demise of industrial processes in the region recent years have seen urban sprawl through suburban housing developments, making use of the desirable rural setting with interlinking road networks. This along with proposed business and industrial developments poses a threat to the wellappreciated rural and cultural landscape value. The value of this landscape to the local population is emphasised through a vast assortment of land regeneration projects, concerned with the renewal of characteristic landscapes through:
Fig. 4. Character Area 38: Nottinghamshire , Derbyshire and Yorkshire Coalfield (Natural England)
• Community woodland planting schemes e.g. the East Derbyshire Woodlands project: for reclaiming forested landscape cover and creating opportunities for sport and recreational use • Extensive land renewal projects along rivers, for re-establishing the naturalistic river valley landscape character • Renewal of degraded agricultural and industrial land through positive management, in keeping with historic heritage • Hedgerow regeneration for renewing the traditional agricultural landscape
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 10
2.2. Landscape Description
2. Baseline
Fig. 5. Barnsley Borough Landscape Character (Mole) 2.2.2. Local: Barnsley borough has been zoned in terms of various landscape characteristic areas, Howbrook is located in area ‘E1: Settled Wooded Farmland’. This zone is characterised by gentle rolling arable farmland settled with semi-natural deciduous and coniferous woodland. Human settlements are frequent, but consist of small Villages and Hamlets of traditional stone Farmsteads desirable to property owners for the vast open green views. The grade 2 and 3 agricultural land is considered by the Barnsley borough zoning system to be in good condition and of ‘strong’ value of landscape character.
The Howbrook site is transected by three streams; Storrs Dike on the northern boundary, it’s tributary and How Brook. Currently the landscape is made up of Grade 2 and 3 arable and pastoral land, which is the result of the generally bare monoculture setting in terms of structural and vegetation diversity. Bordering deciduous and coniferous woodland such as West Wood on the Northern margin forms the naturalistic backdrop of the site, providing a stark contrast to the heavily managed fields of pasture. Due to the landscape’s open views exposed to a long distance of visibility any development is likely to have a large zone of visual influence. Therefore the Barnsley Borough Council considers the landscape to be of ‘High Sensibility’ and discourage any development which may have an adverse effect on important features of a high character status. However the council recognise that many areas are in decline and may benefit from regeneration and sensitive development. 2.2.3. Individual Landscape Receptors
Fig. 6. Local Context Map of the Howbrook Site
• A 132kv power line: owned by Yorkshire Electricity - it has been agreed that any excavation which takes place must ensure its stability. • Carr House Court: within the site and has been recently refurbished as high quality modern housing. Their desirable rural landscape setting is a major contribution to the high value of these housing units • Hedgerow Boundaries: Although in poor condition, they are highly valued in the area for their rural characteristics and ecological function • Topography: Undulating hills are characteristic of the Howbrook Landscape. Any dramatic changes to the landform could have significant detrimental impacts on the landscape. • Public Footpath: Along the Nothern boundary of the site, used by local residents and recreational walkers.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 11
2.3. Visual Description
2. Baseline
When assessing the visual value and condition of the site in its surrounding context a range of effective visual indicator tools are used. For this visual analysis the following tools were implemented: • Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) or Viewshed - Mapping of Landform visibility. Similar to a ZVI, but only considering Landform. • Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI) - Mapping of the area from which development could be seen, allowing for obstacles like landform, trees, woodland etc. These encompass a wide range of likely receptors affected in and around the site, and assesses how significant these effects may be if the proposal was implemented. Therefore analysis covers everything within the site boundary, but due to the open views spreading a great distance outwards, a greater scope is impacted. Therefore viewpoints take into account views of the utmost significance, such as nearby settlements, bordering roads and areas of greater distance and high elevation; to assess the wide-scale visual impact.
Site
Key High Visibility
Low Visibility
No Visibility
Fig. 7. Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) Map
From analysing the ZTV map above it is clear that the areas of closest proximity experience the highest visual interference. These areas include within the site boundary and out towards the western side of High Green, Howbrook Village West wood and Holly House Farm. However it is also clear that some areas far outside the site boundary are significantly affected, such as Woodhead Road in the South-west and areas of Chapeltown in the south-east. This can be explained by the height of these viewpoints, being of high elevation and thus displaying views down onto the valley with little obstruction from landform. However what the ZTV does not interpret is the variety of factors other than topography which have an effect on the site’s visibility, such as Woodland Vegetation and Built form. Therefore further anaylsis is needed in the form of a ZVI (zone of Visual Influence).
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 12
2.3. Visual Description
2. Baseline Fig. 8. Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI) Map
KEY Resticted/Obstructed Views of the site Clear Views onto the site Site Area
Visual Scope
A variety of factors have been considered to have an effect on site visibility, such as: - Topography - Woodland Vegetation - Buildings/Built forms - Seasons (Foliage obstruction)
What the ZVI demonstrates is an analysis of the visual envelope of the site to much greater detail. It shows that obstruction from woodland cover and built form results in a more compact area of visual influence than anticipated by the ZTV. This informed upon the selection of key visual viewpoints for further analysis into the quality of landscape views.
2.3.1. Visual Scope Although the maps clearly show that the location is highly visible from a great distance it has been decided that for the purpose of this analysis, viewpoints assessed will be focused within 0.5 kilometres of the site. This has been decided on the basis that the ZVI and ZTV maps do not take proximity into consideration, therefore analysing viewpoints where the site is of minor visual significance would dilute the final depiction.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 13
2.3. Visual Description
2. Baseline Carr House Court
Powerline Pylon
Public Footpath
Storrs Lane
Aspect: South-facing Sensitivity Level: Moderate View Description: Low viewpoint within a sunken river valley, meaning much of the site is not be visible from this point. Landform is flat with few vertical features. Landscape/Visual Receptors: Public Footpath Agricultural Land Woodland Vegetation Storrs Dyke River
2.3.2. Viewpoint A: View from Storrs Dike
West Wood
Storrs Lane
Hedgerow
Aspect: North-East facing Sensitivity Level: Medium View Description: A high viewpoint overlooking the northern portion of the site from close proximity. The North-facing slope means that views do not extend a great distance, therefore much of the most northern l ow-lying land cannot been seen. The view is open with little vertical interest. Landscape/Visual Receptors: Agricultural farmland Hedgerow Boundaries Storrs Lane West Wood.
2.3.3. Viewpoint B: View Towards West Wood
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 14
2.3. Visual Description West Wood
Powerline Pylon
Hedgerow
2. Baseline Carr House Court
High Green Estate
Aspect: South-East facing Sensitivity Level: High View Description: The Highest viewpoint on site, meaning much of the area is visible from this point. Vast Open views of arable farmland, extending as far as High Green Estate.Undulating south-east facing landform means the lower regions of the valley are unseen, with obstruction from riverside vegetation. Landscape/Visual Receptors: Carr House Court Agricultural Land High Green Estate Hedgerow Boundaries riverside vegetation Powerline Pylon
2.3.4. Viewpoint C: View Towards High Green Carr House Court
West Wood
Powerline Pylon
Powerline Pylon
Aspect: East facing Sensitivity Level: High View Description: Landscape is bare with relatively flat topography, hosting vast open views across the entire site extending as far as west wood. Main features include Carr House Court and Riverside vegetation, partially obstructing more distant views over the valley. Landscape/Visual Receptors: Spout House Lane agricultural land Carr House Court, Powerline Pylon Mature Trees Hedgerows.
2.3.5. Viewpoint D: View Through Centre of Site
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 15
2.3. Visual Description
2. Baseline
Powerline Pylon
High Green Estate
Cottage Housing
Aspect: North-East facing Sensitivity Level: High View Description: High viewpoint with open and distant view of arable farmland, meaning much of the site is visible from this point. Undulating North-east facing landform with low-lying riverside vegetation results in obstruction of views towards distant fields. The powerline pylon is a striking feature from this viewpoint due to its vertical presence. Landscape/Visual Receptors Hollin Berry Farm/Lane Agricultural land dry stone wall Riverside vegetation powerline pylon.
Blackburn Brook
2.3.6. Viewpoint E: View From Hollin Berry Lane High Green Estate
Riverside Woodland
Proposal Site
Aspect: South-West facing Sensitivity Level: Medium View Description: The furthest significant viewpoint from the site, a popular high point hosting wide views covering a vast distance. Despite obstruction from riverside vegetation a majority of the site is still visible, especially during the winter months. Views display a mix of a characteristic rural landscape to the east and development, e.g. High Green Estate, to the West. Landscape/Visual Receptors: Recreational Pathway agricultural landscape High Green Estate
2.3.7. Viewpoint F: View from West Wood Country Park Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 16
3.1. Landscape Impacts
3. Impact Assessment
“The tool that is used to help us to understand, and articulate, the character of the landscape. It helps us identify the features that give a locality its 'sense of place' and pinpoints what makes it different from neighbouring areas." (Landscape Character Assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland, The Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage, 2002) This Landscape Impact assessment will ascertain the effects that the Cobex proposal may have on Howbrook, anticipating the potential and probable scale of landscape impacts over the duration of the project. 3.1.1. Potential Landscape Impacts Over the estimated 20 month course of the proposal different stages of activity will pose various disruptions to the site’s character. Examples of these Potential Landscape Impacts include: Phase 1: - Will see the loss of Topsoil, removing grassland which is an essential characteristic of the agricultural landscape, therefore having a detrimental effect on the site’s rural character. This Impact is considered to be of ‘High Significance’. - Screening mounds will be formed with removed topsoils in order to partially screen the site. This will be a significant topographical alteration and may be a stark contrast against the gradual, undulating character of the current landscape topography. This is impact is considered to be of ‘High Significance’. Phase 2: - Stripping of vegetation will include the removal of hedgerows, considered highly characteristic of traditional rural field boundaries and are highly valuable to wildlife. This impact is considered to be of ‘High Significance’. - Screening mounds will be seeded with grass in order to reduce visual impact; significantly reducing scarring of the landscape appearance from a great distance, but still prove to be detrimental to the landscape character in closer proximity to the site. This impact is considered to be of ‘Less Significance’. Phase 3: - Overburden piling close to the river may run the risk of erosion, which would prove to be a great disturbance to the riverside environment. This impact is considered to be of ‘High Significance’. Phase 4: - At the end of the 20 month period the site will be restored to near original topography to help restore the landscape. However the change may still be clear and landscape scarring may still result. Being of long-term effect, this impact is considered to be of ‘High Significance’.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 17
3.1. Landscape Impacts
3. Impact Assessment
Landscape features were recorded from maps and on site field surveys. The method for determining the sensitivity of specific landscape features (Shown in Table) is based upon the guidance on landscape and visual impact assessment, in other words “its quality, value, contribution to landscape character, and the degree to which the particular element … can be replaced or substituted” (para. 7.17, The Landscape Institute and IEMA, 2002).
Fig.9. Assessing Landscape Receptor Sensitivity 3.1.2. Predicted Landscape Impacts Due to the sheer scale of the scheme, with overburden mounds reaching up to 20 metres in height situated within a relatively open and empty landscape, it is predicted that wide-scale impacts will result; most notably towards residents of close proximity, such as Howbrook Village, Holly Head Farm. Carr House Court and High Green, whose views of the landscape will be significantly impaired. Other stakeholders include recreational walkers who will suffer from the closure of public pathways through the site, and motorists being affected by higher levels of traffic from vehicles leaving and entering the site.
However these impacts are only temporary, the main concerns are for detrimental long-term impacts to the landscape. This includes the removal of matured vegetation such as trees and hedgerows, resulting in the loss of assets which are key landscape characteristics to the area. Although restoration measures plan to restore the state of the site roughly to its original topography some notable landscape scarring from topographical irregularities is predicted, and may prove unavoidable.
Fig.10.Identifying Landscape Impact Significance in accordance with change and sensitivity
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 18
3.1. Landscape Impacts
3. Impact Assessment
Activity/Operation
Predicted Landscape Impacts
Affected Landscape Receptors
Magnitude of Impact
Long/Short-Term Impact
Change and Intensification of Land-Use
Change in widescale Landscape Character and views
Wildlife, Vegetation, Agricultural Land
High Scale Negative Impact
Short-term, as operation on site is temporary
Removal of Topsoil
Loss of agricultural land, resulting in dramatic change in Landscape Character
Historic Field Boundary Pattern, replaced with one large plot of land
High Scale Negative Impact
Long-term, as land-use is likely to differ after the Mitigation Process
Overburden Mounds
Change in topography and Undulating rural landscape character
Undulating Topography
High Scale Negative Impact
Short-term, as topographical restoration will occur with mitigation
Removal of vegetation
Loss of Characteristic Hedgerows and mature trees
Hedgerow boundaries, Trees, Wildlife
Moderate Negative Impact, as Vegetation is of low quality
Long-term, as mature vegetation cannot be reclaimed after the mitigation process
Closure of Site Pathways
Change in site access and circulation
Site circulation, access to viewpoints
Moderate Negative Impact
Short-term, as circulation will be restored with mitigation
Fig. 11. Table of Timescale and Magnitude of Landscape effects The table above displays the predicted Landscape Impacts and how they differ from one another in magnitude and long/short-term effect. This analysis can help inform on possible mitigation measures for reduced impact, but also identifies impacts which may prove unavoidable.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 19
3.2. Visual Impacts
3. Impact Assessment
This Visual Impact assessment will determine the effects that the Cobex proposal may have on Howbrook and its surroundings, anticipating the potential and probable scale of visual impacts over the duration of the project. 3.2.1. Potential Visual Impacts Throughout the duration of 20 months the proposal will undergo various stages of activity, causing various disruptions to the site’s image and outlook. Examples of these Potential Visual Impacts include: Phase 1: - Will see the loss of Topsoil, removing grassland which will create a distinctive patch of exposed earth amongst the green agricultural landscape, therefore having a detrimental effect on the site’s untouched rural views. This Impact is considered to be of ‘High Significance’. - Screening mounds will be formed with removed topsoils in order to partially screen the site. This will be a significant topographical alteration which will cause obstruction of views into and outwards from the site, and proving to be a stark visual contrast against the smooth, undulating surroundings. This is impact is considered to be of ‘High Significance’. Phase 2: - Screening mounds will be seeded with grass in order to reduce visual impact, significantly reducing scarring of the landscape appearance from a great distance, but may prove to be unconvincing in closer proximity to the site. This impact is considered to be of ‘Moderate Significance’. Phase 3: - Overburden piling close to the bordering roads and footpaths will obstruct and dramatically alter the visual experience of recreational walkers and motorists. This impact is considered to be of ‘Moderate Significance’. Phase 4: - At the end of the 20 month period the site will be restored to near original topography to help restore the landscape. However the change may still be clear and landscape scarring may have detrimental effects on the rural visual character. This impact is considered to be of ‘Moderate Significance’.
Fig.12.Identifying Visual Impact Significance
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 20
3.2. Visual Impacts
3. Impact Assessment
3.2.2. Predicted Visual Impacts In order to effectively predict the likely visual impacts if the proposal was to take place, a selection of Baseline Viewpoints have been considered in order to visualise the magnitude of impacts on receptors. These viewpoints have been selected due to their heightened significance. It is predicted that views of closer proximity to the site are more likely to be heavily impacted when compared to more distant areas, along with varying effects relating to elevations. Therefore selected viewpoints support a wide range of distances and elevations considered to be of the utmost importance, for instance from the perspective of surrounding settlements and areas of frequent use.
Fig. 13. Showing the 3 most Visually impacted Viewpoints, and Sections, (shown on pages 21, 22 and 23)
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 21
3.2. Visual Impacts Storrs Dyke
LINE OF SITE
Viewpoint A
VISIBLE
3. Impact Assessment 15m Overburden Mound 2
Tributary
10m Subsoil Tip 2
NOT VISIBLE
Fig.14. A section showing how landform hides the site from view at Viewpoint A
Fig. 15. Viewpoint A and B Details
Before...
3.2.3. Viewpoint C: View Towards High Green Excavation Area Strips 8-16 West Wood
This viewpoint is considered to be of high sensitivity, resulting from itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s close proximity to the site. The entire proposal can be seen from this viewpoint, resulting in the widescale loss of rural character. However besides passing drivers and pedestrians on Storrs Lane Few people are affected.
High Green Estate Powerline 15m Overburden Pylon Mound 2 20m Overburden Mound 1
3m Topsoil Mound
After...
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 22
3.2. Visual Impacts
3. Impact Assessment
Fig.16. Details of Viewpoint D
Before... Due to high elevation much of the site is visible from this viewpoint, with moderate obstruction of distant views disrupting the rural valley setting. However due to the North facing slope and topsoil screening the scale of impact is greatly reduced. Nearby resident views from Hollin Berry Farm and motorists will be most affected, but due to the preservation of pastoral land in closer proximity the rural character is not entirely lost. Powerline Pylon 15m Overburden Mound 2
15m Overburden Mound 3
3.2.4. Viewpoint E: View From Hollin Berry Lane
15m Overburden Mound 1 3m Topsoil Screening Mound
3m Topsoil Screening Mound 10m Subsoil Tip
Site Entrance
After...
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 23
3.2. Visual Impacts
3. Impact Assessment
Before...
3.2.5. Viewpoint F: View from West Wood Country Park
Due to high elevation a great amount of the site is visible from this viewpoint, but of reduced scale with further proximity. The site entrance is the most visible point of the proposal, bringing with it large machinery and greater traffic which may further impact the rural setting. However vegetation from West Wood obstructs much of the excavation in the northern parts of the proposal. Recreational walkers within West Wood country park are most affected from this viewpoint, seeing the site as a scar on the characteristic rural greenery.
High Green Estate Blackburn Brook
20m Overburden Topsoil Mound 1 15m Overburden Mounds Mound 2 20 Subsoil Riverside Tip Woodland
After...
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 24
4.1. Mitigation
4. Mitigation and Restoration
The act of Mitigation is to lessen the intensity of negative impacts resulting from a proposal, before development commences. In Landscape and Visual terms it involves lowering the environmental and observable effects, resulting from land intensification through human processes such as mineral extraction. This will ensure that the cultural and natural characteristics which the landscape resource provides to society are not lost. Mitigation of adverse effects can consist of a mixture of techniques in Avoidance, Reduction and Compensation, defined in greater depth below. 4.1.1. Avoidance Mitigation through avoidance usually requires the relocation of a project onto a site considered less sensitive. This option is unable to apply to the Cobex proposal; however avoidance may also involve alteration and modification of a plan towards a lower impact design. Cobex has applied multiple design/layout measures within the proposalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s development to ensure reduced visual and landscape impacts, including the strategic placement of the site entrance on Hollin Berry Lane, directing site traffic away from more heavily used roads and thus reducing the impact on residents and motorists. 4.1.2. Reduction Mitigation through reduction of Landscape and Visual Impacts can include the following measures: - Siting of the development through making use of the topographic and vegetation qualities of the site, for greater concealment. This has been implemented in the Cobex proposal layout through situating the tallest of Overburden mounds within the sunken valley areas, thus significantly reducing the extent of their visual influence on the surroundings. - Screening a development with new environmental features such as walls, earthworks and trees to reduce development exposure to the surroundings. Cobex has considered this technique through the use of topsoil screening mounds, working to restrict the visual exposure of the excavation and overburden mounds. - Detailed designing of the development, involving the selection of forms, materials, colours and finishes which relate visually to the proposals surroundings, therefore minimising the developments contrasts with the surrounding context. This has been implemented in the proposal through the seeding of the outwards facing slopes of the Topsoil screening mounds, therefore helping to blend the site amongst the surrounding grasslands. 4.1.3. Compensation Mitigation through compensation involves charitable designation of new environmental features in return for losses or damage caused by development. This can be on site through restoration in order to ensure the land benefits after development; however it can also be situated elsewhere within the wider area. Examples of compensational measures can benefit the environment through establishing rich environments such as wetlands and woodland, or benefit local residents through providing public green spaces. However this method can be considered controversial as it may be used as a form or bribery, and delivery is not ensured. However when adverse impacts are unavoidable, measures to mitigate the impact should be considered. Where adequate mitigation measures are not possible, compensatory measures is highly appropriate.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 25
4.2. Restoration
4. Mitigation and Restoration
4.2.1. Key Restoration Principles - Establish a mixture of Agricultural land and Woodland, characteristic of the Barnsley Borough E1 ‘Settled Wooded Farmland’ Landscape’ - Enhance the visual environmental qualities of the site to benefit surrounding stakeholders - Reclamation of irregular shaped field patterns with hedgerow boundaries - Expansion of public pathways to encourage more frequent use from recreational walkers and local residents A landscape restoration scheme can accommodate an assortment of land uses such as agriculture, ecological corridors and regenerated woodland. However in order for restoration to be effective it is essential to consider the unique values of the landscape, ensuring that the restoration scheme is cohesive with its surrounding context. Cobex has considered this in the proposal through plans to refill excavated land, restored approximately to its original topographical state, but what is not specified is how this reclaimed landform will be used. As Howbrook is characterised by its rolling hills and broad valleys of intact farmland interspersed with woodland, a scheme for restoration should reclaim the sites physical and functional character as it appeared before development, in conjunction with aims set out in the Barnsley Borough Council LDF. Conversely Barnsley Borough Council’s LDF along with the NPPF promotes the restoration and change of land use for ecological benefits through sustainable methods, for example ‘programmes of woodland expansion’ and ‘new uses for disturbed and degraded land’. Therefore site restoration should prioritise the expansion of woodland, thus bringing benefits such as: - Use of Vegetation for tactical screening of unattractive features, and framing of desired areas: Improving the quality of environment for local residents - Woodland expansion for enhancing the green network throughout the site, linking river corridors for greater environmental benefits for biodiversity, along with greater connectivity with thesurrounding context - Expansion of West Wood, assisting to merge the site with its surroundings for blending into distant views - Enhanced environment for recreational walkers using the site, providing a mixture of open rural views with woodland enclosure Barnsley Borough Council’s LDF Specifies the Restoration of: - The condition and character of countryside land-use and minimising adverse effects from industrial practices - The condition and character of countryside close to the urban fringe - The scale and setting of existing houses, hamlets and villages - Hedgerows and stone walls on field boundaries, restoring those in decline - Characteristic agricultural landscape of Irregular field patterns
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 26
4.2. Restoration
4. Mitigation and Restoration
Fig. 17. Restoration Proposal: Conceptual Plan However it is essential that restoration does not disregard the sites cultural heritage characterised by ancient agricultural field patterns bordered by hedgerows; therefore woodland expansion will be fixated and contained within the eastern side of the site, while the more elevated western portion shall prioritise the restoration of hedgerows and ancient field patterns. This will ensure that: - Only grade 3b unimproved grassland (the least profitable land) is vegetated while retaining more productive Grade 2 and 3a improved agricultural land in the west. - Agricultural land is retained on the highest points of the site while woodland is situated at lower elevations, in keeping with the semi-naturalistic qualities of a river valley environment - Higher elevation ensures that field patterns can be viewed from eastern viewpoints, such as West Wood Country Park and High Green, retaining the desirable agricultural character of the landscape.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 27
5.1. Summary
5. Final Statement
5.1.1. Remaining Impacts Unresolvable by Mitigation Despite effective mitigation, with such a large scale proposal there is likely to be underlying issues which may not be resolved through mitigation. Short-term development issues such as increased traffic and obstructed views are of lesser concern when compared to possible long-term detrimental effects to receptors which cannot be replaced, which may include damage to the natural environment an cultural heritage The NPPF States that... ‘Permission should not be given for the extraction of coal unless the proposal is environmentally acceptable, or can be made so by planning conditions or obligations; or if not, it provides national, local or community benefits which clearly outweigh the likely impacts to justify the grant of planning permission’ (Pg 36, 149). But also states that... ‘Local planning authorities should assess whether the benefits of a proposal for enabling development, which would otherwise conflict with planning policies but which would secure the future conservation of a heritage asset, outweigh the disbenefits of departing from those policies’ (Pg 32, 140). 5.1.2. What must be considered when making the Decision? Although underlying issues may prove unavoidable this does not clarify that the proposal should not be granted permission. It is essential to consider what benefits development may bring, for example could the proposal create more benefits which outweigh the negative effects. Benefits to consider may include: - Significant profitability from the coal excavated - Possible improvements to the natural environment through restoration - Enhanced visual and landscape appearance after restoration - Benefits to the local residents, such as improved quality of life with visual and environmental enhancement These benefits however may not be guaranteed and may take a long time to take effect. Therefore it is essential to analyse the balance between benefits and losses predicted if the proposal is to be granted permission, ensuring that the appropriate decision is passed.
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 28
Bibliography Carys Swanwick Lecture Series Unknown. (2012) National Planning Policy Framework. [e-book] London: Department for Communities and Local Government. Available through: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf [Accessed: 1 Jan 2013]. Naturalengland.org.uk (n.d.) Natural England - Landscape character. [online] Available at: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/landscape/englands/character/default.aspx [Accessed: 16 Jan 2013]. Naturalengland.org.uk (2006) Natural England - European Landscape Convention. [online] Available at: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/landscape/protection/europeanconvention/default.aspx [Accessed: 16 Jan 2013]. Survey, B. (2010) Opencast coal statistics | MineralsUK. [online] Available at: http://www.bgs. ac.uk/mineralsuk/mines/coal/occ/home.html [Accessed: 12 Jan 2013]. Unknown. (2010) Barnsley Local Development Framework Core Strategy. [e-book] Barnsley: Barnsley Borough Council. Available through: http://www.barnsley.gov.uk/services/environment-and-planning/planning/local-development-framework/core-strategy/ [Accessed: 15 Jan 2013]. Unknown. (2002) Barnsley Borough Landscape Character Assessment. [e-book] Barnsley: The Countryside Agency. Available through: http://www.barnsley.gov.uk/media/Development%20-%20Planning%20and%20Transportation/Planning%20Policy/LDF/preferred/underpinning_documents/Landscape%20Character%20Assessment.pdf [Accessed: 10 Jan 2013]. Gov.uk (2012) Environmental Impact Assessments - Detailed guidance - GOV.UK. [online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/environmental-impact-assessments [Accessed: 18 Dec 2012].
Howbrook Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Page 29