LAND SOUTH OF HIGHER TOWN AND NORTH OF TURNPIKE, SAMPFORD PEVERELL, DEVON

PLANNING INSPECTORATE REFERENCE APP/Y1138/W/19/3238631

LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL STATEMENT OF COMMON GROUND / UNCOMMON GROUND WITH RULE 6

PARTY 02/04/2020

1. The following tables summarises the matters which are agreed and those which are not

agreed between Place Land and SOS. Additional information on these matters is also set out

in the following sections.

Table 1: Agreed Landscape and Visual Matters

Areas of Agreement

Topic: Landscape and Visual

Appellant SOS

1 The LVIA methodology, as set out in this sSoCG (except for the study area)

Agreed

2 The processing of the Application, as set

out in this sSoCG

Agreed, subject to inclusion in paragraph 28

below of the letter of objection by Peter Drew, dated 6 June 2018.

3 The published landscape character

extracts as set out in this sSoCG

Agreed

4 The Appeal Site is not a valued landscape Agreed

5 There are no effects to designated

landscapes

Agreed

6 If the Inspector is so minded, the discussion on visual effects could focus

on the visual receptors covered by the following viewpoints:

• WYV no3

• AECOM10;

• SOS 4;

• SOS 6;

• SOS 10A;

• SOS 10B;

• AECOM 11;

• AECOM 12; and

• AECOM 14.

The list on the left is agreed

7 The visibility of new rooflines will vary

from across the study area, such that depending upon the receptors location rooflines would be visible when new

planting is either low in height (year 1 winter) or in leaf (year 15 summer) and

above the proposed planting. The assessment of visual effects addresses the specific viewpoints and the predicted

change.

Agreed

Table 2: Landscape and Visual Matters not agreed

Areas of Disagreement

Topic: Landscape and Visual

Appellant SOS Prospect of

Resolution

1 The 3km extent of the Study Area and the PZVI and SZVI

With additional reference to the

AECOM photograph shown in paragraph 12 of Peter Drew’s

objection letter of 6 June 2018.

N

2 Landscape effects to the north-east part

of the Site

N

3 Landscape effects and loss of rurality The protection of rurality of Higher

Town between number 42 and number 48 is of

particular importance

N

4 Mitigation in the north-east part of the

Appeal Site could be delivered without loss of residential amenity

Although the R6

party has now had an opportunity to

consider the revised illustrative plan that shows the NE access,

this does not address our concerns on this point.

N

5 The effects to visual receptors The effects to users of the two Conservation Areas

N

6 The location and number of viewpoints A further viewpoint should be added at the location from

which Peter Drew took the photograph in paragraph 12 of his

letter of 6 June 2018. This is relevant to the

discussion as to the size of the study area and, hence, broader

visual effects.

N

7 The extent and location of bunds within the Application Site are for reserved

matters

Bunds of at least 1m in height will be

created in the central area of the site

N

Areas of Disagreement

Topic: Landscape and Visual

opposite Ascot House

on Turnpike. Bunds at the south east are also still

shown on all drainage plans and it

is not clear whether or not these will be needed, pending

confirmation from the LLFA.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Methodology

Methodology Overview

2. The landscape and visual impact assessment in accordance with the following guidelines:

• Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Third Edition, 2013 (GLVIA 3); and

• Landscape Institute Technical Guidance Note 06/19.

3. The study area will be a 3km radius from the application site, reflecting that within LVIA rev.04 This will cover landscape receptors and the visual receptors (VR) identified on LVIA rev.04 Figure 1:

• VR1, VR2, VR3, VR4, VR5, VR6, VR10, VR11, VR12, VR13 and VR14.

4. VR 7, VR8 and VR9 will not be included as they are beyond the 3km study area.

5. A construction assessment is not undertaken as this is temporary.

The landscape and visual assessment are undertaken at:

• Year 1 (winter), assuming the Proposed Development is fully built out and occupied; and

• Year 15 (summer), reflecting the year 1 assessment, except that the existing vegetation is in leaf and the proposed planting, as per the Illustrative Site Layout (CD 1.2) has established successfully.

Assumptions

6. The proposed dwellings are two storeys in height, equating to 9 meters in height, from ground level to the roof ridge line.

7. The heights of new planting are:

• Year 1 – new trees would be between 0.5m and 3.5m in height, with new hedgerows between 0.45m and 1m in height; and

• Year 15 – new trees would have grown by 1m every 3 years, such that they would be 5m taller at

year 15, between 5.5m and 8.5m in height. New hedgerows would be 2m in height .

Methodology for Sensitivity, Impacts and Effects

8. In line with GLVIA 3, the sensitivity of landscape and visual receptors is determined by an assessment of their value and susceptibility.

Landscape

Landscape Value

9. The value of a landscape receptor is based upon the consideration of any landscape designations and the following criteria outlined in GLVIA 3 Box 5.1:

• Quality (condition);

• Scenic quality;

• Rarity;

• Representativeness;

• Conservation Interests;

• Recreation value;

• Perceptual aspects; and

• Associations.

10. From the consideration of these factors, an assessment of the landscape value is based upon the criteria outlined in Table 12-1.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-1: Landscape Value Criteria

Landscape Value Criteria

High The receptor is likely to be highly valued for one or more of its attributes and may be protected by a statutory landscape designation. The landscape receptor may contain elements/features that could be described as unique; or are nationally scarce; or mature

vegetation with provenance such as ancient woodland.

Medium Receptors that have a positive landscape character but include some areas of alteration/degradation/or erosion of features; and/or perceptual/aesthetic aspects. The

receptor may have some features/elements that are locally commonplace.

Low The receptor is likely to be undesignated and / or with little recognised value. Areas which are relatively common place in character with few/no notable features and/or landscape

elements/features that make a contribution to local distinctiveness.

Very Low Landscapes which are detracting damaged or eroded or are considered not to contribute

positively to the landscape.

Landscape Susceptibility

11. GLVIA 3 defines landscape susceptibility as:

“the ability of the landscape receptor…to accommodate the proposed development without undue consequences for the maintenance of the baseline situation and/or the achievement of landscape planning policies and strategies.” (para 5.40)

12. The landscape susceptibility criteria for this assessment are set out in Table 12 -2.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-2: Landscape Susceptibility Criteria

Landscape

Susceptibility

Criteria

High The landscape is likely to have a strong pattern/ texture and forms a very distinctive

landscape that cannot readily accommodate change.

Medium The landscape is likely to have an intact pattern/texture and may be able to accommodate

some change.

Low The landscape is likely to have a modified pattern/texture which enables the ability to

accommodate change.

Very Low The landscape may be a damaged or a substantially modified pattern/texture with a very

high ability to accommodate change.

Landscape Sensitivity

13. From the consideration of the above landscape value and landscape susceptibility criteria, the sensitivity of a landscape receptor is assessed, as set out in Table 12-3.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-3: Landscape Sensitivity

Landscape

Sensitivity

Criteria

High Landscape with important or valued features, whether through landscape designations or

distinctive components and characteristics, susceptible to small changes.

Landscape

Sensitivity

Criteria

Medium Landscape with some value, of relatively common components and characteristics,

reasonably tolerant of changes.

Low Landscape of relatively inconsequential components and characteristics, which is tolerant of

substantial change.

Very Low Degraded landscape or landscape with very few or no natural or original features remaining,

such that it is tolerant of change.

Visual Assessment

14. Like the landscape assessment and in accordance with GLVIA 3, the sensitivity of visual receptors is assessed in relation to their value and susceptibility.

Visual Value

15. The visual value of a receptor is set out in Table 12-4.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-4: Visual Value

Visual Value Cr iteria

High A recognised high quality view, likely to be well frequented and/or promoted as a beauty

spot/visitor destination, or;

A view with strong cultural associations (recognised in art, literature or other media) or;

A view which relates to the experience of other features, for example heritage assets in

which landscape or visual factors are a consideration or;

A view which is likely to be an important part of or primary reason for the receptor being

present at the location.

Medium A view, whilst it may be valued locally, is not widely recognised for its quality or has low

visitor numbers. The view has may have cultural associations, or;

An attractive view which is however unlikely to be the receptor’s primary reason for being

there.

Low An ordinary, but not necessarily unattractive view, with no recognised quality which is unlikely to be visited specifically to experience the views available. Although the view may

be appreciated by receptors, it is typically incidental to the receptor’s reason for being there.

Very Low A poor quality or degraded view which is unvalued or discordant and is unlikely to be the

receptor’s reason for being there, or;

A view which detracts from the receptors experience of being there.

16. The visual susceptibility of a receptor is set out in Table 12-5.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-5: Visual Susceptibility

Visual Susceptibility Cr iteria

High Residents at home;

People engaged in outdoor recreation, whose attention/interest is likely to be focused on

the landscape or particular views, including strategic/ popular public rights of way;

Visitors to heritage assets or other attractions, where views of the surroundings are a

substantial contributor to the experience;

Communities where views contribute to the landscape setting enjoyed by residents; and

Travellers on identified scenic routes which people take to experience or enjoy the view.

Medium Residents at home;

Travellers on road, rail, or other transport routes who anticipate some enjoyment of

Visual Susceptibility Cr iteria

landscape as part of the journey but where the attention is not primarily focused on the

landscape;

Users of Public Rights of Way or where the attention is not focused on the landscape; and

Schools and other institutional buildings and their outdoor areas, play areas.

Low Travellers on road, rail or other transport routes not focused on the landscape/particular

views e.g. on motorways and “A” road or commuter routes; and

People engaged in outdoor sport/recreation which does not involve/depend upon

appreciation of views of the landscape.

Very Low People at their place of work whose attention may be focused on their work/activity and

not their surroundings.

17. From the above consideration of visual value and visual susceptibility, the sensitivity of a visual receptor is defined as set out in Table 12-6.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-6: Visual Sensitivity

Visual Sensitivity

Criteria

High Activity resulting in a particular interest or appreciation of the view (e.g. residents or people engaged in outdoor recreation whose attention is focused on the landscape) and/or a high value of existing view (e.g. a designated landscape, unspoilt countryside or conservation

area designation).

Medium Activity resulting in a general interest or appreciation of the view (e.g. people engaged in outdoor recreation that does not focus on an appreciation of the landscape, residents)

and/or a medium value of existing view (e.g. suburban residential areas or intensively

farmed countryside).

Low Activity where interest or appreciation of the view is secondary to the activity (e.g. people at work or motorists travelling through the area) and/or low value of existing views (e.g.

featureless agricultural landscape, poor quality urban fringe).

Very Low Activity where interest or appreciation of the view is inconsequential (e.g. people at work with limited views out, or drivers of vehicles in cutting) and/or very low value of existing

view (e.g. industrial areas or derelict land).

Landscape and Visual Magnitude of Impacts (‘impact’)

18. The potential landscape and visual impacts of the Proposed Development are considered in relation to the following tables relating to:

• Scale;

• Extent; and

• Duration.

19. Table 12-7 sets out typical criteria for scale of impacts.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-7: Scale of Impacts

Impact Landscape Visual

High The total or major loss of key characteristics or the addition of new features or components that would

substantially alter the character or setting

of the area.

Extensive change to the composition of the existing view (e.g. widespread loss of characteristic features or the addition of new

features within the view) and/or high degree of

exposure to view (e.g. close, direct or open views).

Impact Landscape Visual

Medium The partial loss or alteration to key characteristics or the addition of new features or components that are prominent but largely in keeping with the

existing character or setting of the area.

Partial change to the composition of the existing view (e.g. noticeable loss of some characteristic features or the addition of new features within the view) and/or medium degree of exposure to view

(e.g. middle-distance or partially screened views).

Low The limited loss or alteration of common components or characteristics or the

addition of new features or components that largely reflect the existing character or

setting of the area.

Subtle change to existing view (e.g. limited loss of characteristic features or the addition of new

features within the view) and/or low degree of exposure to view (e.g. long-distance, substantially

screened or glimpsed views).

Negligible Virtually imperceptible loss or alteration in any component or to the setting of the

character area.

Barely perceptible change to the existing view

and/or very brief exposure to view.

None No change to the character or setting of

the area.

No change to the view.

20. Table 8 sets out typical criteria for the extent of impacts.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-8: Extent of Impacts

Impact Level Typical Criteria

Wide Beyond 4km, or more than half of the receptor

Intermediate Up to approximately 2-4km, or around half of the receptor area

Localised Site and surroundings up to 2km, or part of receptor area (up to approx. 25%)

Limited Site, or part of Site, or small part of a receptor area (< approx. 10%)

21. Table 12-9 sets out typical criteria for duration.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-9: Duration of Impacts

Impact Level Typical Criteria

Permanent The change is expected to be permanent and there is no intention for it to be reversed.

Long term The change is expected to be in place for 10-25 years and will be reversed, fully mitigated or

no longer occurring beyond that timeframe

Medium term The change is expected to be in place for 2-10 years and will be reversed, fully mitigated or

no longer occurring beyond that timeframe

Short term The change is expected to be in place for 0-2 years and will be reversed, fully mitigated or no

longer occurring beyond that timeframe.

22. From the above tables, a conclusion of the landscape and visual impact is determined based on a criteria of high, medium, low, negligible or none.

Effects Criteria

23. The landscape and visual effects of the Proposed Development are established through the combination of the sensitivity of the receptor and the impact.

24. A guide to this combination is set out in Table 12-10. Where professional opinion considers that the effect is different to this guide, then a reasoned explanation is provided for in the assessment description.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-10: Classification of Landscape and Visual Effects

Sensitivity Magnitude

High

Medium

Low

Negligible

None

High Major Major or Moderate Moderate or Minor Minor or

Negligible

Neutral

Medium Major or

Moderate

Moderate or Minor Minor or Negligible Negligible Neutral

Low Moderate Minor Minor or Negligible Negligible or

Neutral

Neutral

Very Low Minor Negligible Negligible or

Neutral Neutral Neutral

25. The description of the landscape and visual effects is set out in Table 12 -11.

Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-11: Landscape and Visual Effects Descriptions

Effect Landscape Visual

Major

Beneficial

Where the Proposed Development substantially improves the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape and/or

enriches quality or characteristic features

Where the Proposed Development results in a pronounced improvement to the aesthetic

quality or composition of the existing view

Moderate

Beneficial

Where the Proposed Development largely improves the characteristic of the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape,

and/or quality or characteristic features

Where the Proposed Development results in a

notable improvement to the existing view

Minor

Beneficial

Where the Proposed Development partially improves the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape, and/or quality or

characteristic features

Where the Proposed Development causes a

partial improvement to the existing view

Negligible

Beneficial

Where the Proposed Development causes a very slight improvement to the existing

landscape.

Where the Proposed Development causes a barely perceptible improvement to the existing

view

Neutral No change to the landscape character or

landscape features No change to the composition of the view

Negligible

Adverse

Where the Proposed Development barely

deteriorates the existing landscape

Where the Proposed Development causes a barely perceptible deterioration to the existing

view

Minor Adverse Where the Proposed Development partially deteriorates the scale, landform and pattern

of the landscape, and/or quality or

characteristic features

Where the Proposed Development causes a

partial deterioration to the existing view.

Moderate

Adverse

Where the Proposed Development largely deteriorates the characteristic of the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape,

and/or quality or characteristic features.

Where the Proposed Development results in a

notable deterioration to the existing view.

Major Adverse Where the Proposed Development substantially deteriorates the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape

and/or quality or characteristic features.

Where the Proposed Development results in a pronounced deterioration to the aesthetic

quality or composition of the existing view.

26. All effects should be considered, with effects of major or moderate considered to be ‘important’ effects, whilst those of minor, negligible or neutral are of lesser concern.

Processing of the Application

28. The following sets out processing of the Planning Application LVIA’s during and after the Application:

• Cornwall Environmental Consultants (CEC) email to Mr. Rance, 29th March 2018, Core Document

2.8;

• CEC Review of AECOM LVIA, 9th April 2018; Core Document 2.8;

• CEC letter to Mr Rance, 9th May 2018; Core Document 2.8;

• CEC letter to Mr Rance reviewing AECOM LVIA, 23rd May 2018; Core Document 2.8;

• David Wilson Partnership (DWP) Landscape Visual Statement, Core Document 2.8; and

• P Drew letter of objection dated June 2018. Previously provided to the Inspector among objections

sent by the LPA at the outset of the appeal process. (These are referred to as ‘Objections’ in the

Core Documents list at section 2.13)

Other Core Documents (CD) of relevance in relation to the processing of the Planning Application

include:

• Pre-Application Response ref:17/00803/PREAPP, 27 July 2017 (CD11.1)

• Sustainability Appraisal Update, including consultant LUC recommendations January 2018 (R

Hammond’s PoE Appendix)

• Committee Report, July 2018 (CD 4.1)

• Committee Report Updates and Minutes, July 2018 (CD 4.2 and 4.3)

• Inspectors Letter following the Preliminary Hearings, 29th October 2018 (CD 6.19)

• Implications Report, July 2019 (CD 4.4)

Published Landscape Character Assessments and Related Studies

Natural England, National Character Area 148 (NCA 148): Devon Redlands (2013) (CD 7.6)

29. NCA 148 is an extensive area, extending between Exmoor and the coast, with the Site located in the northern part of NCA 148. Sampford Peverell is not mentioned in the study.

30. Relevant statements of environmental opportunity (SEO) are:

“Conserve and enhance the existing character, form and pattern of the area’s historic settlement, from single farmsteads to larger villages.” (SEO 4, page 4)

31. Stated relevant key characteristics of NCA 148 are:

• “Hilly landscape of villages, hamlets, farmsteads, hedge banks and winding sunken lanes…; and

• …Fields tend to be small and irregular with dense hedgerows on top of earthbanks in the transitional areas, while there is a larger, more open field pattern elsewhere.” (page 6)

32. In respect of ‘settlement and development’, the study notes:

“There is also evidence of scattered development in the open countryside and around smaller settlements…” (page 30)

33. Relevant landscape opportunities are:

“Create new landscapes around the fringes of new developments…making the most of existing landscape features and supporting the diverse landscape character and biodiversity.” (page 39)

Devon Landscape Character Assessment (DLCA) (2017) (CD7.7)

34. The study area is covered by the following Landscape Character Types (LCT).

LCT Culm Valley Lowlands

35. The Site and most of the study area is covered by LCT Culm Valley Lowlands, which extends from the east of Tiverton to the Culm Valley, to the east of the M5.

36. Relevant stated ‘distinctive characteristics’ are:

“Grand Western Canal and other historic river features including weirs, bridges and large mill buildings;

Relatively densely settled with towns and large villages along the rivers (Cullompton, Willand, Uffculme, Sampford Peverell) and near Tiverton;

Extensive modern development around the peripheries of larger settlements; and

By Devon standards, a ‘busy’ landscape but with some parts retaining a more remote and peaceful feel, particularly in the northern part of the area.”

37. Relevant stated ‘special qualities and features’ are:

“Numerous Conservation Areas (reflecting the dense settlement) including historic cores of…Sampford Peverell; and

Grand Western Canal Towpath and National Cycle Route 3.”

38. Relevant stated ‘past and current forces for change’ are:

“Agricultural intensification, resulting in (for example) field amalgamation, loss of hedgerows, large-scale agricultural buildings, and use of new materials on fields such as fleece and plastic which affect the character of the rural landscape and reduce its biodiversity ; and

Development pressure, resulting in development along transport routes; and peripheral growth of settlements within and adjacent to the area which does not reflect traditional styles or layout.”

39. Relevant stated ‘future forces for change’ are:

“Continued development pressure on edges of larger towns and villages and associated with transport routes, increasing urban influences in the landscape.”

40. The stated overall strategy for LCT Culm Valley Lowlands is:

“To protect the area’s characteristic Devon agricultural landscape, and enhance its role as a gateway into Devon. Agricultural land use is encouraged, and associated features such as hedgerows are well-maintained. The biodiversity of agricultural land is increased. Development in the form of settlements and transport corridors is sensitively accommodated. Links between settlements and the countryside are encouraged, and the recreational, historic and wildlife values of the river valleys are enhanced.”

41. The LCT Culm Valley Lowlands’ guidelines are based upon:

• Protect – including protection and management of hedgerows and hedgerow trees; ensuring new development respects traditional local built forms and styles; protection of the Grand Western Canal and its associated features and resist unsympathetic highways measures and signage;

• Manage – including managing the agricultural landscape by retaining traditional landscape features and enhancing its biodiversity; manage recreational facilities and encouraging links between towns and the countryside; and

• Plan – including increasing green infrastructure links between larger settlements and the countryside and planning well sited and designed future development that incorporates green infrastructure frameworks.

DLCA Bampton and Beer Downs

42. The northern part of the study area, to the north of the A road, is covered by LCT Bampton and Beer Downs.

Mid Devon Landscape Character Assessment (2011) (CD 7.8)

43. The study area is covered by the following LCT.

LCT 3A: Upper Farmed Lowland Moorland (LCT 3A)

44. LCT 3A is in the northern part of the study area and is characterised by steeply rolling landform and small-scale farming.

LCT 3C: Sparsely Settled Farmed Valley Floors (LCT 3C)

45. LCT 3C is in the eastern part of the study area and consists of the River Culm and its associated plains.

LCT 3E Lowland Plains

46. The Site and most of the study area is covered by LCT 3E: Lowland Plains and its description includes:

“An open, low lying flat landscape…primarily managed as arable farmland…there are some early but isolated settlements that harmonise with the landscape…” (page 61)

47. Relevant key characteristics are:

“Gently rolling middle ground to lowland with smooth, rounded hilltops that have concave lowers and convex upper slopes;

An agrarian landscape with medium to large scale field patterns;

Villages tend to be located either near to valley crossing points or on the high ground;

Views are highly variable. The landscape is semi-open with some long extensive views afforded from on top of hilltops…;

Roads are straight or very gently winding in nature and characterised by narrow routes that are lined with traditional hedgebanks…;

The landscape typically has short vistas terminated by a backdrop of curving hills with occasional long views from prominent locations, giving rise to a patchwork of irregular shaped fields with green pastures.”

48. Stated Special Qualities include the attractive textured patchwork of the arable landscape, the agrarian character and valued hedgerows with mature trees.

49. Past forces for change include:

“Development which does not maintain the existing settlement pattern of individual farmsteads or nucleated villages and their associated vernacular.”

50. Chapter 5 sets out the strategic guidelines for the borough with those relevant to LCT 3E and the Proposed Development being:

“protect the existing settlement pattern of scattered farmsteads, small clustered hamlets and nucleated villages, resisting anything other than small-scale development;

plan for small scale development within existing settlement pattern that preserves landscape and improves degraded land;

protect tranquillity of views by locating development away from either plateau edges, ridgelines or prominent slopes where it will interrupt the character of undeveloped skylines;

plan for a network of green spaces and green infrastructure links to support future population growth in existing settlements; and

plan to extend areas of mixed and broadleaved woodland to create effective ecological corridors and increase local biodiversity.”

Mid Devon Town and Village Character Assessment (2012) (CD 7.9)

51. Most of the study area is covered by the following Settlement Character Area (SCA):

SCA 1: Upper Exe

52. SCA 1 covers most of the study area and includes the Site and Sampford Peverell .

53. For the ‘settlement form’ of Sampford Peverell, stated aspects relevant to the assessment are:

• the proximity to the Grand Western Canal, which is a stated constant element within the settlements; and

• the form of the settlement, having been influenced by topography, the canal, more recent development and roads.

54. For ‘movement’ in Sampford Peverell, the assessment states:

“Sampford Peverell is also sited on a busy road, but the wide road and presence of footpaths on either side of the street contribute to a more pleasant environment.” (page 39)

55. For ‘residential pre-1920’s’ in Sampford Peverell, the assessment states:

“development is dispersed with stone walls that abut the road edge, as high as two metres.” (page 39)

56. The ‘important landmark buildings’ within Sampford Peverell are the church, village school and Globe Inn public house.

57. The ‘characteristic features’ of SCA 1: Upper Exe include trimmed hedges as attractive boundary treatments.

58. In terms of ‘views’, the assessment states:

“In Sampford Peverell, views of open countryside are often obscured by buildings, however some gaps allow framed views towards the surrounding countryside.” (page 41)

Mid Devon Overall Evaluation

59. The ‘overall evaluation’ for Mid Devon is that the large majority of villages either have compact or linear forms and that newer housing has been through additions to existing settlements and:

"the expansion of many of Mid Devon’s towns and villages has had an impact on the wider landscape. This is particularly noticeable where large modern development have been added to the edges of settlements with little consideration for local character.” (page 135)

Historic Landscape Characterisation1

60. The Site is classified as ‘Historic Landscape Character Post medieval’, which is described as:

“This area was probably first enclosed with hedge-banks during the later middle ages. The curving form of the hedge-banks suggests that earlier it may have been farmed as open strip-fields.”

Sampford Peverell Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan (adopted 2008) (CD 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3)

61. The north-east part of the Site is adjacent to part of the SP CA boundary and there are views of the site from the south west of the conservation area. The three parts of the SP CA appraisal set out features of the village conservation area and approaches to its management that will be respected in the determination of the current appeal.

Grand Western Canal Visitor Guide2 (CD 7.10)

62. The guide notes that the canal meanders through both countryside and villages and that the canal ’s many of its ‘original features and buildings still survive’.

63. Sampford Peverell is mentioned for its play park (c.600m to the east of the Site) and Sampford Peverell bridge.

64. The stated ‘one of the best and most popular walks’ is the Swans Nest Circular Walk, to the west of Halberton and is described as a ‘scenic route’.

Mid Devon District Council, Grand Western Canal Management Plan 2020-2025 (CD 7.14)

1 http://map.devon.gov.uk/dccviewer/?bm=OSGreyscale&layers=Historic%20Environment;14&activeTab=Historic

Environment&extent=210063;25600;338387;151675 2 Grand Western Canal Visitor Guide, on-line, https://devoncc.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicDocs/Environment/Canal/Forms/AllItems.aspx?id= %2Fsites%2FPublicDocs%2FEnvironment%2FCanal%2FGWC%20Visitor%20Guide%202018%2Epdf&parent=%2Fsites%2FPublicDocs%2FEnvironment%2FCanal&p=true&originalPath=

aHR0cHM6Ly9kZXZvbmNjLnNoYXJlcG9pbnQuY29tLzpiOi9zL1B1YmxpY0RvY3MvRW52aXJvbm1lbnQvRVI3SUNXSk1WWmhEclZtTlpkZVlLMUlCWWxodE4xWGZMOHZ4alpHTUM2aW5fZz9ydGltZT1BV21GY3hxNTEwZw, accessed February 2020

65. This is a draft Plan which is not in the public domain at the time of preparing for the Inquiry, howev er MDDC have made it available to the Appellant and Third Parties and will be referring to it in their evidence. The Plan may be in the public domain at the time of the Inquiry.

66. The Management Plan aims to be consistent with the policies adopted in the Mid Devon Local Plan that seek to conserve and enhance the character and appearance of this designated heritage asset, including its setting.

67. In addition to guiding the management of the Country Park itself, the Plan also seeks to influence the wider setting of the Canal, recognising its importance in the landscape, its function as a linear corridor connecting other sites and features of conservation significance and the inextricable links between it and land-use in its catchment.

68. The stated aims of the country park include “To protect, enhance and promote enjoyment and understanding of the special biodiversity, landscape and heritage value of the Country Park .”

69. Section 4.6 refers to the published landscape character assessments and the Country Park’s own visual amenity and its impact on the wider landscape is influenced by several components, including:

• Historic canal structures (such as bridges, embankments and limekilns);

• Country Park infrastructure (such as the towpath, signage, car parks, moorings, benches, gates and fences);

• Naturally vegetated soft earth banks (only wharves and bridges have hard edges and the only section that is

piled is a short section of plastic piling at Lowdwells);

• Trees and hedgerows;

• The canal and its banks (in particular, the amount of open water and the quantity and type of vegetation

both in the water and on the banks);

• Adjacent land use (agricultural, residential and commercial land use, and adjacent infrastructure such as

roads, power lines and modern bridges).

70. The relevant ‘Local Landscape Zone’ is set out in paragraph 4.7.5 ‘Greeenway Bridge to Sampford Peverell Bridge’, stating:

“The Canal continues to pass through mixed farmland with outstanding views to the east until it reaches the village of Sampford Peverell.”

71. The Sampford Peverell Local Landscape Zone is characterised in paragraph 4.7.6:

“The canal passes through the centre of Sampford Peverell. The western end of the village is characterised by

attractive older buildings and St John the Baptist church, whereas the canal at the eastern end is bounded by

more modern council housing on the offside. As in Tiverton, adjacent residents can rent DCC -owned offside land to

use as part of their garden. The offside land contains a large number of trees, which help to screen some of the

more modern housing.”

72. Section 19.1.2 sets out the main methods for conserving the landscape of and around the Canal which include:

• Screening of residential and industrial developments by planting / thickening hedges and planting trees;

• Opposing inappropriate developments which would impact on the Canal corridor either through consultation

responses from appropriate DCC officers and/or through the Canal Joint Advisory Committee; and

• Maintenance of good relationships wherever possible with adjacent land owners and residents to build influence

and deter / respond effectively to visually intrusive activities or developments within the Canal corridor.

73. Landscape threats include:

“Existing and potential future development within the setting of the Canal could harm its attractive rural setting,

sense of tranquillity, and quality of long views; and Detrimental impact of artificial lighting from adjacent development on rural tranquillity and nature conservation.”

74. Page 112 states:

“Landscape: The park offers an opportunity for people to experience and explore the natural environment and presents excellent views of, and access to, the wider countryside. Much of the recreational activity is based upon the attractiveness of the landscape.”

75. Section 24.2.2 states in relation to challenges that:

“Development: The Tiverton Eastern Urban Extension and other proposed housing developments close to the Canal which

may take place are likely to significantly increase pressure on the Country Park and could also have a detrimental effect of the Canal’s setting. Careful consideration needs to be given to how the potential benefits of these schemes can be harnessed and how the negative aspects can be minimised.”

76. Landscape aims are stated on page 116 as:

• “Retain and restore hedgerows and standard trees;

• Keep listed-structures clear of scrubby vegetation (e.g. Ivy and Buddleia); and

• Preserve / open up views along the canal (especially towards bridges) and viewpoints from the

canal (especially towards attractive landscape features such as hills, church spires etc) Seek to

minimise visual intrusions.”