solar site, llanwern, newport - gov.uk...hlca is a discrete entity, defined according to...

Solar Site, Llanwern, Newport

March 2015

A report for Energy My Wayby Rob Dunning BSc MCIfA

GGAT report no. 2015/016Project no.P1737

National Grid Reference:ST 37811 84203

The Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust LtdHeathfield House Heathfield Swansea SA1 6EL

Historic Landscape Assessment (ASIDOHL2)

CONTRACTORS HEALTH & SAFETY ASSESSMENT SCHEME

Accredited Contractorwww.chas.gov.uk

Solar Site, Llanwern, Newport: Historic Landscape Assessment (ASIDOHL2)

1

Contents Page

Summary ............................................................................................................................. 3 Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................. 3 Copyright Notice ................................................................................................................. 3 Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... 3

1 Project background ......................................................................................................... 4 2 The affected historic landscapes ..................................................................................... 7 3 Assessment methodology ............................................................................................... 11

3.1 The Guidelines ......................................................................................................... 11 3.2 Summary of ASIDOHL2 stages .............................................................................. 11 3.3 Quantification of results ........................................................................................... 11 3.4 The ASIDOHL2 Stages ........................................................................................... 11

4 Historic Landscape Assessment .................................................................................... 17 4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 17 4.2 Assessment of direct impacts on the historic landscape by the proposed development (ASIDOHL2 Stage 2) ..................................................................................... 35 4.3 Assessment of indirect impacts on the historic landscape by the proposed development (ASIDOHL2 Stage 3) ..................................................................................... 39 4.4 Evaluation of relative importance (ASIDOHL2 Stage 4) ........................................ 46 4.5 Assessment of the overall significance of the impact of the development (ASIDOHL2 Stage 5) .......................................................................................................... 60

5 ASIDOHL2 Concluding Statement .............................................................................. 65 References ........................................................................................................................ 66 Appendix I ....................................................................................................................... 67

Historic Landscape Characterisation ........................................................................... 67 Appendix II ...................................................................................................................... 68

Photographic Catalogue ............................................................................................... 68


2

Figures

Figure 1. Location of development areas (red) and the Gwent Levels Historic Landscape (blue) .........................................................................................................5

Figure 2. Location of development areas (red) and HLCAs (blue) ........................................6 Figure 3. Nash/Goldcliff Coastal Zone (HLCA001)...............................................................20 Figure 4. Christchurch/Nash/Whitson Back-Fen (HLCA002) .............................................22 Figure 5. Whitson (HLCA003).................................................................................................24 Figure 6. Porton (HLCA004) ...................................................................................................26 Figure 7. Redwick/Magor/Undy (HLCA006) .........................................................................28 Figure 8. Redwick Broadmead (HLCA007) ...........................................................................30 Figure 9. Northern Redwick (HLCA008) ...............................................................................32 Figure 10. Green Moor (HLCA009) ........................................................................................34 Figure 11. Location of development areas (red), HLCAs (blue) and Plates 1-14

(green) ........................................................................................................................75

Plates

Plate 1. View to the west of Goldcliff Moated Site (MM092/307860/00273g) ......................68 Plate 2. View to the southeast of Moated site east of Grangefield Farm

(MM205/406/54452/02313g) (NGR ST 38950 84960) ............................................68 Plate 3. View to the southeast of Development Area 1 ..........................................................69 Plate 4. View to the southwest of Development Area 2 .........................................................69 Plate 5. View to the east of Development Area 4 ....................................................................70 Plate 6. View to the southeast of Development Area 4 ..........................................................70 Plate 7. View to the northeast of Development Area 6 ..........................................................71 Plate 8. View to the southwest of Development Area 6 .........................................................71 Plate 9. View to the south of HLCA002 ..................................................................................72 Plate 10. View to the north of HLCA003 ................................................................................72 Plate 11. View to the east of HLCA004 ...................................................................................73 Plate 12. View to the northwest of HLCA006.........................................................................73 Plate 13. View to the southeast of HLCA008 ..........................................................................74 Plate 14. View to the northwest of HLCA009.........................................................................74


3

Summary

The proposed development consists of the construction of a solar farm on land near Chestnut Farm, Llanwern, Newport (Planning Application no. for screening 14/0419). In response to a screening opinion the archaeological advisors to the LPA (GGAT Curatorial) recommended that a desk-based assessment and ASIDOHL2 be completed for the proposed development. The ASIDOHL2, carried out to the latest guidelines issued by Cadw, forms the subject of the current report.

The overall significance of the impact of the development on the Gwent Levels (HLW (Gt) 1) landscape of outstanding historic interest is considered to be ‘Severe’. There will be a direct physical impact on six Historic Landscape Character Areas and an indirect, visual impact on eight HLCAs. It is considered that the development will have no permanent indirect physical impact on any of the Character Areas within the Historic Landscape.

It is considered that the overall effect of the development can be mitigated by the use of appropriate screening measures to limit the visual impact of the development. This will reduce the visual impact on both the settings and view shares of sites of national and regional importance, as well as the HLCAs themselves. It should also be noted that a number of the buildings within the Historic Landscape have existing solar panels, thereby partially reducing the inherent visual intrusion. It is also important to note that the indirect visual effect of the development will be transitory in nature, with the majority of solar sites having an economic lifetime of less than 25 years.

Additionally the sympathetic placement of individual units within the development, so as to avoid unnecessary damage to inherent landscape characteristics, will reduce the direct physical impact of the development. This is in addition to the watching brief, hedgerow survey and earthwork survey recommended by the desk-based assessment (Sherman 2015).

Acknowledgements

This project has been managed by Richard Lewis BA MCIfA (Head of Projects) and the report was compiled by Rob Dunning BSc MCIfA (Project Manager) of GGAT Projects. The illustrations were prepared by Charlotte James-Martin BA ACIfA (Assistant Project Officer).

Copyright Notice

The copyright of this report is held by the Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust Ltd, which has granted an exclusive licence to Energy My Way and their agents to use and reproduce material it contains. Maps are based on Ordinance Survey data, License Number AL 1000320693, unless otherwise stated. Annotations are GGAT copyright.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations have been used in this report:

MMxxx: Schedule Ancient Monument

HER: Historic Environment Record

NGR: National Grid Reference

NPRN: National Primary Record Number

PRN: Primary Record Number


4

1 Project background

Energy My Way are proposing to construct a solar farm on land near Chestnut Farm, Llanwern, Newport (Planning Application no. for screening 14/0419). The proposed development is divided into seven, irregular shaped areas (Areas 1-7), centred on the village of Whitson (see Figures 1-2). The proposed development would consist of the erection of a solar farm producing up to 49 MW of power. The solar farm would consist of fixed panels in rows, mounted on a framework system which is screwed in to the ground. It would include small substation buildings and associated small scale plant. The electricity generated from the site would be fed directly to the national grid via underground cables.

The proposed development area is located entirely within the Gwent Levels Historic Landscape (HLW (Gt) 2). Specifically within six Historic Landscape Areas, Nash/Goldcliff Coastal Zone (HLCA001), Christchurch/Nash/Whitson Back-Fen (HLCA002), Whitson (HLCA003), Porton (HLCA004), Redwick Broadmead (HLCA007) and Northern Redwick (HLCA008), all of which will be subject to a direct effect (see Figures 1-2).

It has also been assessed that the proposed development will have an indirect visual impact on eight Historic Landscape Character Areas (see Figure 2), Nash/Goldcliff Coastal Zone (HLCA001), Christchurch/Nash/Whitson Back-Fen (HLCA002), Whitson (HLCA003), Porton (HLCA004), Redwick/Magor/Undy (HLCA006), Redwick Broadmead (HLCA007), Northern Redwick (HLCA008) and Green Moor (HLCA009).

The development is considered to have a negligible impact on other historic landscapes, due to the great distances involved. For example, the Lower Wye Valley (HLW (Gt) 3) is the nest closest Historic Landscape, located 16km to the northeast.

The Gwent Levels represents a rare and important historic landscape and as such is included in the national Register of Landscapes of Historic Interest in Wales: Part 2:1: Landscapes of Outstanding Historic Interest (Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS 2001).

N

GRID


Figure 1. Location of development areas (red) and the Gwent Levels Historic Landscape (blue)

0 2.00 4.00km

Based on the Ordnance Survey 1:50000 map with the permission of The Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright, Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust Ltd, Licence number AL10005976

5


N

GRID

0 1.00 2.00km

Figure 2. Location of development areas (red) and HLCAs (blue)


6

HLCA001

HLCA002

HLCA003

HLCA004

HLCA007

HLCA008

Area 1

Area 3

Area 2

Area 5

Area 4

Area 6

Area 7

HLCA009

HLCA006


7

2 The affected historic landscapes

2.1 Register of landscapes of special historic interest in Wales

In 1998, after an extensive consultation exercise, Cadw in association with the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) and the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS UK), published Part 2.1 of its Register of Landscapes of Outstanding Historic Interest in Wales (Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS 1998). This volume forms part of a series of publications, collectively known as the Register of Landscapes, Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in Wales. The first part of the Register (Part 1) deals with historic parks and gardens, and is being produced in a series of county volumes. Part 2, which deals with landscapes, has been published in two volumes covering all of Wales. The first of these volumes (Part 2.1) covers the Landscapes of Outstanding Historic Interest; the second (Part 2.2) deals with landscapes of more regional value (Landscapes of Special Historic Interest).

2.2 The historic landscape

In addition to any direct effects of the proposal on known and potential archaeological sites, the development has the potential to affect the historic landscape in general and the area of the Historic Landscape of the Gwent Levels in particular. Recently updated guidance outlined a methodology for assessing the indirect and visual effects of proposals on the historic landscape (ASIDOHL). The present study of the effects of the proposed development was undertaken according to this methodology. What follows in Section 3 is a summary of the ASIDOHL process; the full details appear as a Technical Annex within the Guide to good practice on using the Register of Landscapes of Historic Interest in Wales in the planning and development processes, Revised (2nd) edition including revisions to the assessment process (ASIDOHL2) (Cadw/CCW/Welsh Assembly 2007).

2.3 Welsh Historic Landscapes and Historic Landscape Character Areas

The Welsh landscape is steeped in history and displays the influence of man from later prehistoric times through to the industrial era. Some landscapes are of especial historic significance, and in recent years this fact has been recognised by the identification of 58 areas as being key Historic Landscapes. These are described within the Register of Landscapes of Outstanding Historic Interest in Wales (Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS 1998) and the Register of Landscapes of Special Historic Interest in Wales (Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS 2001).

Recent historic landscape characterisation projects across Wales have sought to describe in detail the Historic Landscapes. Each project involves detailed examination of the landscape, on the basis of which analysis, the Historic Landscape is divided into a number of Historic Landscape Character Areas (HLCAs). Each HLCA is a discrete entity, defined according to archaeological and historical attributes, or by cultural associations, which distinguish it from adjacent areas; HLCAs take diverse forms, ranging from Bronze Age funerary zones to recent industrial landscapes, from unenclosed upland to densely populated settlements.

Historic Landscape Characteristics are tangible evidence for the activities and habits of past land users and occupiers and reflect their beliefs, attitudes, traditions and values. Such characteristics might equally reflect specific events or functional


8

evolution over time. Historic Landscape Characterisation sets out to establish the historic depth of past human activity within the modern landscape by identifying its principal historic components. In establishing the historical characterisation of landscapes, recent work in Wales has suggested that adopting a practical approach based on subdivision of the overall historic landscape into sub-units of broadly homogenous character is an effective method. This process can be summarised as:

One (or more) components dominant pattern

One (or more) dominant patterns coherent character

Coherent character (with definable limits) character area (HLCA)

Several HLCAs local landscape

HLCAs form the basic unit assessed within the ASIDOHL2. As discussed below, the contribution of each HLCA to the wider Historic Landscape (and thus its value in ASIDOHL2 terms) is variable: some are key elements, whilst others are only of incidental importance. Each HLCA directly or indirectly affected by the proposed development is assessed individually within Stages 2-4 of ASIDOHL2. In Stage 5 the results of Stages 2-4 are combined to produce an assessment of the overall impact on the Historic Landscape described by the Register.

2.4 Historic landscapes and the planning process

The Register seeks to promote policies to preserve the character of historic landscapes, although it imposes no additional planning controls and recognises that continuing development is a necessary part of a living landscape. Nevertheless, historic landscapes remain a factor in the planning process:

When Environmental Assessment is necessary, the Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988 require, amongst other things, the significant effects of the development on the landscape and cultural heritage to be assessed.... Factors that need to be borne in mind include the effect of the development on the overall historic integrity and coherence of the area on the Register, whether by outright removal, severance, fragmentation, or dislocation of historic elements. The cumulative effects of secondary or piecemeal changes over time should also be taken into account.

(Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS 1998)

Similarly, the most recent guidance given to planning authorities states that:

PPW (7th Eds) July 2014 6.5.25 Local planning authorities should protect parks and gardens and their settings included in the first part of the ‘Register of Landscapes, Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in Wales’. Cadw should be consulted on planning applications affecting grade 1 and II* sites and the Garden History Society should be consulted on all parks and gardens on the Register. Information on the historic landscapes in the second part of the Register should be taken into


9

account by local planning authorities in considering the implications of developments which are of such a scale that they would have a more than local impact on an area on the Register (see para 6.4.9). The effect of proposed development on a park or garden contained in the Register of Landscapes, Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in Wales, or on the setting of such a park or garden, may be a material consideration in the determination of a planning application.

2.5 The affected historic landscapes

The development area has a direct and indirect visual impact on the Gwent Levels, an area that is included within the Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS Register of Landscapes of Outstanding Historic Interest in Wales. Planning Policy Wales (2011) states that “Information on the landscapes on the second part of the Register should be taken into account in considering the implications of developments which are of such a scale that they would have a more than local impact on an area on the Register”.

The guidance emphasises the interaction between different aspects of impact, including landscape and the archaeological heritage, requiring any assessment to include a description of “the likely significant effects of the development on the environment, which should cover the direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, short medium and long-term, permanent and temporary effects … and the description by the applicant of the forecasting methods used to assess the effects on the environment.” In the Register, guidance has been given on the approach to fulfilling this requirement in relation to historic landscapes where effects to be assessed include ‘the effect of the development on the overall historic integrity and coherence of the area on the Register.” This guidance has been amplified in Guide to good practice on using the Register of Landscapes of Historic Interest in Wales in the planning and development processes, Revised (2nd) edition including revisions to the assessment process (ASIDOHL2) (Cadw/CCW/Welsh Assembly 2007).

The Gwent Levels has been selected as a landscape of special historical interest for (principally) two out of five potential criteria (Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS 1998):

(1) Intensively developed or extensively remodelled

Landscapes in which development or change as a result of human activity (land use) has been so intense, resulting in substantial alterations to the natural (landform) and semi-natural (landcover) elements: large towns, cities, conurbations, industrial areas, large-scale civil engineering projects, landscapes showing human endeavor on a grand scale.

(4) Buried/Subsumed or destroyed

Landscapes whose past use may usually only be inferred by historical (documentary) or archaeological (remote or intrusive) methods of investigation.

The Gwent Levels are described as three distinct and extensive areas of alluvial wetlands and intertidal mudflats situated on the north side of the Severn estuary representing the largest and most significant example in Wales of a ‘hand-crafted’ landscape. They are entirely the work of man, having been recurrently inundated and reclaimed from the sea from the Roman period onwards. The areas have distinctive patterns of settlement, enclosure and drainage systems belonging to successive


10

periods of use, and a proven and possibly quite vast potential for extensive, well-preserved, buried, waterlogged, archaeological and paleoenvironmental deposits surviving from earlier landscapes (Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS 1998).


11

3 Assessment methodology

3.1 The Guidelines

Guidelines setting out a suggested methodology for historic landscape assessment have been produced by Cadw and CCW, in consultation with the Welsh Archaeological Trusts (Cadw/CCW/Welsh Assembly 2007).

3.2 Summary of ASIDOHL2 stages

ASIDOHL2 is structured into five stages, summarised below in Table 1. A concluding statement follows the final stage.

Table 1. The ASIDOHL2 process

Stage 1 Compilation of an introduction of essential, contextual information

Stage 2 Description and quantification of the direct, physical impacts on the HLCAs affected

Stage 3 Description and quantification of the indirect impacts on the HLCAs affected

Stage 4 Evaluation of the relative importance of the parts of the HLCAs affected by development in relation to:

a) the whole of the HLCA concerned b) the whole of the Historic Landscape c) the national context

Stage 5 Assessment of the overall significance of development, and the effects that altering the HLCAs concerned has on the whole of the Historic Landscape

3.3 Quantification of results

ASIDOHL2 Stages 2-4 involve a grading and scoring process, by which figures can be offered for the direct and indirect impacts, and for the relative importance of the HLCAs (and their individual components) within a local and national context. Leading from this, a similar grading process is followed in Stage 5, producing a single figure for the overall significance of the impact of the proposed development. It is noteworthy that the ASIDOHL2 methodology as it presently stands cannot lead to the expression of positive benefits of a development, the range of impacts being graded from Very Severe to Very Slight.

The basic grading and scoring criteria are reproduced in the tables below. The formulae and working processes leading to the final scores for Stages 2-5 are not replicated here, for they are unnecessary for all but the most specialist reader of this report. The full methodology can be found in the Technical Annex described above (Cadw/CCW/Welsh Assembly 2007).

3.4 The ASIDOHL2 Stages

Stage 1: Contextual information

The first stage is to gather essential contextual information that forms the introduction to the report. In addition to information such as the planning history, necessary issues such as the historical background to the area are addressed within the early pages of the present report.

Stage 2: Direct effects

Direct physical impacts are quantified and expressed in three ways, namely:


12

(a) in absolute terms, expressed as a percentage of the area of land that is directly affected

(b) in relative terms, expressed as a percentage of key elements that are directly affected

(c) in landscape terms, expressed by statements concerning the extrinsic value of elements that are directly affected

Table 2, below, shows the criteria for assessing the magnitude of the direct physical impacts of a proposed development on an historic landscape in absolute and relative terms – steps (a) and (b) above.

Table 2: Criteria for assessing the magnitude of direct physical impacts on elements of an HLCA

75-100% permanently lost or removed Very severe 50-74% permanently lost or removed Severe 30-49% permanently lost or removed Considerable 15-29% permanently lost or removed Moderate 5-14% permanently lost or removed Slight 1-4% permanently lost or removed Very Slight

The intrinsic importance or status of each element or characteristic affected should also be briefly described, recorded together with a statement of intrinsic importance or status using the categories adopted by the Welsh Archaeological Trusts (that extend those as set out in the Department of Transport/Welsh Office/Scottish Office Design Manual for Roads and Bridges paragraph 3.4 Vol. 11 Section 3 Part 2 (Cultural Heritage):

Category A: national importance

Category B: regional importance

Category C: local importance

Category D: low importance

Category U: unknown

Table 3 shows the criterion for expressing the magnitude of the direct effects of a proposed development in landscape terms – step (c) above. This aspect is considered in two stages. First, the value of each affected element to the HLCA is assessed. Second, the effect of the loss (or partial loss) of that element or characteristic to the HLCA is considered; for example, how much does the loss of element X (or part thereof) diminish the value of Y as a landscape?

Table 3: Criteria for assessing the magnitude of direct effect on landscape value Element – value to the HLCA Landscape value Effect Very High Lost High Substantially Reduced Considerable Considerably Reduced Medium Moderately Reduced Low Slightly Reduced Very Low Very Slightly Reduced

Key to the ASIDOHL2 process is its scoring system, by which the overall magnitude on an HLCA can be expressed, detailed in Table 4 below. The scores for each affected element are added together and then the total averaged. To this mean figure is added the score for the magnitude of absolute impact (the total area of the HLCA to be affected). This produces a final figure, which provides a measure of the overall


13

magnitude of direct, physical impacts. Scores are then graded against the 28-point scale shown in Table 5.

Table 4: Direct physical impacts: grades and scores Impacts and element sensitivity Score

Direct physical impacts – absolute Very Severe

Severe Considerable

Moderate Slight

Very Slight

6 5 4 3 2 1

Direct physical impacts – relative Very Severe

Severe Considerable

Moderate Slight

Very Slight

6 5 4 3 2 1

Site Category A B C D U

4 3 2 1 1

Direct physical impacts – landscape value Very High

High Considerable

Medium Low

Very Low

6 5 4 3 2 1

Landscape value effect Lost

Substantially Reduced Considerably Reduced Moderately Reduced

Slightly Reduced Very Slightly Reduced

6 5 4 3 2 1

Table 5: Overall magnitude of direct physical impacts

Score Grading 24-28 Very Severe 19-23 Severe 14-18 Considerable 9-13 Moderate4-8 Slight0-3 Very Slight

Stage 3: Indirect effects

Indirect effects are classified by ASIDOHL2 as physical and visual.

Indirect physical effects are categorised as:


14

(a) An increased risk of exposure, erosion, disturbance, decay, dereliction or any other detrimental physical change to elements, during or consequent to development.

(b) Related to (a), the likelihood of increased management needs to maintain elements as, for example, through altered habitats, water levels, increased erosion, new access provision, etc., during or consequent to development.

(c) The severance, fragmentation, dislocation or alteration of the functional connections between related elements, for example, a field system becomes ‘severed’ from its parent farmstead by an intervening development.

(d) The frustration or cessation of historic land use practices, for example, it becomes more difficult or impossible to manage an area in a traditional manner as a result of development.

(e) The frustration of access leading to decreased opportunities for education, understanding or enjoying the amenity of elements, during or consequent to development.

Indirect (non-physical) visual effects are categorised as:

(a) Visual impact on elements from which a development can be seen (considered up to its maximum height). Impacts can be on ‘views to’ or ‘views from’ elements, and should be assessed with particular reference to key historic viewpoints and essential settings. These should be considered in relation to a site’s original character and function, as well as to the vantage points and visual experience of a visitor today. In some cases, key historic viewpoints may no longer be identifiable, but it may be possible to make reasonable assumptions on the basis of archaeological or historical information. Key viewpoints should also include those that have subsequently become acknowledged as such, for example, as depicted in artists’ drawings and paintings, or as features on popular routes or trails.

(b) Impact on the visual connections between related elements, by occlusion, obstruction, etc. For example, an essential line of sight between historically linked defensive sites will become blocked or impaired by an intervening development.

(c) Conversely, the creation of inappropriate visual connection between elements not intended to be inter-visible originally, by the removal of intervening structures, barriers, shelters, screening or ground.

(d) Visual impact of the development itself in relation to the existing historic character of the area, considering:

(i) its form – the scale, number, density, massing, distribution, etc. of its constituent features;

(ii) its appearance – the size, shape, colour, fabric, etc. of its constituent features.

For each category of indirect physical or visual impact the magnitude is graded as Very Severe, Severe, Considerable, Moderate, Slight or Very Slight. The assessment of severity is based on professional judgement rather than on fixed criteria. The magnitudes are scored between 6 and 1, according to the scale for direct physical impacts (shown above in the second row of Table 4).


15

The overall magnitude of indirect impacts are also graded in a similar fashion to the overall magnitude of direct impacts, using the 28-point scale shown in Table 5.

Stage 4: Evaluation of relative importance

Stage 4 is concerned with evaluating the relative importance of the part of each HLCA directly or indirectly affected by the development, in relation to:

(a) the whole of the HLCA

(b) the whole of the Historic Landscape

followed by an evaluation of: (a) the relative importance of the HLCA within the national context

The criterion for determining the relative importance or value of the HLCAs and their component elements are as follow:

Rarity

Representativeness

Documentation

Group value

Survival

Condition

Coherence

Integrity

Potential

Amenity

Associations

Each criteria is graded as Very High, High, Moderate, Low and Poor. Criteria values in steps (a), (b) and (c) are scored as shown below in Table 6.

Table 6: Stage 4 evaluation scores

Criterion value Score Very High/ Good 5 High/ Good 4 Moderate/ Medium 3 Low 2 Very Low/Poor 1

These scores enable a figure to be calculated that reflects the relative importance of individual HLCA elements and entire HLCAs in the terms of the immediate Historic Landscape and the national context. The final part of Stage 4 is to determine the average, overall value of all the HLCAs (or parts thereof) affected. This is achieved by combining the scores in steps (a), (b) and (c); once again the calculations are not rehearsed below, but the average overall figure is graded as shown in Table 7.


16

Table 7: Stage 4 grades of overall value

Score Grading 80-100 Very High 60-79 High 40-59 Considerable 20-39 Moderate 5-19 Low 0-4 Very Low

Stage 5: Assessment of overall significance of impact

This final stage combines the results of Stages 2-4 to produce an assessment of the overall significance of impact of development, and the effects that altering the HLCA (or HLCAs) concerned will have on the whole of the Historic Landscape as identified by the Register. This is determined by setting out and scoring the value of the affected HLCAs against the consequent reduction in value caused by the proposed development to the Historic Landscape.

Stage 5 summarises the findings from earlier parts of the process by focussing on three specific issues:

(a) Impact caused by development (based on Stages 2 and 3 results)

(b) Value of HLCAs (based on Stage 4 results)

(c) Reduction of value of the Historic Landscape

Each criterion is graded as Very High, High, Medium, Low or Very Low. Although scoring is used extensively in Stages 2-4, it is not recommended that the scores from these stages are directly combined or ‘converted’ to determine the Stage 5 score. Rather, judgements are based on professional interpretation and judgement; this approach enables the data to be assessed more flexibly, and for significant ‘highs’ and ‘lows’ to be considered, rather than merely the average figures. The overall significance of impact score is graded as shown in Table 8.

Table 8: Stage 5 overall significance of impact

Score Grading 26-30 Very Severe21-25 Severe 16-20 Fairly Severe 10-15 Moderate 4-9 Slight 0-3 Very Slight


17

4 Historic Landscape Assessment

4.1 Introduction The proposed development is located around the village of Whitson, with Areas 1-3 and 7 to the east of the village and Areas 4-6 to the west of the village (see Figure 2).

Areas 1-7 comprises a total of 5.84km2 in size and are entirely located within the Gwent Levels Historic Landscape, although no other Historic Landscapes will be subject to a direct or in-direct effect. Within the Gwent Levels Historic Landscape, five Historic Landscape Areas (HLCAs) will be directly affected:

Nash/Goldcliff Coastal Zone (HLCA001)

Christchurch/Nash/Whitson Back-Fen (HLCA002)

Whitson (HLCA003)

Porton (HLCA004)

Redwick Broadmead (HLCA007)

Northern Redwick (HLCA008)

It is also assessed that eight Historic Landscape Areas will be subject to an indirect effect:



Whitson (HLCA003)

Porton (HLCA004)

Redwick/Magor/Undy (HLCA006)



Green Moor (HLCA009)

The relevant HLCA description excerpts are listed below:


The higher coastal parts of this landscape were certainly reclaimed by the late eleventh/early twelfth century when Goldcliff and Nash were granted to Goldcliff Priory. Lower-lying areas inland were enclosed and drained by the thirteenth/fourteenth century.

Subsequent changes in landuse, population increase leading to the proliferation of scattered farms and cottages, and the enclosure of commons and roadside waste, have meant that this has been a constantly modified landscape, but one that in essence is high medieval in date.

An abundance of prehistoric intertidal archaeology is known off Nash and Goldcliff, and this is likely to extend inland under the later alluvium. Evidence of Roman occupation was found when the Nash sludge pits were dug, during construction of the


18

Uskmouth Power Station and around Goldcliff Point. A Roman inscription, the “Goldcliff Stone”, records the work of legionaries on a linear earthwork, presumably a sea wall.

A wide range of documentary material exists for this area, including a series of charters for Goldcliff Priory, and thirteenth century accounts of how the drainage system worked. Locally, there are strong cultural associations with the Priory; farmers widely attribute the reclamation of this area to the monks.

Key historic landscape characteristics

Diverse landscape: abundant intertidal and buried archaeological remains, drainage features (reens, banks, grips, surface drainage, bridges) small irregularly shaped fields, sinuous lanes with roadside waste, dispersed settlement, and large commons, monastic associations

Area of relatively high coastal land, bounded by be Severn to the south; Uskmouth industrial development to the west; Newport urban/industrial areas, the Llanwern Steel Works and intermediate landscapes to the north; Whitson and Porton to the east.

This was, and still is, a common type of complex and diverse landscape, typical of the higher coastal parts of the levels. It is characterised by small irregularly shaped fields, sinuous lanes with roadside waste, dispersed settlement and large commons. This wide range of well-articulated landscape elements gives it a high group value.

There are strong associations with the Priory on Goldcliff Point, of which Monksditch is the most obvious aspect. Though still in use, this is of great historical significance. The areas of landscape north of Goldcliff Point, and around Chapel Lane, Clifton Common and Saltmarsh are particularly well preserved. Several areas have suffered damage from agricultural improvement, but in other areas, preservation is excellent.

The visually most positive feature of this landscape is its diversity. The northern and western areas are over-shadowed by Uskmouth, Newport and Llanwern, but towards the coast, the area is quiet and secluded. There is a great diversity of features and good preservation of earthworks demonstrating the complex drainage hierarchy.

Hedge management varies considerably. There is a mixture of scrubby and cut hedges with some isolated mature trees; areas south of the Nash-Goldcliff road tend to have more scrubby hedges.

Generally this is a fairly intensively used landscape with significant areas of arable, especially in south-east Nash.

Overall this landscape has a reasonable integrity (though many of the roads are metalled and there are many modern cottages), and a reasonable coherence (being predominantly a working agricultural landscape).

This is a very diverse landscape, reflecting its long history of formation, with an irregular field-boundary pattern and sinuous lanes. Much of the once ample roadside waste has been enclosed, though traces survive (eg Saltmarsh Lane). North of Goldcliff Point, Mireland Pill forms one side of a particularly fine green lane, there were several linear street commons; most have been enclosed (eg Broadstreet), though the Clifton example survives.

The settlement pattern was mainly dispersed with farms and cottages scattered throughout the landscape. Several earthwork complexes represent the sites of abandoned settlements, including the scheduled moated site by Chapel Lane in


19

Goldcliff. Nash and Goldcliff villages now largely consist of modern buildings, though there are a number of fine old farmhouses elsewhere

Several NRA and IDB reens flow through this area, though historically few are of particular significance; most follow natural meandering courses. The exception is the raised watercourse of Monksditch, which carries water from an upland stream to the coast, preventing this fresh water from flooding the Levels. It is first documented in the thirteenth century and was probably constructed by the monks at Goldcliff.

There are a wide range of other landscape features, such as a fine collection of bridges over Mireland Pill. The sea wall is rubble faced having been rebuilt quite recently. The survival of grips is patchy, but fine examples occur to the north of Red House Farm, either side of Chapel Road. Clifton Common and Saltmarsh Lane (all in Goldcliff) and around Tatton (Nash: allocated for development). Pollarded willows are fairly common towards the coast, particularly to the south of the Nash-Goldcliff road. The last working putcher rank stands off Goldcliff Point.


N

GRID

0 1.00 2.00km

Figure 3. Nash/Goldcliff Coastal Zone (HLCA001)

HLCA001


20


21


The initial enclosure and drainage by reens and banks began by the fourteenth century. Individual field-boundaries are probably later (possibly Post-medieval).

Very little documentary evidence survives until the mid-seventeenth century, when a survey described the area and its drainage system in great detail.


Well-preserved drainage features (reens, banks, and surface drainage), rectilinear field pattern arranged in blocks, very little settlement, straight roads, without waste, lined by pollarded willows, giving a strong “wetland” feel

Area of low-lying back-fen. Once extended to fen-edge but surviving area now bounded by the Steel Works to the north and Green Moor to east.

The fairly rectilinear field-boundary pattern can be broken down into small blocks, defined by major reens and former banks that represent individual reclamations. Roads are mainly straight and without waste.

There was a distinct range of other landscape features. The lowest-lying areas closest to the fen-edge were occupied by a series of commons. They were destroyed by the Steel Works, along with two duck decoy ponds and the only two farms in this character area. There are several fine lines of pollards.

This area was once representative of a common type of landscape on the Levels, covering much of the back-fen. It is characterised by a fairly homogenous rectilinear pattern arranged in blocks of several dozen fields, with very little settlement. The roads are straight, without waste and lined by pollarded willows, giving a strong “wetland” feel.

Monksditch is particularly well preserved, being stone faced in places. With its lower level reen to the west, Whitson Arch bridge, and well-preserved grips in the surrounding fields, the area around the sub-station has a very high group value.

Hedge management varies, with a mixture of well-cut and scrubby hedges, and a large number of mature trees around the Whitson electricity sub-station.

The integrity and coherence have been damaged, though the impact of the Steel Works is lessened by trees.


N

GRID

0 500m 1.00km

Figure 4. Christchurch/Nash/Whitson Back-Fen (HLCA002)

HLCA002

HLCA002


22


23

Whitson (HLCA003)

This fascinating landscape was planned out during the high medieval period possibly by the monks at Goldcliff. Initially, a series of long narrow strips were laid out, surrounded by a “fen-bank”. These strips were subsequently extended a number of times. The common was enclosed in the mid nineteenth century.

There is a scarcity of documentary material for Whitson, though the possible contexts for its creation, by Flemings, Goldcliff Priory or the lords of Caerleon, give the potential for strong cultural associations to be developed. A survey of 1656 describes the drainage system in detail.


Drainage features (reens, banks, and ridging/surface drainage, include the medieval Monksditch), linear settlement on the former common, fen-banks, green lanes, long narrow fields, pollarded trees

This landscape occupies the centre of the Caldicot Level. Monksditch lies to the west, the road around Whitson to the north/east, and a green lane to the south.

The principal element is a linear settlement along a “street common”, and very long narrow fields laid out longitudinally to the east. It is enclosed by a road, which is metalled to the north/west; there is a fine green lane along Parish Reen to the south/east. The main village street runs down the centre of the former common, leading to the farms, which originally all lay on the common’s edge, being set back from the present road. Monksditch runs down the west side of the former common. A fine row of pollards lines Bowlease Reen.

This is a unique and fascinating example of a planned landscape and linear settlement dating to the twelfth to fourteenth century. It is unique on the Levels. There is a coherent range of landscape features giving the area a very high group value (eg Monksditch, the former common, sequence of fen-banks, green lanes).

A number of boundaries have been lost but some grips are well preserved and the pattern of long narrow fields survives in essence. The area is overlooked by the Steel Works, though tree planting partly screens this; ash dumps to the north-east also need screening.

There are many scrubby and well-wooded hedges (especially in the village), though others are cut or absent. This, along with the loss of some boundaries, leads to a rather open landscape in places, though still retaining the important pattern of long narrow fields.

Overall, this is a very important arid coherent landscape, retaining considerable integrity. It is a fine example of English planted settlement/reclamation in the Welsh Marches.


N

GRID

0 500m 1.00km

HLCA003

Figure 5. Whitson (HLCA003)


24


25

Porton (HLCA004)

This landscape appears to have been planned out in a single episode. Porton is documented from the mid-thirteenth century.

Land in Porton was held by Goldcliff Priory and Tintern Abbey, though little documentation survives. There is a local legend that the original village has been eroded away; some claim the ghostly bells of Whitson church can still be heard.


Drainage features (reens, surface drainage, grip system), seawall, rectangular fields in planned grid of roads, and network of green lanes, fishery features (important Putcher rank)

This landscape is bounded by Whitson to the north, Elver Pill Reen and Broadmead to the east, Mireland Pill to the west and the coast to the south.

The field pattern consists of rectangular fields set within a planned grid of roads. The axial east-west road may be an enclosed street common. The two north-south roads lack any waste and survive as unmetalled “green lanes”. The hamlet of Porton lies adjacent to Whitson church, and includes a fine collection of seventeenth to eighteenth century buildings. The only other settlement is an isolated farmstead by the coast. It is known as “The Fisheries”, and the remains of a “Putcher rank” can be seen in the intertidal zone.

The sea wall clearly cuts across the grain of this landscape, leading to the creation of a number of triangular shaped fields. Elver Pill (formerly Earls) Reen lies to the east; though documented from the sixteenth century, it is certainly much older. The sea wall has stone rubble facing and a wave return wall. Some well-preserved grips remain especially to the south. Some pollards are also in evidence.

It is unusual to find such a “regular landscape” so close to the coast, and is probably another example of medieval planning. It is a well preserved, very coherent landscape having a high group value, with a relatively intact field-boundary pattern, grip system and network of green lanes, all cut by the set-back sea wall.

To the south, hedges are mainly scrubby, with occasional mature willows. To the north, some boundaries have been lost, and many of the remaining hedges are well managed.

Overall, this is an extremely coherent landscape with a very high integrity; the wide range of landscape elements articulate well. There are few visual intrusions, apart from the British Steel pipeline down Elver Pill Reen (though this is largely screened by hedges). The small hamlet at Porton is particularly pleasant.


N

GRID

0 1.00 2.00km

HLCA004

Figure 6. Porton (HLCA004)


26


27

Redwick/Magor/Undy (HLCA006)

As elsewhere, this “irregular landscape” results from gradual enclosure and reclamation, probably between the eleventh and fourteenth centuries. The enclosure of street commons in the nineteenth century marked an important period of alteration.

Very important prehistoric, Roman and medieval sites are known in the intertidal zone; such evidence is likely to continue inland under later alluvium.

A range of good documentation exists for the area, including references to a medieval port and mill, called “Abergwaitha”, lies near the Sewage Works.


Irregular field pattern of small fields (includes some regular areas), drainage features (reens, surface drainage) include major medieval reens, seawall includes relict sea wall (SAM)

An Area of higher coastal land. Windmill Reen and Broadmead to the west; Ynys Mead Reen, Lower Grange and the fen-edge to the north; Collister Pill/Caldicot Moor to the east.

This diverse landscape has pattern of small irregular fields. Undy Common has a “regular landscape” resulting from nineteenth century enclosure.

There is a range of other features, including some fine bridges. West of Magor Pill the sea wall is rubble faced with a wave return wall: to the east it is a simple earthen bank with dressed stone facing. The wall sits uncomfortably over the landscape creating a series of triangular fields. A well-preserved relict sea wall runs along Collister pill (a Scheduled Ancient Monument) - There are a number of major medieval reens (e.g. Windmill and Coldharbour) and the embanked Mill Reen.

This is a typical and mainly well-preserved example of “irregular landscape”, with great diversity or elements. Redwick viIlage stands at the centre, while Mill Reen and the Collister Pill relict sea wall are other focal (if linear) features.

Most areas have a mixture of scrubby and cut hedges; south of Redwick village they are more wooded. Around Coldharbour Pill, north of Redwick village and the south east of Undy have seen many fields enlarged and hedges well cut.

Overall, both integrity and coherence of the landscape are high. While some areas have suffered from agricultural improvements, otherwise its condition is good; there are few intrusive modern buildings. Some fine ridging, especially to the south of Redwick village and in Undy.


N

GRID

0 1.00 2.00km

Figure 7. Redwick/Magor/Undy (HLCA006)


28

HLCA006


29


Broadmead is first recorded in 1422. It was a large tract of meadow, divided into strips which were not defined by ditches; hence it was known as an “open field”. Piecemeal enclosure probably started by the sixteenth century on the eastern side, but it remained largely unenclosed until a Parliamentary Act of 1858; the present pattern of roads and fields for the most part date to that period.

This was the communal meadow of Redwick village, and is mentioned in innumerable documentary sources. It survived to be mapped in 1831.


Regular field pattern of large rectangular fields, drainage features (reens, ridgeing/surface drainage, bridges, medieval drainage channels), seawall, single green lane (pollards) without waste

An area bounded by Elver Pill Reen/Porton to the west, Grangefield to the north, Windmill Reen to the east and the coast to the south.

This homogeneous and uniform landscape is dominated by a pattern of mainly large, rectangular fields which replaced the earlier open field strips. The only road, Mead Lane, is a very straight green lane which lacks any roadside waste.

There is a very limited range of other landscape features, notably some fine bridges along Mead Lane. Two major medieval artificial drainage channels, Elver Pill and Windmill Reens, lie to the west and east. The sea wall to the south has a stone rubble racing and concrete wave return wall. A few fields have ridging, and occasional ill-developed grips. Pollards are mainly restricted to hedges beside the green lane.

For the Levels, this is a very rare single period landscape, and the most extensive parliamentary enclosure of former open fields. As such it is one of the few landscapes for which an absolute date of origin can be attributed. A major characteristic is the very limited range of landscape features, notably the predominance of large rectangular fields and lack of settlement. Its condition is generally good. Hedge maintenance, however, is very diverse.

This landscape has a very high integrity and coherence relating to its nineteenth century origins. It also demonstrates how landscapes were transformed through Parliamentary enclosure.


N

GRID

0 1.00 2.00km

HLCA007

Figure 8. Redwick Broadmead (HLCA007)


30


31


This area was enclosed and drained probably around the thirteenth or fourteenth century.

Grangefield was a farm owned by the monks of Tintern Abbey. The area to the east, known as “Black Moores”, was enclosed and drained by them, probably in the thirteenth or fourteenth century.


Uniformity, limited range of features, earthworks - monastic grange, monastic boundary, regular field pattern, straight lanes without waste, sparse settlement at periphery, drainage features (reens, ridgeing/surface drainage, grip system)

A slightly lower-lying area inland of the coastal part of Redwick. Bounded by Whitson to the west, Green Moor Wall/Rush Wall to the north, and Ynys Mead/Mere Reen to the south.

This area of landscape is characterised by its uniformity and limited range of landscape features; a regular field-boundary pattern, with relatively few lanes, all of them straight and without roadside waste, and very few settlements. Just three isolated farmsteads all lie around the periphery (Grangefield, Greenmoor and Greenfield Farms).

The earthworks of Tintern Abbey’s farm survive beside Grangefield, and are scheduled. Slight traces of a bank survive along Mere (Old English for boundary) Reen, that probably represents the boundary between Redwick’s open fields in Broadmead and the Lands of Tintem Abbey to the north. There are some well-preserved grip systems, especially to the east of Grangefield.

The landscape around Grangefield is historically very important due to its monastic associations, and has a high group value; this area is in rather better condition than the rest of HLCA008.

Though the whole of this landscape block survives, and has good coherence (especially around Grangefield), its integrity has been reduced due to the intensity of modern farming.

While this character area is largely, complete, parts are poorly preserved with extensive ploughing and the removal of hedges. The extreme western part is in better condition, where hedges are predominantly scrubby, with some well wooded.

This area is important, however, as a buffer zone between the industrial and commercial developments to the north, and the better-preserved, more secluded landscapes to the south. Though at present, the very open nature of the landscape affords little screening of the Steel Works or Gwent Europark developments, this could change.


N

GRID

0 1.00 2.00km

HLCA008

Figure 9. Northern Redwick (HLCA008)


32


33


The framework of major reens and lanes date to at least the mid-sixteenth century, and probably earlier. However, the pattern of fields is largely post-medieval. The areas north and east of the railway were enclosed first, possibly in the seventeenth or eighteenth centuries; Green Moor proper, south of Llanwern, was enclosed c. 1850.

When the Gwent Europark was under construction a nearly complete Roman boat was discovered beside a stone and timber quay.

In the medieval/post-medieval period Green Moor was an extensive common pasture used by many of the surrounding communities.


Uniformity, strong “wetland” feel, regular field pattern, straight roads (grid-layout), drainage features (reens, ridgeing/surface drainage, grips and bridges)

The lowest-lying area of back-fen. The southern area bounds the Steel Works, railway and Gwent Europark to the north, Rush Wall and Blackwall to the south/east. The block to the north of the railway retains its original fen-edge.

The principal elements of this very uniform landscape are a very regular pattern of field-boundaries, laid out within a grid of straight roads and major reens. There are few other landscape features and just one settlement (Barland’s Farm). Certain areas have good grips and some fine bridges (e.g. along Rush Wall). A duck decoy pond is documented at ST 416 862.

The condition of this landscape is mixed. To the east and north of the Gwent Europark, most boundaries survive, fields retain surface ridging, and fragmentary hedges contain a large number of mature willows; this landscape has a strong wetland feel, typical of low-lying back-fen areas. The area south of the Steel Works has been used an ash tip.

The area south of Magor village is now a nature reserve, run by the Gwent Wildlife Trust. Traditional management methods preserve areas of rich meadow and “fen carr” vegetation.

Though once a common type of field pattern, the distinctively homogeneous back-fen landscapes are now rare. Areas north and east of the Gwent Europark are typical, in good condition and retain the original fen-edge. There are fine views of the adjacent uplands, though the area south west of Llandevenny village is over-shadowed by the Gwent Europark. Overall, the eastern and northern areas have a very high integrity and coherence.


N

GRID

0 1.00 2.00km

Figure 10. Green Moor (HLCA009)


34

HLCA009


35

4.2 Assessment of direct impacts on the historic landscape by the proposed development (ASIDOHL2 Stage 2) The proposed development comprises 5.84km2 the entirety of which lies within the Gwent Levels Historic Landscape. The entire Gwent Levels Historic Landscape has an area of 106.9km2, therefore the maximum overall area which could be directly affected by the proposal represents 5.46% of the entire area on the register. The breakdown of Areas 1-7 in relation to the HLCAs is set out below:

Development Area Total Area (km2) Area (km2) in HLCAs

Area 1 0.36 0.36 in HLCA003

Area 2 0.86 0.76 in HLCA004, 0.1 in HLCA008

Area 3 0.55 0.55 in HLCA004


Area 5 0.45 0.45 in HLCA001

Area 6 0.16 0.16 in HLCA002


Assessment of direct physical impacts of the development (ASIDOHL2 Stage 2)


ASSESSMENT OF DIRECT, PHYSICAL IMPACTS ON HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA 001

ABSOLUTE IMPACT (LOSS OF AREA)

MAGNITUDE & SCORE

1.59km2 of 11.32km2, 14.04% Slight – 2

RELATIVE AND LANDSCAPE IMPACTS (LOSS OF KNOWN CHARACTERISTICS OR ELEMENTS) & SCORES

ELEMENT / % LOSS STATUS MAGNITUDE LANDSCAPE VALUE LANDSCAPE VALUE EFFECT

Drainage features (reens, banks, grips, surface drainage, bridges) – less than 14%

B - 3 Slight – 2 High –highly coherent water management system

– 5

Considerably reduced – 4

Small irregularly shaped fields – less than 14%

C – 2 Slight – 2 High – well preserved relict field system – 5


OVERALL MAGNITUDE OF DIRECT PHYSICAL IMPACTS ON HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA 001

SCORE GRADING 16 Considerable


36




MAGNITUDE & SCORE

0.69km2 of 1.72km2, 40.12% Considerable – 4



Well preserved drainage features (reens, banks and surface drainage) – less than 35%

B - 3 Considerable – 4 High –highly coherent water management system

– 5


Rectilinear field pattern arranged in blocks – less than 35%

C – 2 Considerable – 4 High – well preserved relict field system – 5



SCORE GRADING 20 Severe

Whitson (HLCA003)



MAGNITUDE & SCORE

0.36km2 of 1.81km2, 19.89% Moderate – 3



Drainage features (reens, banks and ridging/surface drainage, including Monksditch) – less than 20%

B - 3 Moderate – 2 High –highly coherent water management system

– 5


Long narrow fields – less than 20%

C – 2 Moderate– 2 High – well preserved relict field system – 5





37

Porton (HLCA004)



MAGNITUDE & SCORE

1.31km2 of 2.49km2, 52.61% Severe – 5



Drainage features (reens surface drainage, grip system) – less than 50%

B - 3 Considerable – 4 High –highly coherent water management system

– 5

Substantially reduced – 5

Rectangular fields in planned grid of roads– less than 50%

C – 2 Considerable – 4 High – well preserved relict field system – 5







MAGNITUDE & SCORE

1.29km2 of 1.96km2, 65.82% Severe– 5



Drainage features (reens, ridging/surface drainage, bridges, medieval drainage channels) – less than 65%

B - 3 Severe – 5 High –highly coherent water management system

– 5


Regular field pattern of large rectangular fields – less than 65%

C – 2 Severe – 5 High – well preserved relict field system – 5





38




MAGNITUDE & SCORE

0.6km2 of 2.58km2, 23.26% Moderate – 3



Drainage features (reens, ridging/surface drainage, grip system) – less than 20%

B - 3 Moderate – 3 High –highly coherent water management system

– 5

Moderately reduced – 3

Regular field pattern– less than 20%

C – 2 Moderate – 3 High – well preserved relict field system – 5

Moderately reduced – 3




39

4.3 Assessment of indirect impacts on the historic landscape by the proposed development (ASIDOHL2 Stage 3) The development has the potential to indirectly affect the eight HLCAs listed in section 4.1. The magnitude of the indirect impact has been calculated through the use of contour mapping, complemented by field visits to each landscape area, taking into consideration the existing vegetation cover and landform (see Figure 11).

It is considered that the development will have no permanent indirect physical impact on any of these HLCAs. Therefore the first part of Stage 3: assessment of indirect, physical impacts, has not been carried out.

Assessment of indirect visual impacts of the development (ASIDOHL2 Stage 3b)

The proposed development has the potential to indirectly affect eight Historic Landscape Character Areas, Nash/Goldcliff Coastal Zone (HLCA001), Christchurch/Nash/Whitson Back-Fen (HLCA002), Whitson (HLCA003), Porton (HLCA004), Redwick/Magor/Undy (HLCA006), Redwick Broadmead (007), Northern Redwick (HLCA008) and Green Moor (HLCA009).


ASSESSMENT OF INDIRECT, VISUAL IMPACTS ON HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA 001

IMPACTS STATUS & SCORE MAGNITUDE & SCORE

View to HLCA002 partially altered C – 2 Moderate – 3

View to HLCA003 partially altered B – 3 Moderate – 3

View to HLCA004 partially altered B – 3 Slight – 2

View to HLCA008 partially altered C – 2 Very Slight – 1

View from Goldcliff Moated House Site (MM092/307860/00273g) altered

A – 4 Severe – 5

View from St Mary Magdelene's Church (LB2912/307350/00274g) partially altered

A – 4 Very Slight – 1

View to HLCA001 from Whitson Court (LB2944/21147/00271g)

A – 4 Considerable – 4

View to HLCA001 from Whitson Lodge (LB2946/21148/03832g)

B – 3 Slight – 2

View from Great Newra Farm (LB17538/00269g) and Great Newra Barn (LB17539) partially altered

B – 3 Considerable – 4

Development form (average value of element sensitivity) 3 Considerable – 4

Development appearance (average value of element sensitivity)

3 Slight – 2

OVERALL MAGNITUDE OF INDIRECT VISUAL IMPACTS ON HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA 001

AVERAGE SCORE: 5.91


40

OVERALL MAGNITUDE OF INDIRECT IMPACTS ON HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA 001

TOTAL SCORE ON 28 POINT SCALE GRADING(5.91 + 0 = 5.91): 5.91 x 28 = 8.27 = 8 20

Slight




View to HLCA001 partially altered B – 3 Severe – 5

View to HLCA003 partially altered B – 3 Considerable – 4



3 Slight – 2


AVERAGE SCORE: 6.75


TOTAL SCORE ON 28 POINT SCALE GRADING (6.75 + 0 = 6.75): 6.75 x 28 = 9.45 = 9 20

Moderate

Whitson (HLCA003)



View to HLCA001 partially altered B – 3 Slight – 2


View to HLCA004 partially altered B – 3 Very Slight – 1


View from Whitson Court (LB2944/21147/00271g) A – 4 Slight – 2

View from Whitson Lodge (LB2946/21148/03832g) B – 3 Very Slight – 1



3 Slight – 2


41


AVERAGE SCORE: 4.63



Slight

Porton (HLCA004)






View from St Marys Church (LB2943/307461/307381/03834g) and Whitson Churchyard (08266g) partially altered

B – 3 Very Slight – 1

View from Little Portion Cottage (LB3065/45058/00282g) and Little Portion Byre (LB3066/43266/00283g) partially altered




3 Slight – 2


AVERAGE SCORE: 4.43



Slight


42

Redwick (HLCA006)




View to HLCA008 partially altered C – 2 Considerable – 4

View from Brickhouse (LB3060/36493/ 02977g) partially altered




3 Slight – 2


AVERAGE SCORE: 6


TOTAL SCORE ON 28 POINT SCALE GRADING (6 + 0 = 6): 6 x 28 = 8.4 = 8 20

Slight


43





View to HLCA008 partially altered C – 2 Severe – 5



3 Slight – 2


AVERAGE SCORE: 6.75



Moderate







View from Moated site east of Grangefield Farm (MM205/406/54452/02313g) and Lontre Tunbwlch (08355g) partially altered

A – 4 Severe – 5



3 Slight – 2


AVERAGE SCORE: 6.17



Moderate


44







2 Slight – 2


AVERAGE SCORE: 4.33



Slight


45

SUMMARY OF OVERALL MAGNITUDE OF DIRECT IMPACT ON HISTORIC CHARACTER AREAS

IMPACT AREA SCORE MAGNITUDE HLCA001 16 Considerable HLCA002 20 Severe HLCA003 17 Considerable HLCA004 22 Severe HLCA007 23 Severe HLCA008 17 Considerable

ABSOLUTE OVERALL MAGNITUDE OF INDIRECT IMPACT ON COMBINED HISTORIC CHARACTER AREAS

IMPACT AVERAGE SCORE ON SCALE OF 28

MAGNITUDE

Combined HLCAs 19.17 Severe

SUMMARY OF OVERALL MAGNITUDE OF INDIRECT IMPACT ON HISTORIC CHARACTER AREAS

IMPACT AREA SCORE MAGNITUDE HLCA001 8 Slight HLCA002 9 Moderate HLCA003 6 Slight HLCA004 6 Slight HLCA006 8 Slight HLCA007 9 Moderate HLCA008 9 Moderate HLCA009 6 Slight

ABSOLUTE OVERALL MAGNITUDE OF INDIRECT IMPACT ON COMBINED HISTORIC CHARACTER AREAS

IMPACT AVERAGE SCORE ON SCALE OF 28

MAGNITUDE

Combined HLCAs 7.6=8 Slight


46

4.4 Evaluation of relative importance (ASIDOHL2 Stage 4)

By its place in the Register, the Gwent Levels Historic Landscapes (HLW (Gt) 1), is considered to be an outstanding landscapes in its entirety. The evaluation of the character areas in a national context therefore ‘should not be regarded as down grading of certain areas: it is simply acknowledging that within a landscape that is all of national importance, some areas, characteristics, or elements may well be of greater value than others’.

The guidelines for the evaluation of relative importance, stage 4 of the ASIDOHL2 process, are summarised above. Stage 4 is concerned with evaluating the relative importance of the part of each HLCA directly or indirectly affected by the development, in relation to:

(a) the whole of the HLCA

(b) the whole of the Historic Landscape

followed by an evaluation of:

(c) the relative importance of the HLCA within the national context

The criteria used to determine the relative importance, or value, of the historic character areas affected by the development are those established in the ‘Guide To Good Practice’; these are based on the following:

Rarity

Representativeness

Documentation

Group Value

Survival

Condition

Coherence

Potential

Integrity

Amenity

Associations


47

Criteria values in steps (a), (b) and (c) are scored as follows:

ASIDOHL2 STAGE 4: EVALUATION SCORES

CRITERION VALUE SCORE

Very High/Good 5

High/Good 4

Moderate/Medium 3

Low 2

Very Low/Poor 1

Gwent Levels Historic Landscapes (HLW (Gt) 1)

Evaluation of the Relative Importance of the Part of Historic Character Area 001 Affected by the Development in Relation to: (a) the Whole of the Historic Character Area, and (b) the Whole of the Historic Landscape Area on the Register

EVALUATION OF THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE PART OF HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA 001 AFFECTED BY DEVELOPMENT

VALUE VERY HIGH/V. GOOD

HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

in relation to: (a) WHOLE OF HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA

(b) WHOLE OF HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AREA ON THE REGISTER

RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS

DOCUMENTATION GROUP VALUE SURVIVAL

CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY

POTENTIAL AMENITY ASSOCIATIONS

RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE PART OF HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA 001 AFFECTED BY DEVELOPMENT

Average score (a) out of 55

Average score (b) out of 55 Average of (a) and (b)

34 31 32.5


48




HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR



RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS


CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY





30 25 27.5


49




HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR



RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS


CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY





33 30 31.5


50




HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR



RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS


CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY





32 30 31


51




HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR



RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS


CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY





29 34 31.5


52




HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR



RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS


CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY





33 34 33.5


53




HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR



RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS


CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY





30 25 27.5


54




HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR



RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS


CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY





29 28 28.5


55

Evaluation of the Relative Importance in the National Context, of the Historic Character Areas Directly and/or Indirectly Affected by the Development

EVALUATION OF THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE IN THE NATIONAL CONTEXT OF THE HISTORIC CHARACTER AREAS DIRECTLY

AND/OR INDIRECTLY AFFECTED BY DEVELOPMENT VALUE VERY

HIGH/V. GOOD

HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

in relation to: HLCA001 HLCA002

RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS


CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY


RELATIVE IMPORTANCE IN THE NATIONAL CONTEXT OF THE HISTORIC CHARACTER AREAS DIRECTLY AND/OR INDIRECTLY

AFFECTED BY DEVELOPMENT Average score for HLCA001 out of 55 Average score for HLCA002 out of 55 30 24


56




HIGH/V. GOOD

HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR


RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS


CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY





57




HIGH/V. GOOD

HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR


RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS

DOCUMENTATION

GROUP VALUE

SURVIVAL

CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY





58




HIGH/V. GOOD

HIGH

/GOOD

MOD./MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR

VERY HIGH/V.GOOD

HIGH / GOOD

MOD. / MED.

LOW

VERY LOW/ POOR


RARITY

REPRESENTATIVE-NESS


CONDITION

COHERENCE

INTEGRITY





59

SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OVERALL VALUES FOR HISTORIC CHARACTER AREAS AFFECTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT

Historic Character Area Average value converted to a scale of 1-100 HLCA001 57.58 HLCA002 47.88HLCA003 56.37HLCA004 55.15 HLCA006 53.94 HLCA007 59.39 HLCA008 48.48 HLCA009 50.91

Average Overall value, or combined evaluation figure for stage 4 Average overall value Grading53.71 Considerable


60

4.5 Assessment of the overall significance of the impact of the development (ASIDOHL2 Stage 5)

This section assesses the overall significance of impact of development and the effects that altering the historic character areas concerned will have on the whole of the historic landscape area on the Register. This final stage combines the results of Stages 2 to 4 to produce an assessment of the overall significance of impact of development and the effects that altering the historic character area(s) concerned has on the whole of the historic landscape area on the Register. This is determined by setting out and scoring the value of the character area(s) affected in relation to the effect caused by development and the consequent reduction in value of the historic landscape area on the Register. The results are set out in the following tables:

Gwent Levels (HLW (Gt) 1)

ASIDOHL2 STAGE 5: SUMMARY OF THE OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT ON LANDSCAPE OF HISTORIC INTEREST ‘HLCA 001’

VALUE OF CHARACTER AREA

(Based on STAGE 4 results)

IMPACT CAUSED BY DEVELOPMENT

(Based on STAGES 2 & 3 results)

REDUCTION OF VALUE OF HISTORIC LANDSCAPE AREA

ON REGISTER

Very high Key elements of very high intrinsic importance and/or condition and/or group value and/or not found elsewhere in this or other historic landscape areas on the Register SCORE: 9

Medium Moderate land loss and consequent fragmentation and/or visual intrusion causing some key elements to be removed or changed so that group value and/or coherence and/or integrity are diminished, and/or amenity value reduced. SCORE: 5

Medium Development impact on key elements is such that there is some, but still appreciable, reduction in the overall value of the historic landscape area on the Register. SCORE: 6

TOTAL SCORE: 20

OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Fairly Severe


61







ON REGISTER

Medium Key elements of varying intrinsic importance and/or condition and/or group value and/or generally typical of this or other historic landscape areas on the Register SCORE: 6

Very High Critical land loss and consequent fragmentation and/or visual intrusion causing key elements to be removed or so changed that detailed descriptions no longer apply, and/or amenity value is totally lost. SCORE: 9

High Development impact on key elements is such that the overall value of the historic landscape area on the Register is significantly reduced.. SCORE: 8

TOTAL SCORE: 23

OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Severe







ON REGISTER

High Key elements of high intrinsic importance and/or condition and/or group value, and/or of uncommon elsewhere in this or other historic landscape areas on the Register. SCORE: 8

Medium Moderate land loss and consequent fragmentation and/or visual intrusion causing some key elements to be removed or changed so that group value and/or coherence and/or integrity are diminished, and/or amenity value reduced. SCORE: 6


TOTAL SCORE: 21



62







ON REGISTER


High Substantial land loss and consequent fragmentation and/or visual intrusion causing key elements to be removed or changed so that group value and/or coherence and/or integrity are significantly diminished, and/or amenity value greatly reduced. SCORE: 8


TOTAL SCORE: 24








ON REGISTER


Low Slight land loss and consequent fragmentation and/or visual intrusion causing limited numbers of key elements to be removed or changed so that group value and/or coherence and/or integrity are slightly diminished, and/or amenity value slightly reduced. SCORE: 3

Low Development impact on key elements is such that there is a slight reduction in the overall value of the historic landscape area on the Register. SCORE: 3

TOTAL SCORE: 14

OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Moderate


63







ON REGISTER


Very High Critical land loss and consequent fragmentation and/or visual intrusion causing key elements to be removed or so changed that detailed descriptions no longer apply, and/or amenity value is totally lost. SCORE: 9


TOTAL SCORE: 25








ON REGISTER

Medium Key elements of varying intrinsic importance and/or condition and/or group value and/or generally typical of this or other historic landscape areas on the Register SCORE: 6


Medium Development impact on key elements is such that there is some, but still appreciable, reduction in the overall value of the historic landscape area on the Register. SCORE: 6

TOTAL SCORE: 20

OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Fairly Severe


64







ON REGISTER


Very Low Marginal land loss and consequent fragmentation and/or visual intrusion causing negligible changes to elements and their values. SCORE: 1

Very Low Development impact on key elements is such that the value of the historic landscape area on the Register remains essentially unchanged. SCORE: 1

TOTAL SCORE: 10

OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Moderate

ASIDOHL2 STAGE 5: SUMMARY OF THE OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE GWENT LEVELS

LANDSCAPE OF OUTSTANDING HISTORIC INTEREST VALUE OF COMBINED CHARACTER AREAS





ON REGISTER




TOTAL SCORE: 21


Summary of loss through development impact

The development will have a direct impact on six Historic Landscape Character Areas (HLCAs), and an indirect, visual impact on eight HLCAs of the Registered Gwent Levels Landscape.

It is considered that the development will have a ‘Severe’ overall impact on four HLCAs, a ‘Fairly Severe’ overall impact on two HLCAs and a ‘Moderate’ overall impact on two HLCAs. The overall impact on the Gwent Levels Historic Landscape is considered to be ‘Severe’.


65

5 ASIDOHL2 Concluding Statement

The ASIDOHL2 process has assessed the impacts of the development as currently proposed on the historic landscapes as they presently stand, and based on existing knowledge.

The overall significance of the impact of the Solar Site development on the Gwent Levels (HLW (Gt) 1) landscape of outstanding historic interest is considered to be ‘Severe’. There will be a direct physical impact on six Historic Landscape Character Areas and an indirect, visual impact on eight HLCAs. It is considered that the development will have no permanent indirect physical impact on any of the Character Areas within the Historic Landscape.

It is considered that the overall effect of the development can be mitigated by the use of appropriate screening measures to limit the visual impact of the development. This will reduce the visual impact on both the settings and view shares of sites of national and regional importance, as well as the HLCAs themselves. It should also be noted that a number of the buildings within the Historic Landscape have existing solar panels, thereby partially reducing the inherent visual intrusion.

It is also important to note that the indirect visual effect of the development will be transitory in nature, with the majority of solar sites having an economic lifetime of less than 25 years.

Additionally the sympathetic placement of individual units within the development, so as to avoid unnecessary damage to inherent landscape characteristics, will reduce the direct physical impact of the development. This is in addition to the watching brief, hedgerow survey and earthwork survey recommended by the accompanying desk-based assessment (Sherman 2015).


66

References

Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS, 1998, Register of landscapes of outstanding historic interest in Wales, Cadw

Cadw/CCW/ICOMOS, 2001, Register of landscapes of special historic interest in Wales, Cadw

Cadw/CCW/Welsh Assembly, 2007, Guide to good practice on using the register of landscapes of historic interest in Wales in the planning and development process: revised (2nd) edition including revisions to the assessment process (ASIDOHL2), Cadw

Sherman A, 2015, Solar Site, Llanwern, Newport: archaeological desk-based assessment, GGAT Report no. 2015/017

Welsh Assembly 2002, Planning Policy Wales, Welsh Assembly


67

Appendix I

Historic Landscape Characterisation

The historic characterisation for the Gwent Levels (HLW (Gt) 1) Historic Landscape can be found at:

http://www.ggat.org.uk/cadw/historic_landscape/Gwent%20Levels/English/GL_Main.htm. Accessed on 2nd March 2015.


68

Appendix II

Photographic Catalogue

Plate 1. View to the west of Goldcliff Moated Site (MM092/307860/00273g)

(NGR ST 36218 83514)

Plate 2. View to the southeast of Moated site east of Grangefield Farm

(MM205/406/54452/02313g) (NGR ST 38950 84960)


69

Plate 3. View to the southeast of Development Area 1

(NGR ST 37207 85289)

Plate 4. View to the southwest of Development Area 2

(NGR ST 38845 84986)


70

Plate 5. View to the east of Development Area 4

(NGR ST 36167 83792)

Plate 6. View to the southeast of Development Area 4

(NGR ST 36258 84682)


71

Plate 7. View to the northeast of Development Area 6

(NGR ST 35379 84535)

Plate 8. View to the southwest of Development Area 6

(NGR ST 35379 84535)


72

Plate 9. View to the south of HLCA002

(NGR ST 36108 85203)

Plate 10. View to the north of HLCA003

(NGR ST 36108 85203)


73

Plate 11. View to the east of HLCA004

(NGR ST 38430 83262)

Plate 12. View to the northwest of HLCA006

(NGR ST 41075 84104)


74

Plate 13. View to the southeast of HLCA008

(NGR ST 39345 85411)

Plate 14. View to the northwest of HLCA009

(NGR ST 39345 85411)


N

GRID

0 1.00 2.00km

Figure 11. Location of development areas (red), HLCAs (blue) and Plates 1-14 (green)


75

HLCA001

HLCA002

HLCA003

HLCA004

HLCA007

HLCA008

Area 1

Area 3

Area 2

Area 5

Area 4

Area 6

Area 7

HLCA009

Plate 1

Plate 2

Plate 3

Plate 4

Plate 5

Plate 6

Plate 7

Plate 8

Plate 9

Plate 10

Plate 11

HLCA006

Plate 12

Plates 13-14

Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust Ltd

(Projects Division)

Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust Ltd. Heathfield House, Heathfield, Swansea, SA1 6LE Tel. 01792 655208; Fax. 01792 474469 Registered Charity no. 505609 Web: www.ggat.org.uk e-mail: [email protected]

QUALITY CONTROL Report Title: Solar Site, Llanwern, Newport Report Date: March 2015 Report Number: 2015/016 Report prepared by: Rob Dunning Position: Project Manager Date: 06/03/15 Illustrations prepared by: Charlotte James-Martin Position: Assistant Project Officer Date: 06/03/15 Illustrations checked and authorised by: Richard Lewis Position: Head of Projects Date: 06/03/15 Report checked by: Richard Lewis Position: Head of Projects Date: 06/03/15 Report checked and authorised by: Richard Lewis Position: Head of Projects Date: 06/03/15 As part of our desire to provide a quality service we would welcome any comments you may wish to make on the content or presentation of this report.

solar site, llanwern, newport - gov.uk...hlca is a discrete entity, defined according to...

Documents