ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT SCOPING REPORT · 1.12 Specifically, this Scoping Report sets out the views of the Applicant, as to the proposed scope of the environmental issues

JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499

Pegasus Group

Colmore Place | 39 Bennetts Hill | Birmingham | B2 5SN

T 0121 308 9570 | F 0121 323 2215 | W www.pegasusgroup.co.uk

Birmingham | Bracknell | Bristol | Cambridge | Cirencester | East Midlands | Leeds | Liverpool | London | Manchester ©Copyright Pegasus Planning Group Limited 2011. The contents of this document must not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part

without the written consent of Pegasus Planning Group Limited

LAND AT OVERSTONE GREEN, DAVENTRY

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT SCOPING REPORT

ON BEHALF OF GALLAGHER ESTATES AND DAVIDSONS GROUP

http://www.pegasusgroup.co.uk/

Gallagher Estates and Davidsons Group Overstone Green Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping Report

JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 1

CONTENTS:

1 INTRODUCTION 2

2 THE APPLICATION SITE AND PROJECT OVERVIEW 6

3 LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS AND THE EIA PROCESS 8

4 PROPOSED SCOPE OF THE EIA AND ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT CHAPTERS 14

5 TOPICS PROPOSED TO BE SCOPED OUT AND NOT INCLUDED WITHIN THE

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT 57

6 STRUCTURE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT 59

APPENDICES:

APPENDIX A - APPLICATION SITE LOCATION PLAN

APPENDIX B - SCHEDULE 4 OF 2017 EIA REGULATIONS

APPENDIX C - LANDSCAPE SCOPING REPORT

APPENDIX D - TECHNICAL BRIEFING NOTE: ECOLOGY INPUT INTO ES SCOPING


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 2

1 Introduction

1.1 This Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping Report has been prepared on

behalf of Gallagher Estates and Davidsons Group (the “Applicants”) in respect of

land at Overstone Green, Daventry (the “Application Site”) on which it is proposed

to submit an outline planning application for residential development comprising

circa 1,600 dwellings, up to 3 hectares of employment land (including a local

centre), a primary school and associated infrastructure with access off the A43

Overstone Road (the “Proposed Development”). The location and extent of the site

are shown the Location Plan at Appendix A.

1.2 An application for planning permission will be submitted to Daventry District

Council in due course and this Scoping Report has been prepared to accompany a

formal EIA Scoping Request to the authorities under Regulation 15 of the Town and

Country Planning (EIA) Regulations 2017.

1.3 The Applicant has appointed a team of specialist consultants to consider planning

and environmental matters in relation to the Proposed Development and to provide

input into the production of this Scoping Report, as listed below.

Table 1.1 Consultant Team

Topic Consultant

Planning Pegasus Group

(Planning)

Landscape Golby & Luck

Ecology & Nature Conservation Aspect Ecology

Archaeology and Built Heritage Pegasus Group

(Heritage)

Transport and Access Jubb

Air Air Quality

Consultants

Noise Jubb

Flood Risk and Drainage Jubb

Ground Conditions and Contamination Jubb

Agricultural Land Assessment Land Research

Associates

1.4 The Scoping Report has been produced on behalf of Gallagher Estates and

Davidsons Group by Pegasus Group. Pegasus is registered to the EIA Quality Mark,

a scheme operated by the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment

(IEMA) which allows consultancies that lead the co-ordination of statutory EIAs in


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 3

the UK to make a commitment to excellence in their EIA activities and have this

commitment independently reviewed.

Requirements of an Environmental Statement

1.5 EIA is a process for identifying the likely significant environmental effects

(beneficial and adverse) of proposed developments before development consent is

granted.

1.6 The purpose of the EIA is to establish the nature of the existing Application Site

and its surroundings (i.e. baseline) and the nature of the Proposed Development,

and compare the baseline with the situation once the proposals are in place, so to

identify the likely significant effects that may arise as a result. This requires

consideration of effects during construction, including any demolition or enabling

works, and effects once operational. Information required to be included within an

ES in accordance with Schedule 4 of the EIA Regulations is described in Appendix

B. The document produced as a result of the EIA process is known as the

Environmental Statement (ES).

1.7 The EIA Regulations require that any Proposed Development falling within the

description of a ‘Schedule 2 Development’ within the meaning of the Regulations,

may be subject to an EIA where such development is likely to have ‘significant’

effects on the environment by virtue of factors such as its nature, size or location

(Regulation 2b).

1.8 The proposed development is defined as an urban development project under

Column 1 of Schedule 2 10 b); the development includes more than 150 dwellings

and; the overall area of the development exceeds the 5-hectare threshold, under

Column 2. The proposal therefore requires screening by the Local Planning

Authority to determine whether significant effects are likely and hence whether EIA

is required.

1.9 Having regard to the Application Site and the nature of the Proposed Development,

in the context of the above it is considered the proposals may lead to likely

significant effects on the environment. The applicant therefore intends to submit an

ES in support of a future planning application, the content or ‘scope’ of which is set

out and discussed throughout this document.

Purpose of the Scoping Report


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 4

1.10 This Scoping Report has been prepared to accompany a formal EIA Scoping

Request under Regulation 15 of the Town and Country Planning (EIA) Regulations

2017. The purpose of the Scoping Request is to seek a formal view from Daventry

District Council (and other consultees where relevant) on the information to be

contained within the Environmental Statement (ES) which will accompany a

forthcoming planning application on the above Application Site.

1.11 In accordance with Regulation 15 of the EIA Regulations 2017, paragraph 2, this

Scoping Report contains:

• “A plan sufficient to identify the land;

• A brief description of the nature and purpose of the development on the

environment;

• An explanation of the likely significant effects of the development on the

environment; and

• Such other information or representations as the person making the request

may wish to provide or make.”

1.12 Specifically, this Scoping Report sets out the views of the Applicant, as to the

proposed scope of the environmental issues to be considered in the EIA and as to

the method by which assessment will be undertaken. In particular, this scoping

report reviews existing data and identifies sensitive receptors as far as can be

identified at this stage, so to determine an appropriate scope.

1.13 We welcome comment on the proposed scope and contents of the ES from the

local planning authorities and it is anticipated that they will invite statutory and

other consultees that they wish to nominate to also comment, in accordance with

Regulation 15. It is considered that these consultees are likely to include:

• Environment Agency

• Natural England

• Highways England

• Heritage England

• Local Authority departments such as Environmental Health

1.14 This consultation will also include any other consultation bodies that the Planning

Authorities nominate.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 5

1.15 It is requested that the Applicant is informed of those consultees which are notified

of this Scoping Request.

Structure of Report

1.16 The remainder of this EIA Scoping Report is divided into the following Sections:

Section 2: The Application Site and Project Overview

An overview of the Application Site and the Proposed Development.

Section 3: Legislative Requirements and the EIA Process

A summary of the relevant EIA legislation and EIA process which

will be undertaken.

Section 4: Proposed Scope of the Environmental Statement (ES)

Individual discussions on each topic to be assessed within the ES,

including information regarding specific methodology.

Section 5: Topics proposed to be Scoped Out of the ES

Each environmental topic not proposed to be considered in the ES

is discussed in turn.

Section 6: Structure of the ES

The structure and format of the ES document is outlined.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 6

2 The Application Site and Project Overview

Application Site

Background

2.1 The Application Site forms part of the Northampton North Sustainable Urban

Extension (SUE) allocation under Policy N3 of the West Northamptonshire Joint

Core Strategy (December 2014). This allocation makes provision for the

development of circa 3,500 dwellings; primary school provision; 10ha of land

providing local employment opportunities; at least one local centre including small

scale retail facilities and community and healthcare facilities; and provision of a

local multi-modal interchange alongside integrated transport, greenspace and sport

and leisure provision.

2.2 Land forming the southern part of the allocation (Overstone Leys) was granted

outline planning permission on 27th August 2015 for 2,000 houses (with access,

appearance, layout and scale unreserved for the first phase of development,

comprising 200 dwellings), alongside a new local centre, foodstore, a new section

of the A43 dual carriageway, public house, care home, day nursery, medical

centre, retail units, light industry, primary school, public open space and

associated landscaping and infrastructure (Ref. DA/2013/0850).

2.3 The subject application will represent the balance of the SUE allocation, proposing

the remaining dwellings and associated infrastructure.

Site Setting

2.4 The site extends to approximately 79.5 hectares of farmland extending north-east

from Northampton set between the A43 Kettering Road to the north and

Cowpasture Spinney to the south.

2.5 The site comprises 8no. medium scale geometrically shaped arable fields defined

by native boundary hedgerows and intermittent tree cover.

2.6 Beyond the land-use and associated framework of boundary hedgerows and trees

there is a small collection of farm buildings located towards the northern boundary

of the site that are accessed from Kettering Road via an unmade track. An

overhead electricity line with associated pylons crosses the site from the south-

west to the north-east.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 7

2.7 Beyond the site, local settlement includes the immediately adjoining committed

NNSUE to the south that affords outline planning permission, to the south-east the

linear settlements of Overstone and Sywell, and to the west the larger settlement

of Moulton.

2.8 Wider land uses that are distinct from the otherwise farmed landscape and urban

setting of Northampton include Overstone Park and Golf Course to the south,

Overstone Lakes Holiday Park also to the south, Sywell Reservoir and Sywell

Country Park to the south-east, and Sywell Aerodrome with associated commercial

development to the north-east.

2.9 The site is crossed by public footpath DG2 that connects between Rectory Farm to

the north-west of the site and Sywell Road at Overstone to the south. Footpath

DG1 runs alongside the south-west boundary of the site. Footpath DG3 runs

between Overstone Grange and Moulton on the northside of Kettering Road, and

footpath DG4 provides a short section of path connecting Overstone Grange with

Kettering Road. To the Northamptonshire Round recreation route passes to the

east of the site from Sywell Reservoir heading north to Sywell Wood then west to

Halcot and Pitsford Reservoir. The site itself is maintained as private farmland and

does not provide any public access beyond the designated rights of way.

2.10 The Application Site boundary and context is identified on a figure provided at

Appendix A.

Proposed Development

2.11 The Proposed Development comprises residential development of circa 1,600

dwellings, up to 3 hectares of employment land (including a local centre), a

primary school and associated infrastructure. It is proposed that access to the site

will be obtained via a new roundabout junction onto the A43 Overstone Road.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 8

3 Legislative Requirements and the EIA Process

Legislative Requirements

3.1 The EIA process will be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the

Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017,

which are referred to in this document as the ‘EIA Regulations’. Specifically,

Schedule 4 (Regulation 18 (3)), sets out the information for inclusion in ESs, as

replicated within Appendix B and summarised as follows:

Part 1:

• ‘A description of the development’ - including information on the location of

the development, the physical characteristics of the development, the main

characteristics of the operational phase, and estimate of expected residues

and emissions.

Part 2:

• ‘A description of the reasonable alternatives studied by the developer’ – for

example with regard to development design, technology, location, size and

scale, and an indication of the main reason for selecting the chosen option.

Part 3:

• ‘A description of the relevant aspects of the current state of the environment

(baseline scenario)’- including how the baseline might evolve if the

development were not to proceed.

Part 4:

• ‘A description of the factors specified in regulation 4(2) likely to be

significantly affected by the development’ – including with regard to

population, human health, biodiversity (for example fauna and flora), land

(for example land take), soil (for example organic matter, erosion,

compaction, sealing), water (for example hydromorphological changes,

quantity and quality), air, climate (for example greenhouse gas emissions,

impacts relevant to adaptation), material assets, cultural heritage, including

architectural and archaeological aspects, and landscape.

Part 5:

• ‘A description of the likely significant effects of the development on the

environment’ - including with regard to: construction, existence and

demolition works, the use of natural resources, emission of pollutants and

the disposal of waste, the risks to human helath, cultural heritage or the

environment (for example due to accidents or disasters), cumulative effects


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 9

with other developments, vulnerability with respect to climate change and

the technologies and substances to be used.

• The description of the likely significant effects should cover ‘direct effects

and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, transboundary, short-term,

medium-term and long-term, permanent and temporary, positive and

negative effects of the development’

Part 6:

• ‘A description of the forecasting methods or evidence, used to identify and

assess the significant effects on the environment’ - including details of

difficulties (technical deficiencies or lack of knowledge) encountered

compiling the required information and the main uncertainties involved.

Part 7:

• ‘A description of the measures envisaged to avoid, prevent, reduce or, if

possible, offset any identified significant adverse effects on the environment’

- including where appropriate with regard to: any proposed monitoring

arrangements (for example the preparation of a postproject analysis).

• The description should explain the ‘extent, to which significant adverse

effects on the environment are avoided, prevented, reduced or offset’, and

should cover both the construction and operational phases.

Part 8:

• ‘A description of the expected significant adverse effects of the development

on the environment deriving from the vulnerability of the development to

risks of major accidents and/or disasters which are relevant to the project

concerned’. Where appropriate, this description should include measures

envisaged to prevent or mitigate the significant adverse effects of such

events on the environment and details of the preparedness for and proposed

response to such emergencies.

Part 9:

• ‘A non-technical summary of the information provided under paragraphs 1 to

8’.

Part 10:

• ‘A reference list detailing the sources used for the descriptions and

assessments included in the environmental statement’.

The EIA Process

3.2 Each of the topic areas ‘scoped in’ the EIA, will undergo the following main steps:


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 10

Baseline Studies

3.3 In the case of many of the environmental topics which will be covered in the ES, or

which are proposed to scoped-out of the ES, baseline studies have already been

undertaken, and details of this work, where relevant, are discussed within each

environmental topic within this Report. Baseline conditions will be established

within each of the individual environmental assessments through the use of a

number of sources including, desk top review of existing available data; site

specific survey work; and consultation.

Assessment of Environmental Effects and Evaluation of Significance

3.4 The EIA Regulations require that the ES identifies ‘likely significant effects of the

Proposed Development on the environment’. It is recognised in the EIA Regulations

however that not all environmental effects are significant.

3.5 The evaluation and determination of significant effects will be carried out using

specific criteria defined within each of the technical chapters of the ES. Where

available, published standards and guidelines will be used as the basis for the

significance criteria, along with professional judgement.

3.6 The proposed methodologies for individual environmental topics are discussed in

the subsequent section. However, in many disciplines the following basic approach

is utilised:

• The sensitivity of the receiving environmental receptor is evaluated using

defined criteria.

• The nature of the impact is established in terms of its duration, extent,

frequency, likelihood of occurrence, reversibility, and compliance with

recognised standards;

• The magnitude of the impact is determined. The magnitude of change is a

consideration of how much the impact alters the baseline condition.

• The significance of the effect is determined by cross referencing the

sensitivity of the receptor with the magnitude of change on the receptor.

3.7 It should be noted that environmental effects may be direct or indirect, secondary,

cumulative, transboundary, short, medium, long-term, permanent and temporary,

positive and negative effects of the development and this will be noted in the ES.

Effects will be considered both during the construction phase, when the


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 11

development is being built (often temporary effects) and following completion of

the development (often permanent effects). Given the nature and intended

longevity of the Proposed Development’s operational life, decommissioning is not

appropriate to consider. Accordingly, the ES will focus on the potential likely

significant effects during the construction and operational phases only.

Consideration will however be given to effects from major accidents and disasters

where relevant.

Mitigation Measures and Residual Effects

3.8 Following the assessment of effects, mitigation measures to reduce and avoid

these effects will be identified and detailed. Mitigation measures considered may

include modification of the proposals, integral mitigation, or secondary measures.

Any residual effects following the implementation of mitigation measures will be

determined accordingly. The residual effects represent the overall likely significant

effect of the Proposed Development on the environment having taken account of

practicable/ available mitigation measures.

Cumulative and In-combination Effects

3.9 The ES will respond to the requirement in the Regulations to assess the cumulative

effects of the Proposed Development which will specifically consider two types of

effect:

• Intra-project Cumulative Effects: The combined effect of individual effects

(for example noise, airborne dust or traffic) on a single receptor where

deemed potentially significant; and

• Inter-project Cumulative Effects: The combined effects of development

schemes which may, on an individual basis be insignificant but,

cumulatively, have significant effect.

3.10 With respect to inter-project cumulative effects, the Regulations state that

consideration should be given to “other existing and/ or approved projects”

(Schedule 4, 5e). This is further supported by the National Planning Policy

Guidance (NPPG) which states “There are occasions...when other existing or

approved development may be relevant in determining whether significant effects

are likely as a consequence of a proposed development.” (Paragraph: 024

Reference ID: 4-024-20170728)


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 12

3.11 Regard will therefore be had to “existing and/ or approved projects”, which

alongside the development of the proposals at the Application Site, could

potentially result in cumulative significant effects. From review, this is considered

to include the following, however we would welcome confirmation that this list

includes all necessary schemes deemed relevant to consider:

• Overstone Leys – Hybrid planning application for up to 2,000 dwellings,

including a new local centre, foodstore (up to 2,000m), a new section of

the A43 dual carriageway, public house (up to 600 sqm), care home, day

nursery, medical centre, retail units, light industry, primary school, public

open space and associated landscaping and infrastructure – Application

Ref. DA/2013/0850 (approved 27th August 2015).

• Land off Sandy Hill Lane - Outline application for up to 85 dwellings,

including affordable housing, access and associated works, open space and

healthcare facility – Application Ref. DA/2013/0686 (approved 27th August

2015).

3.12 The following committed highway schemes will also be factored into an assessment

of cumulative effects:

• Duelling of the A43 north of the Round Spinney Roundabout – An

off-line construction of a realigned A43 dual carriageway between the

Round Spinney Roundabout and the relocated a43/ Overstone road/

Overstone Lane junction, plus continuation of the A43 duelling programme

to extend up to and including the roundabout at Sywell Road/ Holcot Lane.

• A43 Roundabout Junction with Overstone Leys – to south of

application site, implemented to provide Overstone Leys access and

southern Overstone Green access.

3.13 Whilst this report has identified the above schemes, it is to be acknowledged that

the extent to which schemes need to be considered within each environmental

discipline will inevitably vary. We welcome confirmation on the above proposed

approach from the local authority.

Preparation of the ES


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 13

3.14 In accordance with the Regulations, the ES will be prepared by “competent

experts”, as listed at the outset of this report. A statement outlining the relevant

experience of the experts who have undertaken the assessment and drafted the

technical chapters within the ES will be provided. It is also noted the 2017

Regulations now require decision makers to ensure they have ‘necessary skills in

house’.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 14

4 Proposed Scope of The EIA and Environmental Statement Chapters

Environmental Topics

4.1 Table 4.1 lists the environmental topics specified within the EIA Regulations as to

potential be considered as part of the EIA process. The table also summarises

whether these topics are considered relevant to include within the EIA process, and

where such topics will be considered within the ES where applicable. Where a topic

has been scoped out, the reasoning is provided.

Table 4.1: Environmental Topics as per EIA Regulations

EIA Topic Scoped In / Out Where addressed/Reason for

Scoping Out

Population Scoped in To be assessed within the Socio-

economics chapter

Human Health Scoped in To be assessed within various

chapters, including Air Quality, Noise

Environment, Ground Conditions and

Contamination

Biodiversity Scoped in To be assessed within the Ecology

chapter

Land Scoped in To be assessed within the Ground

Conditions and Contamination

chapter

Soil Scoped in To be assessed within the Ground

Conditions and Contamination

chapter

Water Scoped in To be assessed in the Flood Risk and

Drainage chapter, and Ecology

chapter where necessary

Air Scoped in To be assessed within the Air Quality

chapter

Climate Scoped in To be assessed within various

chapters including Air Quality,

Drainage & Flood Risk

Material Assets Scoped out It is not considered there are any

further ‘material assets’ to those

already addressed within other EIA

topics

Cultural Heritage Scoped in To be assessed within with the

Cultural Heritage chapter

Landscape Scoped in To be assessed in the Landscape and

Visual chapter

Interelationship

between above

factors

Scoped in Within each topic chapter under the

heading Cumulative and Interactive

Effects

4.2 In the context of the above environmental topics, it is proposed that the resultant

ES will include the following chapters.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 15

• Introduction

• EIA Scope and Methodology

• Application Site

• Proposed Development and Alternatives

• Landscape and Visual Issues

• Ecology

• Archaeology and Built Heritage

• Transportation and Access

• Air Quality

• Noise and Vibration

• Flood Risk and Drainage

• Ground Conditions and Contamination

• Socio-Economics

• Summary

4.3 The proposed scope of these individual chapters is discussed below.

Introduction

4.4 This chapter of the ES will provide an introduction to the document and present

details of the ES’s structure and context, in addition to how consultees and

members of the public can comment on the document or obtain addition copies.

EIA Scope and Methodology

4.5 This chapter provides a summary of the agreed scope of assessments to be

considered within the ES, with reference to consultation responses and explains the

methodology used to prepare the technical chapters, including reference to the

general approach in determining significance. Information in relation to cumulative

impacts is also set out within this chapter, along with any limitations or

assumptions used throughout the ES.

Application Site

4.6 This chapter will describe the Application Site’s location, context, existing use and

features.

Proposed Development and Alternatives


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 16

4.7 This chapter will provide a comprehensive description of the Proposed

Development, including any relevant details on assumed timescales and phasing.

Development Parameters will be established and assessed alongside the

description.

4.8 The chapter will also provide a description of the reasonable alternatives (for

example in terms of development design, technology, location, size and scale)

studied by the developer, which are relevant, and an indication of the main reasons

for selecting the chosen option, including a comparison of the environmental

effects.

Landscape and Visual

Introduction

4.9 This chapter will consider the effects of the Proposed Development on landscape

character and visual amenity. The full ‘Landscape Scoping Report’ can be found at

Appendix C.

Relevant Policy and Guidance

4.10 In the production of the LVIA the following documents and information will be

considered:

• National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF);

• National Planning Policy Framework (Draft) 2018 (Draft NPPF);

• Daventry District Local Plan (June 1997) Saved September 2007 (Local

Plan);

• West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Local Plan (Part 1) adopted

December 2014 (JCT);

• Natural England Character of England – NCA 89 Northamptonshire Vales;

• Northamptonshire Current Landscape Character Assessment November

2006, and Current Landscape Character Strategy and Guidelines;

• Daventry Landscape Character Assessment 2017;


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 17

• Northampton Landscape Sensitivity and Green Infrastructure Study 2009

(NLGS)

• British Listed Buildings online resource:

(http://www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/map);

• Historic England National Heritage List for England:

(https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list);

• Ordnance Survey information Explorer 1:20,000 and Street Plus 1:10,000;

and

• Google Maps aerial photography.

4.11 The LVIA methodology is based on the following published guidelines:

• Preparation of Environmental Statements for Planning Projects that require

Environmental Assessment - A Good Practice Guide (1999) DETR London,

The Stationery Office;

• Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Assessment 3rd Edition (2013) the

Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Assessment, E and

FN Spon (GLVIA3);

• An approach to Landscape Character Assessment – Natural England

(2014);

• Photography and photomontage in landscape and visual impact

assessment – The Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/11; and

• Visual representation of development proposals – Technical Guidance Note

02/17 (2017);

Baseline Conditions

4.12 In terms of designations, the site is not covered by any statutory or non-statutory

designation that would prohibit its development in accordance with the Joint Core

Strategy allocation. The site is not covered by any landscape designation that

would suggest an increased value or sensitivity to change. The site is also not


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 18

covered by any functional planning designation that would be compromised by

development.

Landscape Character

4.13 At a national level, the site and its local context are identified as being located

within National Character Area (NCA) 89: Northamptonshire Vales.

4.14 At County Level, The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Character Assessment

identifies the southern half of the site as being located within the Rolling Ironstone

Valley Slopes landscape character type (LCT). More specifically, the southern half

of the site is identified within the Moulton Slopes landscape character area (LCA).

The northern half of the site is identified as being located within the Clay Plateau

LCT. More specifically, the northern half of the site is identified within the Sywell

Plateau LCA.

4.15 At a local level, the site has been considered as part of the Daventry Landscape

Character Assessment 2017. The broad LCT area and more considered LCA areas

in this study broadly replicate those identified in the wider County assessment. In

this assessment the southern part of the site is identified within LCT 4 Rolling

Ironstone Valley Slopes and LCA Area 4b Moulton Slopes (assessed as having a

moderate to weak landscape condition). The assessment sets out a landscape

strategy for this area, but it is focussed primarily on the landscapes of Moulton and

Pitsford, and the potential effects of the proposed Northampton Northern Orbital

Route (NNOR). There is no mention of the allocated Northampton North SUE in the

landscape strategy. The very northern extent of the site is located within LCT 5

Clay Plateau and LCA 5b Sywell Plateau (assessed as having a moderate

condition).

4.16 Also, at local level the Northampton Landscape Sensitivity and Green Infrastructure

Study 2009 (LSGI) considered the setting of the site and its associated landscape

sensitivity. The site is identified as being within an area of high-moderate

sensitivity, an assessment similar to much of the wider rural landscape surrounding

Northampton.

4.17 The assessment of landscape effects will consider the findings of these studies

alongside a more detailed assessment of the immediate character of the site. As

part of this study a landscape strategy will be formulated taking into consideration


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 19

primary mitigation measures that will include the type, scale, appearance and

siting of the proposed development and its associated open spaces, and secondary

mitigation measures in the form of structural planting, planting character, and

landscape management. Then assessment will consider the likely effects arising

from the construction process, the operation scheme, and long-term effects (year

15).

Visual Setting

4.18 A Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) plan has been produced as part of the

landscape scoping report. The ZTV plan identifies the theoretical visibility of the

site in its existing state as farmland, and the potential visibility of the development

scenario of up to 10m in height above existing ground levels.

4.19 The ZTV model have been produced in accordance with GLVIA3 guidance adopting

a multiple point assessment using a 50m grid across the study area with an

assumed eyelevel of 1.7m above existing ground level. The ZTV adopts a bare

earth scenario (i.e. does not account for the buffering and screening provided by

features such as buildings, woodland, trees, and hedgerows.

4.20 The ZTV provides the starting point for the identification of representative views in

the field that will be the basis for making judgements against the likely visual

effects arising from the development. It is anticipated that the number and location

of representative views will not be dissimilar to those used in the assessment of

visual effects in the Pegasus LVIA.

4.21 The ZTV shows the likely visual envelope of the site and development being

constrained to the north-west by the ridgeline that separates the local landscape

setting of the site from Pitsford Reservoir beyond. The ZTV identifies possible views

from the ridgelines to the east of Brixworth and south of Walgrave.

4.22 To the south the visual envelope will be restricted by the built-up fringes of

Northampton and Moulton, and further to the south-east by the wooded setting of

Overtone Park. To the eats the ZTV identifies possible views from the ridgelines to

the east and west of Mears Ashby, and to the south-east the fringes of Earls

Barton. In reality these views are likely to be heavily restricted by intervening

vegetation cover.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 20

4.23 To the north and north-east the visual envelope of the site is contained by the local

setting of landform. In reality this will be further reinforced by the large woodland

blocks of Sywell Wood and Hardwick Wood.

4.24 Representative views will be taken from public rights of way, the public highway,

and public access land and assessed against the methodology set out in this

report.

Scope and Methodology of Assessment

Assessment Approach

4.25 The approach to this LVIA comprises the following stages:

• Determining the scope of the assessment;

• A summary of the relevant national and local planning policy, along with

supporting supplementary planning guidance;

• The detailed consideration of the landscape and visual baseline conditions

of the site that includes the identification of key resources and receptors

through a combination of the desktop and research and field based survey

work. This in turn results in the determination of value;

• The description of the development proposals;

• The determination of the susceptibility of each land and visual receptors

that is then combined with the judgement of value to make an overall

assessment of sensitivity.

• The determination of the likely magnitude of change experience by each

receptor;

• The assessment of the likely landscape and visual effects of the proposed

development when assessed against the baseline of the approved

development;

• The identification of measures that seek to avoid, remedy or compensate

any likely significant adverse effects (mitigation measures);


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 21

• The subsequent reassessment of any residual effects of development

specifically highlighting any remaining significant effects; and

• The consideration of any cumulative effect arising from developments in

the locality of the site likely to further influence any change on the

landscape and visual resource within the study area.

4.26 The assessment of landscape and visual effects is set out as a series of transparent

and balanced professional judgements that follow three specific stages:

• The evaluation of the sensitivity of the landscape and visual receptors.

This process considers both the susceptibility of the receptor to the

proposed change and the perceived value of each receptor;

• The identification of the extent of physical change to the existing

landscape resource, to landscape character, and to the visual setting of

the site; and

• The combined assessment of the nature of receptor (sensitivity) and the

nature of the proposed change (magnitude) resulting in a professionally

informed judgement as to the significance of any likely impacts.

Scoping and Consultation

4.27 The following information has been provided for agreement with Daventry District

Council (DDC);

• LVIA methodology;

• Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) setting out the baseline ZTV for the

site, and the ZTV for a development parameter of up to 10m in height;

and

• Broad distribution and location of representative view.

4.28 Further details are set out in the ‘Landscape Scoping Report’.

Assessment of Landscape Effects


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 22

4.29 The initial stage of the assessment of landscape effect is to determine the

susceptibility of the receptor to the proposed change, and an overall assessment of

landscape sensitivity.

4.30 The combined judgements on the nature of the receptor (sensitivity) and the

nature of the impact (magnitude) are combined to arrive at a clear and transparent

judgement of significance. The significance of landscape effects are described in

the assessment text and are guided by the matrix set out below:

MATRIX OF LANDSCAPE SIGNIFICANCE

Magnitude

of Change

Sensitivity

Very High High Medium Low

High Major Major Major-

Moderate

Moderate

Medium Major-

Moderate

Major-

Moderate

Moderate Minor

Low Moderate Moderate Minor Minimal

Negligible Minor Minor Minimal Minimal

4.31 For the purpose of this assessment, effects that are of major and major-moderate

significance (shaded grey in the table) are those considered particularly relevant to

the planning decision making process.

Assessment of Visual Effects

4.32 The initial stage of the assessment of visual effect is to determine the susceptibility

of the receptor to the proposed change, and an overall assessment of landscape

sensitivity.

4.33 The combined judgements on the nature of the receptor (sensitivity) and the

nature of the impact (magnitude) are combined to arrive at a clear and transparent

judgement of significance. The significance of visual effects are described in the

assessment text and are guided by the matrix set out below:


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 23

MATRIX OF SIGNIFICANCE

Magnitude

of Change

Sensitivity

Very High High Medium Low

High Major Major Major-

Moderate

Moderate

Medium Major-

Moderate

Major-

Moderate

Moderate Minor

Low Moderate Moderate Minor Minimal

Negligible Minor Minor Minimal Minimal


significance (shaded grey in the table) are those considered particularly relevant to

the planning decision making process.

Criteria of Other Factors Assessed

4.35 The LVIA will also considers the following aspects;

• Directs and indirect effects – direct effect effects are those directly

attributable to the development. These include changes to features,

character, and views. Indirect effects are those resulting indirectly from

the development. These affects may result as a consequence of direct

effects over distance from the site, or a sequence of change over time or

distance;

• Seasonal variation – due to the role that vegetation can play in

preventing or limiting views, or influencing the character of the landscape,

the difference between winter and summer needs to be considered. This is

considered by assessing winter views (in the first year following

completion) and in summer (after 15 years);

• Beneficial, neutral, or adverse effects - adverse effects are those that

would be damaging to the quality, integrity, or key characteristics of the


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 24

landscape and/or visual resource. Beneficial effects are those that would

result in an improvement in the quality, integrity, or key characteristics of

the landscape and/or visual resource. Neutral effects are those effect that

would maintain, on balance, the existing levels of quality, integrity, or key

characteristics of the landscape and/or visual resource.

Ecology

Introduction

4.36 This chapter of the ES will consider the likely significant ecological effects relating

to the Proposed Development. Likely significant effects on habitats and species

may arise directly from the uses provided both during the construction and

following the completion of the Proposed Development. The ecological technical

note ‘Ecology Input into ES Scoping’ can be found at Appendix D.


4.37 Key ecology legislation, policy and professional best-practice guidance will inform

and guide the assessment works, notably including:

• The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations, 2010 (as amended)

• The Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended)

• The Countryside and Rights of Way Act, 2000

• The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, 2006;

• Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment)

Regulations, 2011;

• The Hedgerows Regulations, 1997;

• The Protection of Badgers Act, 1992;

• The Wild Mammals (Protection) Act, 1996

• National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF); and


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 25

• CIEEM ‘Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United

Kingdom’ (CIEEM, 2016).

Baseline Conditions

4.38 The site has been subject to a desktop study and an extended Phase Habitat

Survey in March 2018 in order to ascertain the general ecological value of the land

contained within the boundaries of the site and to identify the main habitats and

ecological features present. The site was surveyed based on standard Phase 1

Habitat Survey methodology, and extended, in line with the Guidelines for

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal.

4.39 In terms of designations, no statutory designations have been identified within or

adjacent to the site. The nearest statutory designation to the site is Crowfields

Common Local Nature Reserve, located approximately 1.4km from the site, whilst

the nearest European-level designation is the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits

Ramsar and Special Protection Area (SPA), located approximately 7.3km from the

site

4.40 The majority of the site is considered to be of low ecological value, being

dominated by intensively managed arable land. Habitats of elevated value are

present within the site, in the form of hedgerows, trees and the watercourse and

woodland habitats associated with the non-statutory designation, Cowpasture

Spinney Local Wildlife Site (LWS), which is in part located in the east of the site.

4.41 In terms of fauna, the site is considered to provide opportunities for Badger,

roosting bats in buildings and trees, foraging and commuting bats, birds (including

nesting Barn Owl) and reptiles. Specific Phase 2 survey work is therefore proposed

to be undertaken at the site this year during the appropriate seasonal window and

in line with best practice guidance.

Scope and Methodology of Assessment

Evaluation of Ecological Baseline

4.42 The evaluation of ecological features and resources should be based on sound

professional judgement whilst also drawing on the latest available industry

guidance and research. The approach taken will be based on that described in

‘Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland’ published by


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 26

the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) in

2016 whereby important ecological features are identified, and these are

considered within a defined geographical context using the following frame of

reference:

• International;

• National;

• Regional;

• County;

• District;

• Local; or

• Site (not of elevated importance at a local level).

4.43 Features considered to be of importance at the Site level only will be scoped out of

this assessment (with the exception of protected species which are considered in

terms of mitigation and any legislative requirements).

Assessment of Impacts and Significance

4.44 The CIEEM publication ‘Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and

Ireland’ (2016) also sets out a methodology for the assessment of potential effects

arising from development. These methods are followed which can be summarised

as below.

4.45 Using the agreed parameters of the scheme, likely effects are determined with

reference to aspects of the ecological structure and function on which the feature

or resource depends. This includes factors such as the available resources,

ecological processes, human influences, historical context, ecological relationships,

ecological role or function and ecosystem properties. Based on this context, the

nature of the effect is characterised and considered under the following

parameters:

• Positive or negative – will the activity lead to an adverse, beneficial or

neutral effect;


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 27

• Extent – the size or amount of an impact, the area of habitat or number of

individuals affected;

• Duration – the time for which the impact is expected to last prior to

recovery or replacement, i.e. short-term or long-term;

• Reversibility – an effect may be irreversible in that recovery is not possible

within a reasonable timescale or there is no reasonable chance of action

being taken to reverse it, i.e. permanent or temporary; and

• Timing and frequency – some changes may only cause an impact if they

coincide with critical life-stages or seasons, whilst frequent events may

cause a greater effect than a single event.

4.46 Based on these parameters, the scale of effect (or magnitude) can be summarised

as follows. This is in relation to adverse effects, although a similar scale can be

applied to beneficial effects.

Scale of impact Nature of effect

Substantial A permanent or long-term effect on the receptor, which may result in severe damage to key characteristics and implications for the integrity of the receptor or its conservation status.

Moderate Impacts resulting in partial loss of or damage to a receptor, which could have implications for the integrity of the receptor or its conservation status.

Slight Short-term or temporary impacts resulting in only minor loss of or damage to a receptor, unlikely to have implications for the integrity of the receptor or its conservation status.

Negligible No effect or only a short-term reversible impact with no long-term effect on the receptor.

4.47 Based on the nature of the effect, an assessment is then made on whether the

effect on a habitat or species is likely to be ecologically ‘significant’. CIEEM

guidance defines a ‘significant effect’ as “an effect that either support or

undermines biodiversity conservation objectives for ‘important ecological features’

or for biodiversity in general”, going on to state that “significant effects encompass

impacts on structure and function of defined sites, habitats or ecosystems and the

conservation status of habitats and species (including extent, abundance and

distribution).”


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 28

4.48 Significance is also assessed at an appropriate geographic scale. For example, a

significant effect on a Site of Special Scientific interest (SSSI) would be of national

significance. Notwithstanding this however, consideration is also given to whether

an effect is significant at a scale below the geographic context in which the feature

is considered important.

4.49 For some ecological features (notably designations), there may be an existing

statement of the conservation status of a feature and objectives and targets

against which the effect can be judged. For example, Sites of Special Scientific

Interest (SSSI) are assessed under six condition categories, namely favourable,

unfavourable recovering, unfavourable no change, unfavourable declining, part

destroyed, and destroyed. An effect that exerts a change between these condition

categories would be considered as significant.

4.50 Where no existing statement of conservation status is available, an assessment is

made against the existing status and condition of the habitat or species population,

as recorded by survey data and background information, taking into account the

level of ecological resilience or existing conditions that a habitat or species is

currently subject to. An effect resulting in a long-term change to the existing

background population trend or status at a given geographical level would be

considered as significant. In this regard, a significant beneficial impact could be

defined as one that prevents or slows an existing decline in the favourable

conservation status of a habitat or population as much as one that permitted a

population or habitat area to increase.

4.51 The likelihood or uncertainty of an effect occurring as predicted is also considered.

To assist with defining certainty, the following scale is used (with broad confidence

levels indicated):

• Certain/near-certain - probability estimated at 95% chance or higher;

• Probable - probability estimated above 50% but below 95%;

• Unlikely - probability estimated above 5% but less than 50%; or

• Extremely unlikely - probability estimated at less than 5%.

Cultural Heritage


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 29

Introduction

4.52 This section of the Scoping Report addresses the potential for significant effects on

heritage assets including the archaeological resource and built heritage.


4.53 Key heritage statute, policy and professional guidance will inform and guide the

assessment works, notably including:

• The 1979 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979;

• The Planning (Listed buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990;

• The National Planning Policy Framework;

• The National Planning Practice Guide;

• ‘Conservation Principles’ (English Heritage 2008);

• Historic England 2015 ‘Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the

Historic Environment: Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning

2’

• Historic England 2015 ‘The Setting of Heritage Assets’ (Historic Environment

Good Practice Advice in Planning: 3); and

• Chartered Institute for Archaeologists professional guidelines.

Baseline Conditions

Archaeology

4.54 The archaeological potential of the site has previously been considered with

reference to Northamptonshire Historic Environments Record, as well as through

the completion of a detailed magnetometry geophysical survey which covered all

areas of the site suitable for survey, and further land to the north-east.

4.55 The following sites have been identified within the site:

• Geophysical survey anomalies and cropmarks (MNN874, 119533, 119534,

119535) indicating the presence of two enclosures and a roundhouse

gulley in conjunction with other possible features such as pits in the

southern corner of the site. This has been interpreted as a small

unenclosed settlement of Iron Age or Roman date, and unstratified

Roman-British finds have been found in this area (MNN27212). Prehistoric


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 30

funerary activity and undated industrial activity was recorded close to this

area, to the south of the site (MNN1161274, MNN873).

• To the north-east of the first site, also in the southern area of the site,

geophysical survey anomalies suggested the presence of a boundary ditch

with an enclosure to one site. This has also been interpreted as being of

Iron Age or Roman date.

• A large sub-rectangular enclosure was recorded in the geophysical survey

in the north-eastern corner of the site. Prehistoric flintwork has previously

been recorded in this area (MNN21333). This has been interpreted as

prehistoric or Roman in date. Cropmarks had previously been recorded in

this area, but the description does not match well with the anomalies

recorded (MNN21334).

• Two other groups of anomalies indicating possible ditches were recorded in

the central eastern area of the site during the geophysical survey.

4.56 No likely archaeological anomalies were recorded in the area of a third recorded

cropmark site (MNN21335, MNN4450).

4.57 Proposed additional assessment works comprise:

• An updated search of data held at Northamptonshire Historic Environments

Record;

• Review of aerial photographs held by Northamptonshire Historic

Environments Record and Historic England;

• Review of documentary and photographic sources held at

Northamptonshire Archives;

• Additional site visit; and

• Trial trenching to investigate the areas of archaeological potential

identified above.

Built Heritage

4.58 Conservation Areas in the vicinity of the site comprise:


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 31

• Moulton, located approximately 1.4km to the south-west of the site.

• Sywell, located over 1km to the east.

4.59 Listed buildings in the vicinity of the site beyond these Conservation Areas include:

• The Farmhouse at Overstone Grange (Grade II);

• Overstone Old Rectory (Grade II);

• Rectory Farmhouse (Grade II);

• Pytchley Gates (Grade II);

• Holly Lodge Farmhouse (Grade II);

• Overstone Gate (Grade II);

• 102, 104, 106, 108 and 110, Sywell Road (Grade II);

• Church of St Nicholas (Grade II); and

• The Rectory, Sywell (Grade II).

4.60 No Registered Parks and Gardens, Scheduled Monuments or Battlefield are present

in the vicinity of the site.

4.61 The setting of the above assets will be considered with reference to the guidance

given in Historic England’s GPA3 The Setting of Heritage Assets (Second Edition)

2017.

Assessment Methodology

Articulating Value (Significance)

4.62 As defined in the NPPF, significance is ’the value of a heritage asset to this and

future generations because of its heritage interest’. Historic England provides

advice on assessing significance and advocates considering four types of heritage

value: evidential, historical, aesthetic and communal. Significance results from a

combination of any, some or all of these values. These four values essentially cover

the heritage ‘interests’ given in the glossary of NPPF, which comprise

archaeological, architectural, artistic and historic interest.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 32

Setting and Significance

4.63 Setting can contribute to, detract from or be neutral with regards to heritage

values, and so change to setting has the potential to diminish, enhance or leave

unchanged the significance of a heritage asset through change to the value(s).

Levels of Significance

4.64 Significance will be articulated in terms that directly relate to key policy, principally

NPPF. Four levels of significance may be identified:

• Designated heritage assets of the highest significance, as identified in

paragraph 132 of NPPF comprising Grade I and II* Listed buildings; Grade

I and II* Registered Parks and Gardens; Scheduled Monuments; Protected

Wreck Sites and Registered Battlefields (and also including some

Conservation Areas);

• Designated heritage assets of less than the highest significance, as

identified in paragraph 132 of NPPF, comprising Grade II Listed buildings

and Grade II Registered Parks and Gardens (and also some Conservation

Areas);

• Non-designated heritage assets; and

• Sites, buildings or areas which have little or no heritage significance and

thus do not constitute heritage assets.

4.65 Paragraph 139 of NPPF clarifies that ‘Non-designated heritage assets of

archaeological interest that are demonstrably of equivalent significant to scheduled

monuments, should be considered subject to the policies for designated heritage

assets’.

Assessment of significance of effect of development

4.66 The assessment of the significance of effect of development will be articulated in

qualitative terms that directly relate to key policy, principally NPPF. The following

levels of harm may potentially be identified:

• Substantial harm or total loss. It has been clarified in a High Court

Judgement of 2013 that this would be harm that would ‘have such a


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 33

serious impact on the significance of the asset that its significance was

either vitiated altogether or very much reduced’;

• Less than substantial harm. Harm of a lesser level that that defined above;

and

• No harm (preservation). A High Court Judgement of 2014 is relevant to

this, in which it was held that with regard to preserving the setting of

Listed building or preserving the character and appearance of a

Conservation Area, ‘preserving’ means ‘doing no harm’.

4.67 The identification of significant effects in EIA terms will be based on professional

judgement. Substantial harm to a designated heritage asset will be deemed to be a

significant effect. Less than substantial harm to a designated heritage asset, or

substantial harm to a non-designated heritage asset may also represent a

significant effect, determined on the basis of professional judgement. Less than

substantial harm to a non-designated heritage asset does not usually represent a

significant effect in EIA terms.

4.68 Proposed development may also result in benefits to heritage assets, and these will

be articulated in terms of how they enhance the heritage values and hence the

significance of the assets concerned.

Transport and Access

Introduction

4.69 This chapter of the ES will consider the potential effects in the vicinity of the

Application Site which could arise on the transport network and which are

attributable to changes in predicted travel demand associated with the Proposed

Development during both the construction and operational phases.

4.70 Initial consultation has been held with Northamptonshire County Council (NCC)

highways to inform the transportation assessment of the proposals. Further detail

relating to this is outlined below.

Baseline Conditions

Vehicle Links


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 34

4.71 The proposed site is located adjacent to the A43 Kettering Road which runs on a

north south alignment to the western edge of the site. The A43 provides a key link

between Northampton to the south and Kettering approximately 12km north of the

site. In the environs of the proposed site the A43 Kettering Road is single

carriageway and of approximately 7.3m in width (i.e. 3.65m running lanes).

4.72 Presently, vehicular access to the proposed site is provided at three points. Each of

these takes the form of a gated field access, which effectively operate as simple

priority ‘give-way’ junctions. These existing vehicular accesses are located broadly

900m, 1150m and 1450m south of the four-arm roundabout junction between the

A43 Kettering Road, Sywell Road and Holcot Lane.

4.73 The proposed site is well-related to a range of existing and forthcoming facilities

and services in northern Northampton. As the proposed site forms the northern

portion of the NNSUE, it is also located so as to benefit from the range of amenities

that will be delivered within the consented ‘Overstone Leys’ development.

4.74 The accessibility of the proposed site for pedestrians is further enhanced by a

number of Public Rights of Way (PRoW) that run through the surrounding area,

which are discussed below as follows:

• There is a footpath that runs broadly west to east through the site, and

thereafter extends through Cowpasture Spinney to the village of

Overstone

• There is also a footpath that runs along the southern boundary of the

proposed site, effectively bounding the site. This footpath also extends to

the southeast through to the village of Overstone.

• There are also a number of PRoW that extend through the surrounding

countryside, for example to the northwest through to the village of Holcot,

that provide routes for leisure walks.

4.75 Therefore, it is considered that the location of the proposed site presents the

opportunity for journeys, by active modes of travel, to a number of day-to-day

needs.

Cycling


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 35

4.76 Whilst there is no existing cycle-specific infrastructure connecting the proposed site

to the northern edge of Northampton, this is not unexpected given the existing

undeveloped nature of the site.

4.77 Furthermore, as part of the consented ‘Overstone Leys’ development and the A43

Moulton Bypass scheme a number of cycle links will be created, thereby connecting

the proposed site to the existing northern edge of Northampton.

Public Transport

4.78 The closest existing bus stops, located on Sywell Road in Overstone, lie over 1km

from the centre of the site.

4.79 Furthermore, as part of the consented ‘Overstone Leys’ development it is

understood that a comprehensive, sustainable public transport service would be

created to minimise the number of car movements generated by the development.

4.80 Indeed, the TA prepared by PBA in support of the planning application for

‘Overstone Leys’ sets out a bus strategy for the completed development.

4.81 Northampton Railway Station located 9km southwest of the site in central

Northampton offers regular, frequent services towards London (London Euston)

and Birmingham (Birmingham New Street), which allows connection into stations

that sit on the West Coast Main Line and are therefore served by a wider range of

services.

4.82 Table 4.82 below summarises the services that call at Northampton Railway

Station, setting out the approximate frequency and journey time to a selection of

destinations on a typical weekday.

Destination Approximate Journey

Time

Approximate

Frequency

Towards Birmingham

Coventry 35 minutes Every 20 minutes

Birmingham New

Street 65 minutes Every 20 minutes

Towards London

Milton Keynes

Central 15 minutes Every 20 minutes

Watford Junction 45 minutes Every 30 minutes


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 36

London Euston 65 minutes Every 20 minutes

Table 4.82 – Summary of Train Services from Northampton Railway Station


4.83 A detailed Transport Assessment will be submitted with the proposals. Details of

the scope of this Transport Assessment is outlined below.

Access and Parking

4.84 It is proposed that access to the site will be obtained via the A43 Overstone Road.

Appropriate access to the site will therefore be designed which will also consider

the existing dualling provision on this road being delivered to the south as part of

the A43 Moulton Bypass scheme, which has been, in part, facilitated by the nearby

Overstone Leys development proposals.

4.85 Parking will be provided in accordance the guidance as set out with the

Northamptonshire Parking Standard document

Sustainable Modes

4.86 The access strategy proposed will also consider linkages by sustainable modes of

transport both external to the site and within the site itself.

4.87 It is proposed that an accessibility audit be carried out of existing routes to and

from the site. This audit will assess the distances to nearby facilities and will

calculate the associated walking time based on guidance within the “Providing for

Journeys on Foot” document published in 2000 by the Institution of Highways and

Transportation.

4.88 Linkages for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users will also be reviewed

with strategies put forward to enhance connection where appropriate.

4.89 The masterplan of the site will also be developed to ensure accessibility for

pedestrians and cyclists between the residential units and proposed other uses is

maximised thereby encouraging trips to be retained within the site. In addition, the

residential street network of the final scheme will also be designed to be in

accordance with guidance as outlined within Manual for Streets document

published by the Department for Transport in 2007.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 37

4.90 A Travel Plan (TP) will also be submitted with the proposals which will provide

details of sustainable transport measures associated with the site. This TP will be

designed to:

• Raise awareness of sustainable travel;

• Reduce reliance on the private car;

• Discourage unnecessary car journeys; and

• Encourage a modal shift towards walking, cycling and public transport.

Traffic Assessment

4.91 It is noted that NCC have identified that any assessment of traffic impact would

need to use the Northampton Strategic Transport Model (NSTM). Further traffic

surveys have therefore been commissioned at the request of NCC to update the

model where this is required. Details of the junctions that will be surveyed are as

follows:

• A43 / Holcot Lane / Sywell Road – Roundabout

• Holcot Lane / Sywell Road – mini Roundabout

• Sywell Road / Wellingborough Road - Priority Junction

• Webbs Lane / Overstone Road / Ecton Lane / Sywell Road – Priority

Crossroads

• New Road Sywell Road – Priority junction

• Sywell Road / Billing Lane / The Avenue / Overstone Lane – Priority

Crossroads

• A43 / New Road / Overstone Lane / Overstone Road – Roundabout

Junction

• Overstone Road / Ashley Lane – Priority Junction

• Billing Lane / Marburg St / Great Billing Way – Roundabout Junction


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 38

4.92 These surveys will be carried out on a neutral weekday outside of the school

holiday period. In addition, queue surveys will also be carried out of each of these

junctions to provide further information to allow NCCs appointed consultants to

revalidate the associated NSTM traffic model.

4.93 In addition, Automatic Traffic Counts will also be carried out at previously agreed

locations to further inform the model.

4.94 The NSTM model already includes for background growth in the area and

associated committed developments as confirmed by NCC. Thus the model

provides a suitable base for the assessed forecast year. The model should also

account for future infrastructure changes in the area such as the aforementioned

Moulton bypass scheme.

4.95 It is noted that details of proposed site access and development mix will be

provided to NCC for inclusion in their NSTM model. The traffic generation of the

proposals will also be based on trip rates agreed in advance with NCC which are

likely to reflect those previously agreed for the Overstone Leys proposal.

4.96 Output from the model will be extracted for the Forecast Year and Forecast Year

with Development scenario and will be used to assess the traffic impact of the

proposals both in terms of percentage impact and vehicle volume where

appropriate. Where a significant increase is deemed to occur further detailed

capacity modelling will be undertaken of these associated junctions using

appropriate industry standard junction modelling software.

4.97 These detailed assessments will be used to assess whether the impact of the

proposals would necessitate junction mitigation measures to be introduced. Details

of these mitigation measures will be provided where appropriate.

Air Quality

Introduction

4.98 An assessment of the potential effects of the Proposed Development on air quality

will be included within the ES. The air quality chapter will consider the key air

quality effects associated with the proposed development. It is anticipated that it

will address the following:


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 39

• the impacts of the construction of the proposed development on dust

soiling and concentrations of PM10 during the construction period;

• the impacts of emissions from road traffic generated by the development

on concentrations of nitrogen dioxide, PM10 and PM2.5 at sensitive

locations along the local road network;

• the impacts of emissions from traffic on the roads adjacent to the

proposed development on the air quality conditions that future residents

will experience; and

• whether any additional mitigation measures will be required to address

any significant air quality effects.

Baseline Conditions

4.99 Baseline conditions in the study area will be determined by collating information

from a number of sources. Industrial and waste management sources that may

affect the area will be identified using Defra’s Pollutant Release and Transfer

Register, as well as through examination of Daventry District Council’s,

Northampton Borough Council’s and Wellingborough District Council’s Air Quality

Review and Assessment reports. Local monitoring data will be taken from all

Councils’ Air Quality Review and Assessment reports and background

concentrations will be defined using the national pollution maps published by

Defra. Where necessary, dispersion modelling will be undertaken to establish

baseline pollutant concentrations. Consideration will be given to the presence of

any Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) in the study area.

4.100 Although Daventry District Council has not declared any AQMAs, Northampton

Borough Council has declared seven AQMAs for exceedances of the annual mean

nitrogen dioxide objective. The AQMAs declared by Northampton Borough Council

are shown on the plan overleaf.

4.101 Northampton Borough Council has since adopted a Low Emission Strategy, which

forms part of Northampton Borough Council's Air Quality Action Plan. This sets out

a number of actions to improve air quality within the borough, including promoting

sustainable modes of transport, promoting travel plans, undertaking a Clean Air

Zone (CAZ)/Low Emission Zone (LEZ) feasibility study, promoting the uptake of

ultra-low emission vehicles, adopting Air Quality and Planning Technical Guidance,


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 40

promoting mitigation and providing mechanisms for off-setting mitigation,

developing and implementing the Northampton Electric Vehicle Plan, encouraging

electric vehicle charging within new developments, setting minimum emission

standards for taxis and requiring commercial bus services to meet a minimum of

Euro V emission standards.

Figure 4.101 – Declared AQMAs, Application Site and Local Authority Boundaries

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2018. Ordnance Survey licence number

100046099. Additional data sourced from third parties, including public sector information licensed under the

Open Government Licence v1.0.

Assessment Scope and Methodology

Policy Context and Assessment Criteria

4.102 A summary of all relevant national and local policy and guidance will be provided.

Any local policies or guidance (e.g. Northampton Borough Council’s Low Emission

Strategy) relating to air quality will also be considered, from both Daventry District

Council and Northampton Borough Council. Relevant air quality standards and

assessment criteria will also be set out.

Construction Dust Assessment


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 41

4.103 Given the size of the development, it is anticipated that a construction dust

assessment will be required as part of the air quality chapter of the ES. The

assessment methodology will follow that set out in the Institute of Air Quality

Management’s Guidance on the Assessment of Dust from Demolition and

Construction. It will identify the potential for dust to be generated and the

sensitivity of the surrounding area and will combine these to determine the risk of

dust impacts without appropriate mitigation. This information will then be used to

determine the appropriate level of mitigation required to ensure that there are no

significant effects.

Road Traffic Emissions Assessment

4.104 The proposed development is located adjacent to the A43, and will generate

additional traffic on the local road network that could affect air quality conditions at

existing roadside receptors, thus it is anticipated that a detailed air quality

assessment will be required, to be presented within the air quality chapter of the

ES.

4.105 Roadside pollutant concentrations, and the impacts of the development-generated

traffic, will be predicted using the ADMS-Roads dispersion model. The model will

be verified against local monitoring data.

4.106 Impacts will be predicted at a number of locations both within, and close to, the

proposed development, including locations in the borough of Northampton and

relevant AQMAs. Receptors will be selected to represent worst-case exposure. For

new residences within the development these will be at the façades of the

properties nearest the road. For existing properties, these will be at the roadside

façade of properties alongside the local road network where the development-

generated traffic increases will be greatest, and at locations where concentrations

are expected to be highest, such as near to junctions. Impacts at any designated

ecological sites close to roads that will see significant increases in traffic (defined

as >1,000 AADT in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges) as a result of the

proposed development will also be modelled. Specific receptors cannot be selected

at this stage as their selection will depend upon the layout of the scheme and the

changes in traffic flows predicted in the traffic data upon which the assessment will

be based, which are not yet available.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 42

4.107 The model will be used to predict existing baseline pollutant concentrations and

the likely concentrations in the year of first occupation of any homes within the

development, both without and with the development. If relevant, a sensitivity

test will be applied to consider the potential for elevated real-world nitrogen oxides

emissions from certain diesel vehicles, providing a reasonable worst-case upper-

bound to the assessment.

4.108 The assessment will also take account of cumulative effects from other nearby

schemes.

4.109 If the construction works are anticipated to generate a large volume of traffic on

the local roads then road traffic emissions dispersion modelling will also be

undertaken to determine the impacts of the construction traffic in the first full year

of the construction works. If the construction works will generate significantly less

traffic than the operational development then no such modelling will be required,

as the modelled impacts in the first year of occupation will represent the worst-

case impacts of the scheme in either the construction or operational phase.

Potential for Significant Effects

4.110 The Institute of Air Quality Management’s Guidance on the Assessment of Dust

from Demolition and Construction advises that, with appropriate mitigation in

place, the effects of construction dust will be ‘not significant’. The assessment will

thus focus on determining the appropriate level of mitigation to be applied so as to

ensure that effects will normally be ‘not significant’.

4.111 Once operational, the key air quality effects of the proposed development can be

expected to be related to road traffic emissions. For new receptors within the

proposed development, predicted concentrations will be compared with the

relevant air quality objectives, and any exceedances will necessarily be deemed a

significant adverse effect, without mitigation. Appropriate mitigation will be

identified to ensure that future residents experience acceptable air quality, and

thus that there are no significant effects.

4.112 Predicted concentrations at existing nearby sensitive receptors will be compared

with the relevant air quality objectives and the significance of impacts at individual

receptors will be determined following the Environmental Protection UK and

Institute of Air Quality Management guidance on Planning for Air Quality. The


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 43

overall significance of the air quality effects will then be determined following this

guidance. Where necessary, appropriate financial mitigation will be provided in

accordance with the appropriate emissions contribution calculation as outlined in

the Northampton Low Emission Strategy to ensure that there are no significant

effects.

Noise

Introduction

4.113 A consultation has been carried out with the Environmental Health Department of

Daventry District Council to determine their exact requirements in terms of

acceptable noise assessment criteria and the standards that will be required for the

proposed residential development. This consultation has also agreed the scope,

extent and duration of noise measurements to be carried out. Notwithstanding this

the proposed methodology is set out below.

Baseline Conditions and Assessment Methodology

4.114 It is proposed that a detailed environmental noise survey representative of a 96-

hour period, covering both weekend and weekdays, be undertaken to determine

the existing environmental noise conditions upon which to base the subsequent

assessment. The measurements will be carried out by a Consultant certified as

competent in environmental noise measurement, using instrumentation conforming

to Type 1 Specification, as set out in BS EN 61672: 2003: Electroacoustics. Sound

Level Meters. Part 1 Specifications and in accordance with the principles of BS

7445: 2003: Description and Measurement of Environmental Noise.

Monitoring Procedure

4.115 The agreed methodology for the survey is to gain access to the site in order to

locate and secure two sound level meters, which will record noise levels at the site

boundaries; one overlooking the A43 and one in the southeast corner of the site.

These will remain in-situ for a minimum of 96 hours, where access will be required

again for retrieval. No significant activity will take place, apart from the placement

and securing of a tripod/pole mounted microphones and associated, case contained

logger. These will preferable be safely secured to fences or similar.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 44

4.116 A number of attended measurements may be undertaken as necessary towards

the centre of the site in order to verify the results of the noise modelling which is

to be carried out. All proposed monitoring positions are described below.

4.117 The surveys require a period of dry and low wind (<5 m/s) in order to provide

usable data.

Monitoring Positions

4.118 It is proposed that the following monitoring be carried out:

• Unattended measurement close to site boundary with A43;

• Unattended measurement in the southeast corner of the site

representative of the noise environment at the NNSR;

• Spot Measurements – Attended measurements as appropriate to

determine noise arising from Holcot Lane and Sywell Aerodrome and

background noise at the nearest noise sensitive receptor

4.119 Exact measurement positions are to be decided on site.

4.120 The following acoustic parameters will be recorded as a minimum:

• LAeq,, T external noise levels;

• LAFmax external noise levels;

• LA90,T external noise levels;

• LA10,T external noise levels.

Survey/ Assessment Basic Methodology

4.121 The survey and assessment will be undertaken in accordance with Daventry

District Council’s guidance. In this regard it is understood that the senior

environmental health officer at Daventry District Council recommended that the

following guidance and standards be considered in relation to the neighbouring

Overstone Leys proposal:

• BS4142: 2014 Method for Rating and Assessing Industrial and Commercial

Sound


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 45

• BS8233: 2014 Guidance on Sound Insulation & Noise Reduction for

Buildings

• BS5228-1:2009 Code of Practice for noise and vibration control on

construction and open sites – Part 1: Noise

• BS5228-2:2009 Code of Practice for noise and vibration control on

construction and open sites – Part 2: Vibration

• Noise Policy Statement for England

• The World Health Organisations Guidelines on Community Noise and Night

Time Noise

• The Calculation of Road Traffic Noise

• The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

• Professional Practice Guidance on Planning and Noise, & PRoPG

Supplementary Document 1 & 2

• CIEH Clay Target Shooting Guidance on the Control of Noise

• Building Bulletin 93 Acoustic Design of Schools: A Design Guide

• IOA Good Practice Guide on the control of Noise from Pubs and Clubs

4.122 It is also noted that in considering the neighbouring scheme the environmental

health officer also recommended that:

“To achieve the relevant internal and external acoustic amenity criteria

may require individual or a combination of mitigation measures to be

used. This may include one or more the following, but this is not an

exhaustive list; providing sufficient separation from noise sources

providing or taking advantage of natural screens or barriers; sympathetic

orientation and layout of the development to protect/screen noise

sensitive sources; internal layout of noise sensitive uses in the building to

protect/screen noise sensitive rooms; use of sound insulating materials

and building methods for the fabric of the building.”


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 46

4.123 Contact has been made with Sywell Aerodrome, however, a response has yet to

have been received regarding the general activities and likely busy periods. The

EHO at Daventry District Council has spoken to the Aerodrome and confirmed that

all weekends from now into the summer period may be considered representative

of a typical busy operating period.

4.124 Contact will also be made with the Shooting Grounds to ascertain times of

operation etc. Where appropriate measurements of the noise associated with Clay

Pigeon Shooting will be carried out, however, given that the grounds are

approximately 2km from the proposed development this may not be necessary.

Flood Risk and Drainage

Introduction

4.125 This chapter of the Environmental Statement (ES) will assess the likely significant

effects of the Proposed Development in terms of flood risk and drainage. This

chapter will be supported by a Flood Risk Assessment and Sustainable Drainage

Statement that will be written in accordance with the National Planning Policy

Framework and prevailing national and local drainage guidance.

4.126 The ES will build on the information provided in the following Scoping Report. It

will describe the assessment methodology, the baseline conditions currently

present at the site and its immediate surroundings and the likely significant

environmental effects of the development from the construction phase through to

operation. The ES chapter will also recommend appropriate mitigation measures to

prevent, reduce or offset any significant adverse effects, assess the overall

cumulative effects and identify the likely residual effects following the

implementation of the recommended mitigation measures.

Baseline Conditions

Flood Risk

4.127 An initial assessment of the risk of flooding and its impact on the existing site has

been undertaken with consideration of the available Environment Agency flood

maps and modelling data. The assessment identified;

• The site is located within Flood Zone 1 – Very low probability of flooding

according to the Environment Agency’s flood map for planning.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 47

• The majority of the site is identified as an area at very low risk of surface

water flooding, according to the Environment Agency’s risk of flooding

from surface water map. However, the EA information does show some

areas of the site having a low – high risk of surface water flooding.

• Initial geotechnical and geo-environmental investigation of the site has

identified potentially shallow groundwater levels beneath parts of the site.

Further investigation is required to assess the risk of groundwater flooding

to the site.

• No other sources of flooding have been identified for the site, this includes

flooding from existing sewers and artificial sources.

Drainage

4.128 The existing local public surface water and foul water sewer networks currently

serving the area of Overstone and the wider area of Northampton are owned and

maintained by Anglian Water.

4.129 A review of the existing Anglian Water asset information has identified;

• No existing surface water sewers are located within the site or in the

nearby vicinity.

• No existing foul water sewers are located within the site. The closest sewer

to the site is a 150mm diameter sewer which runs within Park View to the

south-west of the site.


4.130 The site and the development proposals will be assessed in further detail

regarding flood risk and drainage aspects.

Flood Risk

4.131 The assessment will consider the existing sources of the flooding to the site, flood

mitigation measures and potential impacts of the development on flood risk to the

site and the surrounding area.

4.132 The methodology for the assessment of flood risk issues will include;


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 48

• Review of planning policies

• Review of Environment Agency published flood risk mapping, records of

flooding and any available flood modelling data

• Review of topography and hydrology of the subject site and the

surrounding area

• Assessment of the magnitude and severity of potential sources of flood

risk

• Consideration of flood mitigation measures for the subject site and the

surrounding area

• Evaluation of proposed construction techniques and phases and the impact

on flood risk to the site and surrounding area

Drainage

4.133 The assessment will consider existing drainage infrastructure and the disposal of

wastewater generated by the development proposals.

4.134 The methodology for the assessment of flood risk issues will include;

• Review and identification of existing surface water and foul drainage

systems within the subject site and the nearby vicinity

• Evaluation of proposed surface water and foul drainage infrastructure and

consideration of the management and disposal of flows from the subject

site

• Identify potential options for the disposal of foul and surface water flows

• Determine the ability of the existing and proposed drainage to

accommodate development flows

• Evaluation of proposed construction techniques and associated surface

water management and disposal options

• Review and assessment of surface water management and disposal

options with regards to water quality and groundwater protection


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 49

Ground Conditions and Contamination

Introduction

4.135 This chapter of the ES will address issues relating to existing ground conditions

and contamination at the Application Site, with the aim of ensuring that suitable

and safe conditions are achieved for the end-use proposed.

4.136 A desk study was carried out by Jubb on the application site in 2017, (Ref.

17223-G200-01, Version 2, dated 5/9/2017), which incorporated the following:

• Review of historic maps

• Review of Envirocheck Report of site

• Site walkover

Baseline Conditions

4.137 The site is located in an area of fields situated to the west of the village of

Overstone.

4.138 The site comprises eight agricultural fields which are used for arable farming and

from a review of the historical maps have remained relatively unchanged for the

duration of the mapped period.

Geology

4.139 The BGS 1:50,000 Solid and Drift Mapping (Northampton, Sheet 185) and the

online BGS Geology of Britain Viewer identifies the southern central strip of the site

to be underlain by Glaciofluvial Deposits comprising sand and gravel, with the

northern central strip to be underlain by the Oadby Member which is a glacial till

and comprises grey weathered brown lenses of sand and gravel, silt and clay.

4.140 These superficial deposits are underlain by the Stamford Member comprising

interbedded sandstone and siltstone and is underlain by the Northampton Sand

Formation, comprising sandy ironstone and sandstone and is shown to subcrop the

southern extremities of the site.

Hydrology & Hydrogeology


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 50

4.141 The Glaciofluvial Deposits and the solid geology beneath the site are classified as

a Secondary ‘A’ Aquifers. The Oadby Member is classified as a Secondary

Undifferentiated Aquifer.

4.142 The nearest surface water feature is an unnamed channel running along the

south-east site boundary, which appears to be a drainage culvert.

4.143 The site is not indicated to be at risk from flooding.

Site History Summary

4.144 The site has remained as open agricultural fields with a farm building in the

northern field, for the duration for the mapped period. A small clay pit was on the

boundary of the site in the 1880’s with just the scar remaining from the 1920’s. A

well is also present towards the north-eastern boundary of the site from the early

1960’s up until the 2000’s. No evidence of either was noted during the site

walkover.

4.145 In the wider surroundings, very little change has taken place, with the area

remaining open agricultural land with occasional farm houses. The village of

Overstone underwent a small residential expansion in the 1960s and has remained

largely unchanged since.

Mineral Mining

4.146 There have been five mining or quarrying sites within 1km of the site. These are

summarised in the Table below.

Proximity to

site

Details

1m SE Cowpasture Spinney Clay Pit, dates of operation not

supplied.

246m SW Overstone Sand Pit, dates of operation not supplied.

269m SW Moulton Sand Pit, dates of operation not supplied.

536m SW Vantage Sand Pit, dates of operation not supplied.

715m SW Moulton Sand Pit, dates of operation not supplied.

Radon


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 51

4.147 the site is in an intermediate probability radon area, where 5 to 10% of homes

are estimated to be at or above the Action Level, therefore basic radon protective

measures are necessary in the construction of new dwellings.

Contamination - Potential Sources

4.148 The potential contaminants described below have been identified from a study of

the site history. The principal contaminative sources are as follows:

On-site

• Agricultural fertilisers and chemicals,

• Oil and fuel use associated with agricultural vehicles and machinery stored

in farm building.

• Possibly backfilled clay pit, heavy metals, landfill gases.

Off-site

• Agricultural land use;

• Backfilled sand pit

Contamination - Potential Pathways

4.149 The main pathways identified were human uptake, percolation/leaching/migration

to groundwater and vertical and lateral migration/inhalation.

Contamination - Potential Receptors

4.150 The following potential receptors have been identified, based on the proposed

development of the site for residential purposes:

• Ground workers and construction workers

• Future site users

• Groundwater (Minor Aquifer)

• Surface water (unnamed stream/water channel along boundary)


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 52

• Building materials

4.151 The primary contamination risks at the site arise from the previous agricultural

site uses and the possibility of a backfilled clay pit, and the relevant pollutant

linkages that are potentially in operation at the site are as follows:

• Heavy Metal/ Semi-metals in any historic made ground present (risk to

construction workers and future site users)

• Organics (Hydrocarbons/PAH’s/) from agricultural vehicles and historic

made ground (risk to construction workers and future site users)

• Asbestos in made ground (risk to construction workers and future site

users)

• Ground gas from backfilled clay pit (risk to future site users)

4.152 In general, the contamination potential of the site is considered to be low.

4.153 Further site investigation will be required to confirm the contaminative potential

of the site.

Mineral Assessment

4.154 Part of the site lies within a Mineral Safeguarding Area (MSA) as defined by Policy

28 of the Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan, adopted July 2017 by

NCC. The council which is the Mineral Planning Authority (MPA), has produced a

Policies Map which shows the southern part of the site to be covered by the MSA,

so the underlying deposit of sand and gravel is safeguarded from unnecessary

development by non-mineral development.

4.155 Ground information provided in a mineral assessment will ascertain the likelihood

and viability of the mineral being worked prior to development that might sterilise

the deposit.

Geotechnical Assessment

4.156 The site conditions are expected to comprise a minimal amount of made

ground/topsoil over variable superficial deposits, underlain by ironstone, or

siltstone and sandstone


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 53

4.157 Shallow foundations are likely to be suitable across much of the site, founding on

the superficial deposits or directly onto bedrock. The extent and composition of

the superficial deposits together with strength of the underlying bedrock should be

determined through appropriate ground investigation techniques.


4.158 Prior to redevelopment, an intrusive phase II ground investigation should be

carried out over the site to identify and quantify any contamination, determine

depth and strength of underlying strata, and obtain suitable parameters for

geotechnical design. A proposed scope for site investigation works depends on the

layout of the proposed development, but is likely to comprise the following:

• Suitable spread of machine excavated trial pits

• Cable Percussion boreholes with SPT testing

• Installation of gas/groundwater monitoring wells and program of

monitoring

• In-situ CBR testing (Plate bearing tests/TRL DCP)

• Programme of contamination and geotechnical testing

4.159 Contamination testing should include an appropriate suite of contaminants for

solids and leachates to include Metals, Organics/Hydrocarbons and Sulphates/pH.

Waste Acceptance Criteria Testing (WAC) should also be captured as part of the

Phase II investigation, if it is anticipated that soils are to be disposed of off-site.

4.160 A suitable Interpretative Report will be required, to determine foundation and

floor slab solutions, parameters for road pavement design, and an assessment of

contamination risk.

4.161 A search of statutory service information held by service providers should be

undertaken prior to any site investigation, and appropriate onsite precautions

employed by site investigation contractors to protect any services identified.

Agricultural Land Assessment

Introduction


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 54

4.162 The land is currently in agricultural use and hence agricultural land and

agricultural businesses operating on the site are potential impact receptors. Soils

at the site are also likely to be largely undisturbed and are an important resource.

This chapter will consider the potential impacts on agricultural land, agriculture

users and soils. Consultation will take place with Natural England (the statutory

consultees for soil resources and best and most versatile agricultural land) to agree

the assessment methodology.

Baseline Conditions

4.163 National planning policy guidance relating to agriculture and soils is in National

Planning Policy Framework (2012) which states at paragraph 112 that ‘Local

planning authorities should take into account the economic and other benefits of

the best and most versatile agricultural land (defined as land in grades 1, 2 and 3a

of the Agricultural Land Classification). Where significant development of

agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should

seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of a higher quality’.

4.164 Paragraph 109 of the NPPF states that ‘The planning system should contribute to

and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued

landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils’ and ‘preventing both new

and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk

from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise

pollution or land instability’.

4.165 The national soil strategy (Safeguarding our Soils: A Strategy for England,

DEFRA, 2009) aims to ensure that soil functions are sufficiently understood in the

planning system and that soils are better managed through all stages of

construction. An Environment Agency document Soil a Precious Resource: Our

strategy for protecting, managing and restoring soil has complementary aims.

4.166 The adopted Joint Core Strategy for West Northamptonshire (2014) states that

‘Proposals which sustain the rural economy by creating or safeguarding jobs and

businesses will be supported where they are of an appropriate scale for their

location, respect the environmental quality and character of the rural area and

protect the best and most versatile agricultural land.’


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 55

4.167 As part of the preliminary desk based study, available information referencing the

site was collated in order to gain an understanding of the site and guide the

following investigation. Geological mapping from the British Geological Society

(1:50,000) show the land is underlain by interbedded Sandstone and Siltstone of

Stamford Member. Land on the south-eastern boundary is underlain by

Northampton Sand Formation ironstone and in the north an area of Whitby

Mudstone Formation is recorded. The majority of the site is overlain by superficial

deposits of Oadby Member till with a small area of sand and gravel deposits in the

south.

4.168 From the National Soil Map produced in 1984, at a scale of 1:250,000, it is

reported that the soil is of Wick 1 Association. Soil of the Wick series is mainly

deep, well drained with coarse loam typical of brown earth, intermixed with some

gleyic brown earths and brown sands of the Arrow and Newport series respectively.

The subsoil is sandy and often overlying gravel. Provisional Agricultural Land

Classification mapping carried out in the 1970s before the revision of the

classification shows the southernmost part of the site as grade 2 with the majority

classified at grade 3. An ALC survey to the current 1988 Classification on land to

the south has been completed as part of a planning application for Overstone Leys

(permitted). This shows land adjoining the site to be of predominantly grade 1 and

2 agricultural quality.

Potential Effects and Assessment Methodology

Potential Effects – Construction phase

4.169 Agricultural production is the main visible function supported by the land with

arable crops over most of the site and smaller areas of grazed or cut grass.

Consequently agriculture (both agricultural users and land resources) will be a

potential receptor of any environmental impact of the Proposed Development.

4.170 The sustainable management of soil is also a central pillar in sustainable

development and so soil resources will be a potential receptor of impacts arising

from the development of the land.

Potential Effects – Operational phase


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 56

4.171 Once construction has ceased land that has been retained and not sealed is

expected to continue to function as a filter provided activity has not compacted the

area. Agricultural activity will permanently cease within the site.

Method of Assessment of Impact

4.172 These issues will all be addressed within the ES Chapter through a process of:

• desk studies – review of published and unpublished soils and agricultural

land quality surveys.

• a detailed survey of all soil layers down to 1-1.2 m at a density of 100 m

intervals across the application area to Natural England guidelines (TIN

049) and classification of agricultural land grades and soil resources into

maps)

• inquiry of landowners and agricultural tenants in order to determine the

nature and basis of the farming operations.

• interpretation and introduction of design elements into the project to

minimise and mitigate against any adverse impacts.

4.173 The significance of the impacts of the proposed development on the following

matters will then be evaluated:

• agricultural land resources

• soil resources

• agricultural businesses / land users

Summary Chapter and Non-Technical Summary

4.174 A chapter summarising each of the above disciplines findings will be presented. A

separate Non-Technical Summary will also be provided in accordance with the EIA

Regulations.

4.175 A non-technical summary of the findings will also be prepared, as required by the

EIA Regulations.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 57

5 Topics proposed to be scoped out and not included within the Environmental Statement

Wind Microclimate

5.1 It is not considered the Proposed Development would result in significant effects on

human receptors in relation to wind micro climate. The Application Site is located in

a predominantly undeveloped area, and there are therefore no existing tall

buildings which may create trapped vortices/ wind tunnelling. The Lawson Criteria

is the most common set of guidelines used when considering the potential effect of

wind microclimate, and considers different pedestrian activities, with the principal

being that the quieter activities such as ‘sitting’, require lighter winds to be

‘acceptable’ than other activities such as ‘business walking’. Given the

development’s nature, it is the latter less susceptible activities which are likely to

be of most relevance.

5.2 Given the location of the Application Site, and the nature of the Proposed

Development, it is considered appropriate that wind microclimate is scoped out of

the EIA and resultant ES.

Daylight, Sunlight, Overshadowing and Glare

5.3 Given the location and nature of the application, including the lack of adjacent

sensitive receptors, there are unlikely to be significant impacts on daylight,

sunlight, overshadowing and glare.

5.4 It is therefore considered appropriate that impacts on daylight, sunlight,

overshadowing and glare are scoped out of the EIA and resultant ES.

Lighting

5.5 The Proposed Development comprises a residential scheme within the context of a

wider existing suburban area and, as such, it is considered unlikely to give rise to

significant environmental effects in respect of lighting. Impacts of lighting arising

from the development (both during and post construction) will be considered as

part of assessment work i.e. in terms of ecology, landscape and visuals, heritage

etc. where necessary.

5.6 Notwithstanding the above, given the concerns raised in response to the previous

scoping request (dated 28th November 2017) in respect of lighting, we propose to


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 58

include a section in the application setting out a lighting scheme/ mitigation

measures commensurate with the potential level of impact.

Electronic Interference

5.7 It is not considered that the Proposed Development would cause electronic

interference and therefore this is proposed to be scoped out of the EIA and

resultant EIA.

Material Assets

5.8 Material assets in EIA is a very broad term which considers both physical and non-

physical sectors that could be said to have material value. On review of the

Application Site’s location and context, it is not considered there are any further

‘material assets’ to those already addressed within other EIA topics, and therefore

no further consideration of material assets is proposed within the EIA and resultant

ES.


JUNE 2018 | KT | P17-1499 Page | 59

6 Structure of the Environmental Statement

6.1 The ES will report the findings of the EIA and will address the requirements of

Schedule 4 of the EIA Regulations, as set out in section 4.

6.2 The anticipated structure and content of the ES is likely to be as follows:

• Chapter 1 Introduction

• Chapter 2 Assessment Scope and Methodology

• Chapter 3 The Application Site

• Chapter 4 Proposed Development and Alternatives

• Chapter 5 Landscape and Visual

• Chapter 6 Ecology and Nature Conservation

• Chapter 7 Archaeology and Built Heritage

• Chapter 8 Transport and Access

• Chapter 9 Air Quality

• Chapter 10 Noise

• Chapter 11 Drainage and Flood Risk

• Chapter 12 Ground Conditions and Contamination

• Chapter 13 Socio Economics

• Chapter 14 Summary

6.3 Within each of the assessment chapters the main structure of the information

presented, although not exclusively, will be as per the following headings:

• Introduction

• Assessment Approach (including methodology, assessment of significance,

legislative and policy framework, scoping criteria, limitation)

• Baseline Conditions

• Assessment of Likely Significant Effects (Assessment of Impacts, including

construction and operation)

• Mitigation, Enhancement and Residual Effects

• Cumulative and in-combination effects

• Summary

Appendix A

Application Site Location Plan

Wind Turbine

Path

VIEW

PARK

LA

OVERSTONE

DAO

R

GNI

RE

TT

EK

WEI

ROAD

SYWELL

LANE

EN

OTSREV

O

VIEW

PAR

K

LANE

BILLING

AVENUE

THE

A43

ROAD

GNI

RE

TT

EK

Drain

Drain

Parson's Wood

Depot

Ass Bank

Highlands

Young

116m

116m

105m

114m

116m

99m

118m118m

OVERSTONE CP

Spinney

New Inn

113m

Weir

Ground

Sports

SYWELL

ROAD

Track

Track

Track

Spinney

Gashouse

Track

Track

107m

Sl

99m

101m

103m

112m

109m

Marsh Spinney

Overstone Park

Sluice

WO

OD

LA

D

AV

EN

U

E

N

K E T T E RIN

GRD

PW

Spinney

Gashouse

Recn Gd

Path

Track

Track

Trac

k

Cowpasture Spinney

W

112m

Iss

Track

CP

Bdy

Overstone

Primary

School

Site Boundary

KEY

Site boundary has been drawn to OS Vectormap information based on title plan provided

Planning | Design | Environment | EconomicsEast Midlands

Cop

yrig

ht P

egas

us P

lann

ing

Gro

up L

td.

Cro

wn

copy

righ

t. A

ll ri

ghts

res

erve

d. O

rdna

nce

Sur

vey

Cop

yrig

ht L

icen

ce n

umbe

r 10

0042

093.

Pro

map

Lic

ence

num

ber

1000

2044

9. E

map

site

Lic

ence

num

ber

0100

0316

73 S

tand

ard

OS

lice

nce

righ

ts c

ondi

tions

app

ly.

Peg

asus

acc

epts

no

liabi

lity

for

any

use

of t

his

docu

men

t oth

er th

an fo

r its

ori

gina

l pur

pose

, or

by th

e or

igin

al c

lient

, or

follo

win

g P

egas

us’ e

xpre

ss a

gree

men

t to

such

use

. T 0

1285

641

717

ww

w.p

egas

uspg

.co.

uk

Overstone Green, Northampton - Site Location PlanI Drawn by: LJE I Approved by: KT I Date: 24/05/18 I Scale: 1:5000 @ A2 I DRG: P17-1499-003 Sheet No: 01 Rev: - I Client: Gallagher Estates Iwww.pegasuspg.co.uk

0 100 250 m

http://www.pegasuspg.co.uk

Appendix B

Schedule 4 of 2017 EIA Regulations

SCHEDULE 4

INFORMATION FOR INCLUSION IN ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENTS

1. A description of the development, including in particular:

(a)a description of the location of the development;

(b)a description of the physical characteristics of the whole development, including, where relevant, requisite

demolition works, and the land-use requirements during the construction and operational phases;

(c)a description of the main characteristics of the operational phase of the development (in particular any

production process), for instance, energy demand and energy used, nature and quantity of the materials and

natural resources (including water, land, soil and biodiversity) used;

(d)an estimate, by type and quantity, of expected residues and emissions (such as water, air, soil and subsoil

pollution, noise, vibration, light, heat, radiation and quantities and types of waste produced during the

construction and operation phases.

2. A description of the reasonable alternatives (for example in terms of development design, technology,

location, size and scale) studied by the developer, which are relevant to the proposed project and its specific

characteristics, and an indication of the main reasons for selecting the chosen option, including a comparison of

the environmental effects.

3. A description of the relevant aspects of the current state of the environment (baseline scenario) and an outline

of the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the development as far as natural changes from the

baseline scenario can be assessed with reasonable effort on the basis of the availability of environmental

information and scientific knowledge.

4. A description of the factors specified in regulation 4(2) likely to be significantly affected by the

development: population, human health, biodiversity (for example fauna and flora), land (for example land

take), soil (for example organic matter, erosion, compaction, sealing), water (for example hydromorphological

changes, quantity and quality), air, climate (for example greenhouse gas emissions, impacts relevant to

adaptation), material assets, cultural heritage, including architectural and archaeological aspects, and landscape.

5. A description of the likely significant effects of the development on the environment resulting from, inter

alia:

(a)the construction and existence of the development, including, where relevant, demolition works;

(b)the use of natural resources, in particular land, soil, water and biodiversity, considering as far as possible the

sustainable availability of these resources;

(c)the emission of pollutants, noise, vibration, light, heat and radiation, the creation of nuisances, and the

disposal and recovery of waste;

(d)the risks to human health, cultural heritage or the environment (for example due to accidents or disasters);

(e)the cumulation of effects with other existing and/or approved projects, taking into account any existing

environmental problems relating to areas of particular environmental importance likely to be affected or the use

of natural resources;

(f)the impact of the project on climate (for example the nature and magnitude of greenhouse gas emissions) and

the vulnerability of the project to climate change;

(g)the technologies and the substances used.

The description of the likely significant effects on the factors specified in regulation 4(2) should cover the direct

effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, transboundary, short-term, medium-term and long-term,

permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the development. This description should take into

account the environmental protection objectives established at Union or Member State level which are relevant

to the project, including in particular those established under Council Directive 92/43/EEC(1) and Directive

2009/147/EC(2).

6. A description of the forecasting methods or evidence, used to identify and assess the significant effects on the

environment, including details of difficulties (for example technical deficiencies or lack of knowledge)

encountered compiling the required information and the main uncertainties involved.

7. A description of the measures envisaged to avoid, prevent, reduce or, if possible, offset any identified

significant adverse effects on the environment and, where appropriate, of any proposed monitoring

arrangements (for example the preparation of a post-project analysis). That description should explain the

extent, to which significant adverse effects on the environment are avoided, prevented, reduced or offset, and

should cover both the construction and operational phases.

8. A description of the expected significant adverse effects of the development on the environment deriving

from the vulnerability of the development to risks of major accidents and/or disasters which are relevant to the

project concerned. Relevant information available and obtained through risk assessments pursuant to EU

legislation such as Directive 2012/18/EU(3) of the European Parliament and of the Council or Council Directive

2009/71/Euratom(4) or UK environmental assessments may be used for this purpose provided that the

requirements of this Directive are met. Where appropriate, this description should include measures envisaged

to prevent or mitigate the significant adverse effects of such events on the environment and details of the

preparedness for and proposed response to such emergencies.

9. A non-technical summary of the information provided under paragraphs 1 to 8.

10. A reference list detailing the sources used for the descriptions and assessments included in the

environmental statement.

Appendix C

Landscape Scoping Report

Overstone Green

Landscape Scoping Report

Client: Davidsons Developments & Gallagher Estates

Date: May 2018

Ref: GL0894

l a n d s c a p e a r c h i t e c t s

golby luck+

T e l : 0 1 5 3 0 2 6 5 6 8 8

W e b : w w w . g o l b y a n d l u c k . c o . u k

E m a i l : i n f o @ g o l b y a n d l u c k . c o . u k

O f f i c e : 20 7 L e ice s te r R o ad , I b s t oc k , L e i ce s te r s h i r e , LE 67 6 H P

G ol by and Luc k L TD (Com pa ny N o. 90 37 7 76 ) Re g i s t e r ed i n E ng l a nd and Wal e s

Overstone Green � Landscape Scoping Report


REF: GL0894 i DATE: MAY 2018

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................... 1

2 THE SITE ........................................................................................................................................................ 2

3 LVIA METHODLOLGY ................................................................................................................................ 4

4 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ..................................................................................................................... 17

5 VISUAL SETTING ........................................................................................................................................ 24

6 CUMMULATIVE AND IN COMBINAITON EFFECTS ............................................................................... 25

FIGURES

GL0894 01 Site Context

GL0894 02 Site Location

GL0894 07 Zone of Theoretical Visibility



REF: GL0894 1 DATE: MAY 2018

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 This landscape baseline report has been carried out by Golby + Luck Landscape Architects

following instruction by Davidsons Developments Ltd and Gallagher Estates to review the

land to the west of Overstone village in Northamptonshire that forms the northern extension

to the Northampton North Sustainable Urban Extension (NNSUE) as identified in the West

Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Local Plan (Part 1) adopted December 2014 (JCT).

The SUE is located within the jurisdiction of Daventry District Council.

1.2 The southern half of the SUE is the subject of outline planning approval (DA/2013/0850) that

was the subject of an Environmental Statement (ES) with a supporting landscape and

visual impact assessment chapter prepared by Pegasus Group (Pegasus LVIA). This

application also considered the cumulative effects of bringing forward the entire SUE set

out in an ES Addendum also prepared by Pegasus Group (Pegasus CE).

1.3 This landscape scoping report considers the main issues that will be the focus of the

landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA) prepared in support of an outline planning

application for the remaining northern half of the NNSUE (the site).

1.4 In the production of the LVIA the following documents and information will be considered:

National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF);

National Planning Policy Framework (Draft) 2018 (Draft NPPF);

Daventry District Local Plan (June 1997) Saved September 2007 (Local Plan);

West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Local Plan (Part 1) adopted

December 2014 (JCT)

Natural England Character of England � NCA 89 Northamptonshire Vales;

Northamptonshire Current Landscape Character Assessment � November 2006,

and Current Landscape Character Strategy and Guidelines;

Daventry Landscape Character Assessment 2017;

Northampton Landscape Sensitivity and Green Infrastructure Study 2009 (NLGS)

British Listed Buildings online resource:

(http://www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/map);

Historic England National Heritage List for England:

(https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list);

Ordnance Survey information Explorer 1:20,000 and Street Plus 1:10,000; and

Google Maps aerial photography.




2 THE SITE

2.1 The site extends to approximately 79.5 hectares of farmland extending north-east from

Northampton set between the A43 Kettering Road to the north and Cowpasture Spinney

to the south.

2.2 The site comprises 8no. medium scale geometrically shaped arable fields defined by

native boundary hedgerows and intermittent tree cover. There are no field trees within

the site beyond the boundary hedgerows. Some of the boundaries have planting belts

that appear to be associated with the wider use of Cowpasture Spinney as a local shoot.

The spinney is characterised by dense belt of native deciduous woodland.

2.3 The site sits on a local ridgeline set between Cowpasture Spinney and its associated

watercourse to the east, and the valley setting of a separate local watercourse to the west

that flows south from Overstone Grange and Rectory Farm. The site falls from a high-point

at its north-east boundary of approximately 120m above ordnance datum (AOD), to a

low-point of approximately 100m AOD at the south-east boundary with the spinney.

2.4 Beyond the land-use and associated framework of boundary hedgerows and trees there

is a small collection of farm buildings located towards the northern boundary of the site

that are accessed from Kettering Road via an unmade track. An overhead electricity line

with associated pylons crosses the site from the south-west to the north-east.

2.5 Beyond the site, local settlement includes the immediately adjoining committed NNSUE to

the south that affords outline planning permission, to the south-east the linear settlements

of Overstone and Sywell, and to the west the larger settlement of Moulton.

2.6 Wider land uses that are distinct from the otherwise farmed landscape and urban setting

of Northampton include Overstone Park and Golf Course to the south, Overstone Lakes

Holiday Park also to the south, Sywell Reservoir and Sywell Country Park to the south-east,

and Sywell Aerodrome with associated commercial development to the north-east.

2.7 Beyond the local setting of the site there are large areas of woodland cover to the north

of the site that include Sywell Wood and Harwick Wood. To the north-west is Pitsford Water

and Brixworth Country Park that comprises a major leisure and recreation resource.

2.8 In terms of access, the site is crossed by public footpath DG2 that connects between

Rectory Farm to the north-west of the site and Sywell Road at Overstone to the south.

Footpath DG1 runs alongside the south-west boundary of the site. Footpath DG3 runs




Between Overstone Grange and Moulton on the northside of Kettering Road, and

footpath DG4 provides a short section of path connecting Overstone Grange with

Kettering Road. To the Northamptonshire Round recreation route passes to the east of the

site from Sywell Reservoir heading north to Sywell Wood then west to Halcot and Pitsford

Reservoir. The site itself is maintained as private farmland and does not provide any public

access beyond the designated rights of way.

2.9 In terms of designations, the site is not covered by any statutory or non-statutory

designation that would prohibit its development in accordance with the JCT allocation.

The site is not covered by any landscape designation that would suggest an increased

value or sensitivity to change. The site is also not covered by any functional planning

designation that would be compromised by development.

2.10 To the north-west of the site Overstone Grange, The Old Farmhouse, and Rectory

Farmhouse are all Grade II Listed Buildings. To the south-east of the site there are number

of Listed Buildngs associated with Overstone and Sywell the most notable being the Grade

II* Church of St Peter and Paul and Grade II* Sywell Hall. To the south of the site there are

also a number of Grade II Listed Buildings associated with Overstone Hall and its remnant

parkland. Beyond the local setting, Pitsford Reservoir to the north is a designated Site of

Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), as is Hardwick Lodge Meadow to the north of the site. To

the south of the site there is a large Roman-British settlement to the west of Ecton Lodge

that is a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM).




3 LVIA METHODLOLGY

3.1 This methodology is based on the following published guidelines:

Preparation of Environmental Statements for Planning Projects that require

Environmental Assessment - A Good Practice Guide (1999) DETR London, The

Stationery Office;

Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Assessment 3rd Edition (2013) the Landscape

Institute and the Institute of Environmental Assessment, E and FN Spon (GLVIA3);

An approach to Landscape Character Assessment � Natural England (2014);

Photography and photomontage in landscape and visual impact assessment � The

Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/11; and

Visual representation of development proposals � Technical Guidance Note 02/17

(2017);

Assessment Approach

3.2 The approach to this LVIA comprises the following stages:

Determining the scope of the assessment;

A summary of the relevant national and local planning policy, along with

supporting supplementary planning guidance;

The detailed consideration of the landscape and visual baseline conditions of the

site that includes the identification of key resources and receptors through a

combination of the desktop and research and field based survey work. This in turn

results in the determination of value;

The description of the development proposals;

The determination of the susceptibility of each land and visual receptors that is

then combined with the judgement of value to make an overall assessment of

sensitivity.

The determination of the likely magnitude of change experience by each

receptor;

The assessment of the likely landscape and visual effects of the proposed

development when assessed against the baseline of the approved development;




The identification of measures that seek to avoid, remedy or compensate any likely

significant adverse effects (mitigation measures);

The subsequent reassessment of any residual effects of development specifically

highlighting any remaining significant effects; and

The consideration of any cumulative effect arising from developments in the

locality of the site likely to further influence any change on the landscape and

visual resource within the study area.

3.3 The assessment of landscape and visual effects is set out as a series of transparent and

balanced professional judgements that follow three specific stages:

The evaluation of the sensitivity of the landscape and visual receptors. This process

considers both the susceptibility of the receptor to the proposed change and the

perceived value of each receptor;

The identification of the extent of physical change to the existing landscape

resource, to landscape character, and to the visual setting of the site; and

The combined assessment of the nature of receptor (sensitivity) and the nature of

the proposed change (magnitude) resulting in a professionally informed

judgement as to the significance of any likely impacts.

Scoping and Consultation

3.4 This report has been prepared to assist in the ES scoping exercise. As part of this report the

following information has been provided for agreement with Daventry District Council

(DDC);

LVIA methodology;

Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) setting out the baseline ZTV for the site, and the

ZTV for a development parameter of up to 10m in height; and

Broad distribution and location of representative view.

Landscape Baseline

3.5 The landscape baseline seeks to establish the value associated with the site, its local

landscape setting, and its associated features. To understand value the assessment

considered several factors when describing the site context and location that includes:

Lane use;




Vegetation;

Topography;

Water features;

Public access; and

Local key characteristics

3.6 Landscape planning designation and published landscape character studies help to

inform this assessment but their relevance with depend on the purpose and geographic

extent of the designation, and detail of the study when considered against the nature and

extent of the study.

3.7 As part of the landscape baseline an assessment of value is made. Box 5.1 in the GLVIA

sets out a range of factors that can help in the identification of valued landscape and

therefore inform a judgement as to their sensitivity. These include:

Landscape quality: A measure of the physical state of the landscape. It may

include the extent to which typical character is represented in individual areas, the

intactness of the landscape and the condition of individual elements.

Scenic quality: The term used to describe landscapes that appeal primarily to the

senses (primarily but not wholly the visual sense).

Rarity: The presence of rare elements or features in the landscape or the presence

of a rare Landscape Character Type.

Representativeness: Whether the landscape contains a particular character

and/or features or elements which are considered particularly important

examples.

Conservation interests: The presence of features or wildlife, earth science or

archaeological or historical and cultural interest can add to the value of the

landscape as well as having value in their own right.

Recreation value: Evidence that the landscape is valued for recreational activity

where experience of the landscape is important.

Perceptual aspects: A landscape may be valued for its perceptual qualities,

notably wildness and/or tranquillity.




Associations: Some landscape are associated with particular people, such as

artists or writers, or events in history that contribute to perceptions of the natural

beauty of the area.

3.8 At varying levels communities and individual will have differing perceptions as to the value

of a landscape. However, for the purposes of landscape assessment it is important to set

out a reasoned hierarchy of criteria for assessing value. Value is essentially concerned with

the importance or rarity of a landscape and its ability to be substituted or replicated.

Value can be categorised as follows:

Very High Landscape Value � landscapes of great importance or rarity that would

have limited potential for substitution or replication. Such landscapes are often

identified by designation such as National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural

Beauty, or World Heritage Sites. This may also include local destinations such as

Areas of Great Landscape Value or Special Landscape Areas where the special

interest of the designation is strongly represented and would be difficult to

replicate. It is not the case that all designated landscapes are of high value, areas

where features of special interest are poorly represented may be of a reduced

value. Likewise, undesignated landscapes with high concentrations of designated

features in close proximity (such as heritage assets) where the landscape between

them makes a critical contribution to their setting and interrelationship may be of

increased value.

High Landscape Value � landscapes of local value that are of good condition

and/or strong strength of character with some potential for substitution or

replication. This will include both local designated and undesignated landscapes,

and landscapes with high concentrations of designated features in close proximity

(such as heritage assets) where the landscape between them makes a valuable

contribution to their setting and interrelationship.

Medium Landscape Value � landscapes of moderate value or rarity that have

potential for substitution or replication. Such landscapes can be identified through

local designation or may be undesignated but provide an important setting to

locally designated landscape or heritage assets such as Conservation Areas and

Listed Buildings. There may also be parts of broader national designations where

the features of special interest are either weak or poorly represented, and/or

detracting features that limit the value attached to that particular part of the wider

designation.




Low Landscape Value � landscapes of limited value or rarity that can be

substituted or replicated. Such landscapes are unlikely to be designated with a

moderate to weak strength of character and will be made up of features that are

both common and widespread, and are of moderate to poor quality (condition).

Visual Baseline

3.9 In establishing the visual baseline, a series of representative view towards the site covering

a range of visual receptors have been identified through field survey work and are

identified on plans. The selected viewpoints can typically cover three types of views that

are described in the GLVIA as:

Representative viewpoints � selected to represent the experience of different types

of visual receptor, where large numbers of viewpoints cannot be included

individually and where the significant effects are unlikely to differ;

Specific viewpoints � chosen because they are key and sometimes promoted

viewpoints within the landscape, including for example specific local visitor

attractions, viewpoints in areas of particularly noteworthy visual and/or

recreational amenity such as landscape with statutory landscape designations, or

viewpoints with particular cultural landscape associations. Specific views include

those from recreational spaces, cemeteries, public footpaths, open access land,

and promoted trails.

Illustrative viewpoints � chosen specifically to demonstrate a particular effect or

specific issues, which might, for example, be the restricted visibility at certain

locations.

3.10 Not all of these types of viewpoints will be present or need to be considered in all of the

assessment. The majority of viewpoints will be representative but not exclusively. All of the

viewpoints considered are taken from publicly accessible locations. The likely effect of the

development proposal on private locations, such as houses, is made through professional

judgement based on views from publicly accessible locations nearby.

3.11 The representative views are described as part of the visual baseline assessment and

consider the following criteria:

Location of the viewpoint;

Type of existing view;

Distance between the observer and the site; and




Extent and context of the site and/or likely view of development proposal

observed.

3.12 With specific regard to distance between the observer and site and the extent of the

site/development observed the following descriptions are used:

Open views � uninterrupted views into the site;

Filtered views � views partially obstructed by vegetation, landform, built-form or

combinations of each; and

Distant views � this is based on a judgement that will take into account the scale

and nature of the proposal and character of the receiving landscape.

3.13 As part of the baseline assessment judgements must be made about the value attached

to a view. Value may be attached to views that relate to designated landscapes and

heritage assets. Value may also be attached through appearance in guide books, on

maps, and through the provision of facilities specific to the enjoyment of a view such as

benches or interpretation boards. Value may also be attached to views associated with

heritage assets, these are often identified in heritage assessments and conservation area

appraisals. Value can be categorised as:

Very High Visual Value � Promoted views identified on maps, or local walks/guides

that are highly valued as a destination to appreciate a particular landscape or

feature. This may include views towards notable natural features, structures,

houses, heritage assets, or exceptional landscapes. These views are considered to

be of greater than local value and are likely to be marked by signs, seating, or

features that promote the view.

High Visual Value � Views from publicised vantage points, or to a landscape of

national importance, or highly popular visitor attractions where the view forms an

important part of the experience or has important cultural associations. This may

include particularly noteworthy views from identified trials, designated landscapes,

and statutory heritage assets. These views are considered to be of greater than

local value and regularly visited. Private views may include residential properties

specifically designed to take advantage of a particular view;

Medium Visual Value � Locally known or valued viewpoints. Views from promoted

public rights of way or clear evidence of regular use and areas of informal open




space. Views from regularly used rooms or living spaces. Panoramic views, vistas,

or other noteworthy views from active recreation land, or highways; and

Low Visual Value � Views that are not published and/or where there is limited

evidence of regular use. Views from secondary windows not forming the main

living or working spaces in properties. Views of little noteworthiness from active

recreation land, or highways.

Assessment of Landscape Effects

3.14 The initial stage of the assessment of landscape effect is to determine the susceptibility of

the receptor to the proposed change, and an overall assessment of landscape sensitivity.

3.15 The following criteria are used to establish landscape susceptibility. Whilst these are typical

examples it does not always follow that a site within a specific landscape designation will

automatically fit with this categorization. Much will depend on the specific site conditions.

Very High Susceptibility � A landscape possessing a strong and defined character

of notable scenic quality, in good condition with a very low tolerance to the

proposed change.

High Landscape Susceptibility - A landscape possessing a defined character of

good scenic quality, in good condition with a low tolerance to the proposed

change.

Medium Landscape Susceptibility � A landscape possessing a moderate strength

character and scenic quality, in moderate condition with a moderate tolerance

to the proposed change

Low Landscape Susceptibility � A landscape possessing a weak and undefined

character of limited scenic quality, in poor condition with a high tolerance to the

proposed change.

3.16 Judgements of value and susceptibility are then combined as an assessment of overall

sensitivity:

Table 1 � Matrix of Landscape Sensitivity

SUSCEPTIBILITY

VALU

E VERY HIGH HIGH MEDIUM LOW

VERY HIGH Very High Very High High Medium




HIGH Very High High Medium Medium

MEDIUM High Medium Medium Low

LOW Medium Medium Low Low

3.17 The following stage of the assessment process considers the magnitude of change

imposed by the proposed development on each landscape receptors. Issues that inform

this judgement include:

Size or scale: The amount of change resulting from the proposal to features, or key

characteristics and attributes of the landscape type or area.

Geographic extent: Determines the extent to which the landscape type or area

will be affected by the proposed development.

Duration and reversibility of the landscape effect: The timeframe, or duration of the

effect by the proposed development, and whether the effect is permanent or

temporary.

3.18 The likely magnitude of change of the development proposal can be guided by the

following criteria:

High magnitude of change � The proposal will result in a total change in the key

characteristics of the landscape character, will introduce elements into the

landscape that are totally uncharacteristic to the receiving landscape, and/or will

result in the substantial loss, or alteration of key elements/features.

Medium magnitude of change � The proposal will result in a change in the key

characteristic of the landscape character, will introduce elements

uncharacteristic to the attributes of the receiving landscape, and/or will result in

loss, or alteration to key elements/features.

Low magnitude of change � The proposal will result in a partial change to the key

characteristics of the landscape character, will introduce elements that are not

entirely uncharacteristic to the attributes of the receiving landscape, and/or will

result in the minor loss, or alteration to key elements/features.

Negligible magnitude of change � The proposal will result in a very limited changed

to the key characteristics of the landscape character, will introduce elements




consistent with the attributes of the receiving landscape, and/or will result in an

limited loss, or alteration to key elements/features.

3.19 The combined judgements on the nature of the receptor (sensitivity) and the nature of the

impact (magnitude) are combined to arrive at a clear and transparent judgement of

significance. The significance of landscape effects are described in the assessment text

and are guided by the matrix set out below:

Table 2 � Matrix of Landscape Significance

SENSITIVITY

MA

GN

ITUDE

O

F C

HAN

GE

VERY HIGH HIGH MEDIUM LOW

HIGH Major Major Major-Moderate Moderate

MEDIUM Major-Moderate Major-Moderate Moderate Minor

LOW Moderate Moderate Minor Minimal

NEGLIGIBLE Minor Minor Minimal Minimal


significance (highlighted in blue) are those considered particularly relevant to the planning

decision making process.

Assessment of Visual Effects

3.21 The initial stage of the assessment of visual effect is to determine the susceptibility of the

receptor to the proposed change, and an overall assessment of landscape sensitivity.

3.22 GLVIA describes the susceptibility of different visual receptors to changes in views and

visual amenity as a function of:

the occupation or activity of people experiencing the view at particular locations;

and

the extent to which their attention or interest may therefore be focussed on the

views and the visual amenity they experience in particular locations.

3.23 The GVLIA goes on to categorise those receptor groups that are likely to be most

susceptible to change:




residents at home;

people, whether residents or visitors, who are engaged in outdoor recreation,

including people using public rights of way, whose attention or interest is likely to

be focussed on the landscape and on particular views;

visitors to heritage assets, or to other attractions, where views of the surroundings

are an important contributor to the experience;

communities where views contribute to the landscape setting enjoyed by the

residents in the area.

3.24 Whilst this covers a number of potential visual receptors it does not automatically make

them all highly susceptible to change. Susceptibility can be categorised as follows:

Very High Susceptibility � Views that provide a key understanding and

appreciation of valued landscapes (most notably National Parks and AONB�s),

notable natural features, or historic structures/properties (such as engineering

structures or country houses).

High Visual Susceptibility - Primary views from residential properties; users of public

rights of way, informal footpaths, cycleways and public open space where the

appreciation of the wider landscape setting is critical to its function and

enjoyment; visitors to local attractions and heritage/wildlife assets where views of

the wider landscape are important to its setting.

Medium Visual Susceptibility - Secondary/restricted views from residential

properties; users of public rights of way, informal footpaths, cycleways, lanes and

public open space where the appreciation of the wider landscape setting is

moderately important to its function and enjoyment; and visitors to local

attractions and heritage/wildlife assets where views of the wider landscape make

a contribution to its setting but are not critical to its appreciation and enjoyment.

Low Visual Susceptibility - People engaged in outdoor sport and recreation where

the appreciation of views is not critical to their enjoyment; people at their

workplace where the setting is not important to the quality of working life, and road

or footpath users where views of the wider landscape make a limited contribution

to its setting.

3.25 In terms of views from residential properties it is important to note that the planning system

does not serve to protect private interests. The key issues in considering residential views is




not whether an occupier would experience financial or other loss from development but

whether such development would unacceptably affect the residential amenity of the

property and associated land holding. A number of Local Authorities have adopted

residential amenity standards for new development that have been specifically

implemented to control the relationship between existing and proposed development.

Where such standards exist, these will be relied upon and not replicated through further

assessment.

3.26 Judgements of value and susceptibility are then combined as an assessment of overall

sensitivity:

Table 3 � Matrix of Visual Sensitivity

SUSCEPTIBILITY

VALU

E


VERY HIGH Very High Very High High Medium

HIGH Very High High Medium Medium

MEDIUM High Medium Medium Low

LOW Medium Medium Low Low

3.27 The following stage of the assessment process considers the magnitude of change

imposed by the proposed development on each visual receptor. Issues that inform this

judgement include:

Size or scale: This includes the loss of important features to the character and

composition of the views, the degree of consistency between the proposals and

visual setting of the receiving landscape, and the extent of the view and

proportion of that view the proposals in likely to influence or change.

Geographic extent: The extent of the area in which the proposed change will be

visible.

Duration and reversibility of the visual effect: The timeframe, or duration of the

effect by the proposed development, and whether the effect is permanent or

temporary.




3.28 The likely magnitude of change of the development proposal can be guided by the

following criteria:

High magnitude - The proposal will cause a dominant or complete change or

contrast to the view, resulting in the loss or addition of substantial features in the

view, at odds with the existing visual character, and substantially altering the

appreciation of the view.

Medium magnitude - The proposal will cause a clearly noticeable change or

contrast to the view, which will have an effect on composition through the loss or

addition of features, noticeably altering the appreciation of the view.

Low magnitude - The proposal will cause a perceptible change or contrast in the

view, but which will not materially affect the composition or the appreciation of

the view.

Negligible magnitude - The proposal will cause a barely perceptible change or

contrast to the view that will not affect the composition or the appreciation of the

view.

No change � no part of the scheme or associated works will be discernible in the

view.

3.29 The combined judgements on the nature of the receptor (sensitivity) and the nature of the

impact (magnitude) are combined to arrive at a clear and transparent judgement of

significance. The significance of visual effects are described in the assessment text and

are guided by the matrix set out below:

Table 4 � Matrix of Landscape Significance

SENSITIVITY

MA

GN

ITUDE

O

F C

HAN

GE


HIGH Major Major Major-Moderate Moderate

MEDIUM Major-Moderate Major-Moderate Moderate Minor

LOW Moderate Moderate Minor Minimal

NEGLIGIBLE Minor Minor Minimal Minimal





significance (highlighted in blue) are those considered particularly relevant to the planning

decision making process.

Criteria of Other Factors Assessed

3.31 The assessment also considers the following aspects;

Directs and indirect effects � direct effect effects are those directly attributable to

the development. These include changes to features, character, and views.

Indirect effects are those resulting indirectly from the development. These affects

may result as a consequence of direct effects over distance from the site, or a

sequence of change over time or distance;

Seasonal variation � due to the role that vegetation can play in preventing or

limiting views, or influencing the character of the landscape, the difference

between winter and summer needs to be considered. This is considered by

assessing winter views (in the first year following completion) and in summer (after

15 years);

Beneficial, neutral, or adverse effects - adverse effects are those that would be

damaging to the quality, integrity, or key characteristics of the landscape and/or

visual resource. Beneficial effects are those that would result in an improvement in

the quality, integrity, or key characteristics of the landscape and/or visual resource.

Neutral effects are those effect that would maintain, on balance, the existing levels

of quality, integrity, or key characteristics of the landscape and/or visual resource.




4 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER

National Level

4.1 At a national level the site and its local context are identified as being located within

National Character Area (NCA) 89: Northamptonshire Vales. The key characteristics of this

NCA are identified as:

�An open landscape of gently undulating clay ridges and valleys with occasional

steep scarp slopes. There is an overall visual uniformity to the landscape and

settlement pattern.

Diverse levels of tranquillity, from busy urban areas to some deeply rural parts.

Mixed agricultural regime of arable and pasture, with arable land tending to be

on the broader, flat river terraces and smaller pastures on the slopes of many minor

valleys and on more undulating ground.

Relatively little woodland cover but with a timbered character derived largely from

spinneys and copses on the ridges and more undulating land, and from waterside

and hedgerow trees and hedgerows, though the density, height and pattern of

hedgerows are varied throughout.

A strong field pattern of predominantly 19th-century and � less frequently � Tudor

enclosure.

Distinctive river valleys of the Welland and the Nene, with flat flood plains and

gravel terraces together with their tributaries (including the Ise). Riverside meadows

and waterside trees and shrubs are common, along with flooded gravel pits, open

areas of winter flooded grassland, and wetland mosaics supporting large numbers

of wetland birds and wildfowl.

Frequent large settlements that dominate the open character of the landscape,

such as Northampton and Wellingborough, and associated infrastructure,

including major roads, often visually dominant.

Frequent small towns and large villages often characterised by red brick buildings

and attractive stone buildings in older village centres and eastern towns and

villages. Frequent imposing spired churches are also characteristic, together with

fine examples of individual historic building.




Relatively frequent, prominent historic parklands and country houses towards the

outer edges and close to more wooded areas. Other characteristics include ridge

and furrow and nationally important townships such as Sutton Bassett and Clipston.

Localised high concentrations of threshing barns and high status timberframed

farm buildings from the 18th century or earlier�

4.2 These characteristics are broadly representative of the site and its local context that

includes and open undulating farmed landscape with a timbered character derived from

spinneys and copses. The site has a strong field pattern and the local setting of the site is

characterises by the setting of Northampton to the south and wider rural settlements to

the north, east, and west.

County Level

4.3 The Northamptonshire Current Landscape Character Assessment identifies the southern

half of the site as being located within the Rolling Ironstone Valley Slopes landscape

character type (LCT). The key characteristics of this LCT are identified as:

�Broad valley slopes dissected by numerous tributary streams;

Ironstone geology expressed in local vernacular buildings and in rich red soils;

rolling landform, extensive views and sense of exposure on some prominent

locations;

steep slopes adjacent to more elevated landscapes;

numerous water bodies including the county�s largest reservoir;

productive arable farmland in medium and large scale fields predominates on

elevated land although sheep and cattle pastures also prevalent, often in smaller

fields adjacent to watercourses;

agricultural practices create a patchwork of contrasting colours and textures

extending across valley slopes;

where broadleaved woodlands and mature hedgerow trees combine, these

impart a sense of a well treed landscape;

hedgerows generally low and well clipped although intermittent sections show

evidence of decline;




well settled with numerous villages and towns;

landscape directly and indirectly influenced by the close proximity of many of the

county�s urban areas; and

building materials vary although vernacular architecture and churches display the

local ironstone.�

4.4 More specifically the southern half of the site is identified within the Moulton Slopes

landscape character area (LCA). The assessment summary of this LCA states:

�The Moulton Slopes Character Area is located to the north of Northampton. It

comprises a broad valley, through which flows the Sedge Brook, a tributary of the

Brampton Valley, and a smaller watercourse, which flows southwards into

Northampton to the west of Overstone. From the upper slopes of the valley, wide views

across rolling farmland are possible. From the slopes above Moulton, views southwards

to Northampton are largely screened by vegetation and landform. However, tall urban

elements such as the Express Lifts Tower are prominent features punctuating the skyline.

The landscape is relatively well settled, with the villages of Boughton, Moulton and

Overstone lying along the winding road that runs along the southern slopes of the

Sedge Brook valley. Pitsford is also located within the character area. This small village

is situated on the watershed between Pitsford Water and the valley of the Sedge Brook.

Land cover is typically arable farmland, although improved and semi improved

pastures are more dominant along lower valley slopes and along watercourses.

Woodland cover is low, although significant areas of deciduous woodland can be

found in the vicinity of Overstone. Cowpasture Spinney is a particularly interesting

feature. This is a linear belt of woodland running along the stream to the west of

Overstone Park. Large areas of woodland are also features of designed parklands, as

at Overstone Park and Boughton.�

4.5 The northern half of the site is identified as being located within the Clay Plateau LCT. The

key characteristics of this LCT are identified as:

�Boulder Clay deposits overlie almost the entire landscape, obscuring variations in

the underlying solid geology and giving a unity of character;

broad, elevated undulating plateau dissected and drained by numerous valleys

with convex profile valley sides;




expansive, long distance and panoramic views across open areas of plateau;

sense of exposure on some prominent locations;

limited woodland / tree cover comprising broadleaved woodlands and mature

hedgerow trees;

where trees, woodlands and undulating landform combine, they limit or define

views and create a more intimate character in places;

numerous water bodies including small reservoirs on the Naseby Plateau;

productive arable farmland within medium and large scale fields predominates on

elevated land although sheep and cattle pastures also prevalent, often in smaller

fields adjacent to watercourses;

hedgerows are often low and well clipped, although intermittent sections show

evidence of decline, and emphasise the undulating character of the landscape;

sparsely settled with small villages and isolated farms prevalent; and

monuments and landscape features associated with the Battle of Naseby are

distinctive elements of the local landscape.

4.6 More specifically the northern half of the site is identified within the Sywell Plateau

landscape character area (LCA). The assessment summary of this LCA states:

Sywell Plateau Character Area is located in the heart of Northamptonshire. It is the

most extensive of the Clay Plateaux and almost completely surrounded by the Rolling

Ironstone Valley Slopes, with the exception of a small area of Undulating Hills and

Valleys located to the northwest, and the urban centre of Wellingborough to the

southeast. The plateau rises at one point to a height of 160m ASL, although it generally

has an almost consistent elevation of around 130m ASL. The gently undulating

landform across the plateau has been formed by a series of small watercourses. Stream

action has resulted in the local erosion of the glacial till that otherwise covers the

plateau area. The area is characterised by a predominance of large to medium to

large scale arable fields generally regular or sub regular in shape, although their size

decreases to the western side of the A43(T) from Walgrave to the southern boundary,

where fields of improved grassland become more frequent. Improved pastures are

also evident surrounding village settlements and on steeper landform adjacent to




streams. The area occupied by Northampton (Sywell) Airport represents a significant

area of unimproved calcareous grassland whilst the disused airfield to the north of the

area is under arable cultivation. Woodland cover is typically low, comprising small to

moderately sized often geometric broadleaved woodlands, although significant areas

of coniferous planting can be found around Sywell Airport, including Hardwick Wood,

Hardwick Short Wood and Sywell Wood; these all comprise ancient woodland. Other

ancient woodlands in the area include Covert, Fraxton Corner, Mawsley Wood, Short

Wood, Badsaddle Wood, Withmale Park Wood and Bush Walk, representing areas that

are likely to have once formed part of more extensive woodlands. Well treed stream

sides and occasional mature and semi-mature oak and ash in hedgerows also

contribute to the overall woodland cover. Although views are generally extensive from

the plateau areas, in places woodland cover contains views, resulting in a more

intimate character.

Many of the village settlements display a compact, linear form, such as the village of

Harrington, and this comprises the principal settlement pattern. There are exceptions,

however. Brixworth, the largest settlement in the area is a compact village with an

historic core and warm, pale orange ironstone evident in many buildings, and post war

expansions to the south. Holcot, on the edge of the character area, is also a compact

village that has developed around a number of road junctions. Of particular note in

Brixworth is All Saints Church, one of the finest Anglo-Saxon churches in England, and is

still in use. Beyond this, scattered farms and dwellings predominate, frequently located

adjacent to minor country roads that criss cross the landscape, generally following the

main southwest grain of the plateau and located on interfluves between

watercourses. The most prominent main road in the area is the A43(T), from which minor

roads emerge at right angles. This runs along the spine of the plateau and is intrusive in

a number of views, along with high voltage pylons that cross the landscape. Church

spires and towers are also prominent within the landscape, including the spire at

Walgrave and square tower at Broughton, though this is beyond the area boundary.

Water towers can also been seen on the horizon in a number of locations. There are a

limited number of heritage features on the Sywell Plateau. The most notable include

limited areas of ridge and furrow; the site of the medieval village of Faxton, and

Lamport Hall, a Grade I listed house that was the home of the Isham family from 1560

to 1976.�




Local Level

4.7 At a local level the site has been considered as part of the Daventry Landscape Character

Assessment 2017. The broad LCT area and more considered LCA areas in this study broadly

replicate those identified in the wider County assessment. Likewise, the LCT key

characteristics are similar. In this assessment the southern part of the site is identified within

LCT 4 Rolling Ironstone Valley Slopes and LCA Area 4b Moulton Slopes that is assessed as

having a moderate to weak landscape condition stating:

�Wooded edges to historic parks are intact. Arable fields and the hedgerow network

are generally well maintained although there are places where these are becoming

fragmented.�

4.8 The assessment sets out a landscape strategy for this area, but it is focussed primarily on

the landscapes of Moulton and Pitsford, and the potential effects of the proposed

Northampton Northern Orbital Route (NNOR). There is not mention of the NNSUE in the

landscape strategy.

4.9 The very northern extent of the site is located within LCT 5 Clay Plateau and LCA 5b Sywell

Plateau that is assessed as having a moderate condition stating:

�The majority of landscape features are well managed although there is evidence of

hedgerow fragmentation and a loss of hedgerow trees around larger fields.�

4.10 Also, as at local level the Northampton Landscape Sensitivity and Green Infrastructure

Study 2009 (LSGI) considered the setting of the site and its associated landscape sensitivity.

This study considers the green infrastructure network that exists within the landscape, its

biodiversity, cultural heritage, landscape, and flooding/mineral resource sensitivity, and

concludes by setting out an overall sensitivity map for the study area. The site is identified

as being within an area of high-moderate sensitivity, an assessment similar to much of the

wider rural landscape surrounding Northampton. Tract of high sensitivity landscapes are

identified that are generally associated with the main watercourses and the Brampton

Valley to the north-west of Northampton. There are smaller area of medium and low

sensitivity landscapes and these tend to be associated with the main urban form.

4.11 The assessment of landscape effects will consider the findings of these studies alongside a

more detailed assessment of the immediate character of the site. As part of this study a

landscape strategy will be formulated taking into consideration primary mitigation

measures that will include the type, scale, appearance and siting of the proposed




development and its associated open spaces, and secondary mitigation measures in the

form of structural planting, planting character, and landscape management. The

assessment will consider the likely effects arising from the construction process, the

operation scheme, and long-term effects (year 15).




5 VISUAL SETTING

5.1 A Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) plan has been produced as part of this landscape

scoping report. The ZTV plan identifies the theoretical visibility of the site in its existing state

as farmland, and the potential visibility of the development scenario of up to 10m in height

above existing ground levels.

5.2 The ZTV model have been produced in accordance with GLVIA3 guidance adopting a

multiple point assessment using a 50m grid across the study area with an assumed eyelevel

of 1.7m above existing ground level. The ZTV adopts a bare earth scenario (i.e does not

account for the buffering and screening provided by features such as buildings,

woodland, trees, and hedgerows.

5.3 The ZTV provides the starting point for the identification of representative views in the field

that will be the basis for making judgements against the likely visual effects arising from the

development.

5.4 It is anticipated that the number and location of representative views will not be dissimilar

to those used in the assessment of visual effects in the Pegasus LVIA.

5.5 The ZTV shows the likely visual envelope of the site and development being constrained to

the north-west by the ridgeline that separates the local landscape setting of the site from

Pitsford Reservoir beyond. The ZTV identifies possible views from the ridgelines to the east

of Brixworth and south of Walgrave.

5.6 To the south the visual envelope will be restricted by the built-up fringes of Northampton

and Moulton, and further to the south-east by the wooded setting of Overtone Park. To

the eats the ZTV identifies possible views from the ridgelines to the east and west of Mears

Ashby, and to the south-east the fringes of Earls Barton. In reality these views are likely to

be heavily restricted by intervening vegetation cover.

5.7 To the north and north-east the visual envelope of the site is contained by the local setting

of landform. In reality this will be further reinforced by the large woodland blocks of Sywell

Wood and Hardwick Wood.

5.8 Representative views will be taken from public rights of way, the public highway, and

public access land and assessed against the methodology set out in this report.




6 CUMMULATIVE AND IN COMBINAITON EFFECTS

6.1 This site has already been the subject of a recent cumulative assessment of likely

landscape and visual effects.

6.2 As part of this scoping exercise we would request that the Local Authority identifies any

committed developments, or proposal under consideration that should be assessed in

combination with this proposal.

6.3 The assessment of cumulative landscape and visual effects carried out in the Pegasus CE

will be taken into consideration as part of this LVIA.



REF: GL0894 DATE: MAY 2018

Figures

Key

Site boundary

tel: 01530 265688 email: [email protected] web: www.golbyandluck.co.ukThis drawing has been produced by GOLBY AND LUCK LTD © all rights reserved: 207 Leicester Road, Ibstock, Leicestershire LE67 6HP

no

rth

Licence No. 100053702Scale

1:25000@A2Date

03/05/2018Checked

SG

Number/Figure

GL0894 01Project

Drawing title

Overstone Green

Site Context

Client

Davidsons Developments Ltd& Gallagher Estates

l a n d s c a p e a r c h i t e c t sl a n d s c a p e a r c h i t e c t s

golby luck+

Scale

1:10000@A2Date

03/05/2018Checked

SG

Number/Figure

GL0894 02

Key

Site boundary


no

rth

Project

Drawing title

Overstone Green

Site Location

Client



golby luck+

Licence No. 100053702

The Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) has been based on the proposed development parameters mapping the broad areas of development at the specified heights adopting a ‘bare earth’ policy. Eye height has been set at 1.7m AOD.

This ZTV has been run using a multiple point analysis mapped at 50m intervals across the study area. This ZTV has been produced using LSS Elite digital terrain modelling software.

Key

Site boundary


no

rth

Zone of theoretical visibility - baseline setting of undeveloped site

Zone of theoretical visibility - up to10m development height range across site

Licence No. 100053702Scale

1:25000@A2Date

03/05/2018Checked

SG

Number/Figure

GL0894 07Project

Drawing title

Overstone Green

Zone of Theoretical Visibility(ZTV)Client



golby luck+

REF: GL0084 DATE: NOVEMBER 2013 (AMENDED: MARCH 2014)

l a n d s c a p e a r c h i t e c t s

golby luck+

T e l : 0 1 5 3 0 2 6 5 6 8 8 W e b : w w w . g o l b y a n d l u c k . c o . u k

E m a i l : i n f o @ g o l b y a n d l u c k . c o . u k

Of f ice : 2 07 Le ice s te r Ro ad, I b s tock , Le ice ste r sh i r e , LE 67 6 HP

G ol by an d Luck L TD (C om pany No . 90 377 76 ) Reg i s t e r e d in Eng l and an d Wal e s

Appendix D

Ecology Input into ES Scoping

Aspect Ecology ● Hardwick Business Park ● Noral Way ● Banbury ● OX16 2AF ● Tel: 01295 276066 ● www.aspect-ecology.com

Technical Briefing Note

Project: Overstone Green, Northampton

TN1: Ecology Input into ES Scoping Date: 3 May 2017

Ecology scoping request The Environmental Statement chapter would cover potential effects relating to ecology at the site. Key ecology legislation, policy and professional best-practice guidance will inform and guide the assessment works, notably including:

• The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations, 2010 (as amended);

• The Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended);

• The Countryside and Rights of Way Act, 2000;

• The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, 2006;

• Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations, 2011;

• The Hedgerows Regulations, 1997;

• The Protection of Badgers Act, 1992;

• The Wild Mammals (Protection) Act, 1996;

• National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF); and

• CIEEM ‘Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom’ (CIEEM, 2016).

Baseline Conditions The site has been subject to a desktop study and an extended Phase Habitat Survey in March 2018 in order to ascertain the general ecological value of the land contained within the boundaries of the site and to identify the main habitats and ecological features present. The site was surveyed based on standard Phase 1 Habitat Survey methodology, and extended, in line with the Guidelines for Preliminary Ecological Appraisal. In terms of designations, no statutory designations have been identified within or adjacent to the site. The nearest statutory designation to the site is Crowfields Common Local Nature Reserve, located approximately 1.4km from the site, whilst the nearest European-level designation is the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Ramsar and Special Protection Area (SPA), located approximately 7.3km from the site. The majority of the site is considered to be of low ecological value, being dominated by intensively managed arable land. Habitats of elevated value are present within the site, in the form of hedgerows, trees and the watercourse and woodland habitats associated with the non-statutory designation, Cowpasture Spinney Local Wildlife Site (LWS), which is in part located in the east of the site.

Overstone Green, Northampton

1001812 TN1 Ecology Input into ES Scoping vf 2

In terms of fauna, the site is considered to provide opportunities for Badger, roosting bats in buildings and trees, foraging and commuting bats, birds (including nesting Barn Owl) and reptiles. Specific Phase 2 survey work is therefore proposed to be undertaken at the site this year during the appropriate seasonal window and in line with best practice guidance. Assessment Methodology Evaluation of Ecological Baseline The evaluation of ecological features and resources should be based on sound professional judgement whilst also drawing on the latest available industry guidance and research. The approach taken will be based on that described in ‘Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland’ published by the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) in 2016 whereby important ecological features are identified, and these are considered within a defined geographical context using the following frame of reference:

• International;

• National;

• Regional;

• County;

• District;

• Local; or

• Site (not of elevated importance at a local level).

Features considered to be of importance at the Site level only will be scoped out of this assessment (with the exception of protected species which are considered in terms of mitigation and any legislative requirements). Assessment of Impacts and Significance The CIEEM publication ‘Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland’ (2016) also sets out a methodology for the assessment of potential effects arising from development. These methods are followed which can be summarised as below. Using the agreed parameters of the scheme, likely effects are determined with reference to aspects of the ecological structure and function on which the feature or resource depends. This includes factors such as the available resources, ecological processes, human influences, historical context, ecological relationships, ecological role or function and ecosystem properties. Based on this context, the nature of the effect is characterised and considered under the following parameters:

• Positive or negative – will the activity lead to an adverse, beneficial or neutral effect;

• Extent – the size or amount of an impact, the area of habitat or number of individuals affected;

• Duration – the time for which the impact is expected to last prior to recovery or replacement,

i.e. short-term or long-term;

• Reversibility – an effect may be irreversible in that recovery is not possible within a reasonable

timescale or there is no reasonable chance of action being taken to reverse it, i.e. permanent

or temporary; and

• Timing and frequency – some changes may only cause an impact if they coincide with critical

life-stages or seasons, whilst frequent events may cause a greater effect than a single event.

Overstone Green, Northampton

1001812 TN1 Ecology Input into ES Scoping vf 3

Based on these parameters, the scale of effect (or magnitude) can be summarised as follows. This is in relation to adverse effects, although a similar scale can be applied to beneficial effects.

Table 1.1. Assessment of scale of effect.

Scale of impact

Nature of effect

Substantial A permanent or long-term effect on the receptor, which may result in severe damage to key characteristics and implications for the integrity of the receptor or its conservation status.

Moderate Impacts resulting in partial loss of or damage to a receptor, which could have implications for the integrity of the receptor or its conservation status.

Slight Short-term or temporary impacts resulting in only minor loss of or damage to a receptor, unlikely to have implications for the integrity of the receptor or its conservation status.

Negligible No effect or only a short-term reversible impact with no long-term effect on the receptor.

Based on the nature of the effect, an assessment is then made on whether the effect on a habitat or species is likely to be ecologically ‘significant’. CIEEM guidance defines a ‘significant effect’ as “an effect that either support or undermines biodiversity conservation objectives for ‘important ecological features’ or for biodiversity in general”, going on to state that “significant effects encompass impacts on structure and function of defined sites, habitats or ecosystems and the conservation status of habitats and species (including extent, abundance and distribution).” Significance is also assessed at an appropriate geographic scale. For example, a significant effect on a Site of Special Scientific interest (SSSI) would be of national significance. Notwithstanding this however, consideration is also given to whether an effect is significant at a scale below the geographic context in which the feature is considered important. For some ecological features (notably designations), there may be an existing statement of the conservation status of a feature and objectives and targets against which the effect can be judged. For example, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) are assessed under six condition categories, namely favourable, unfavourable recovering, unfavourable no change, unfavourable declining, part destroyed, and destroyed. An effect that exerts a change between these condition categories would be considered as significant. Where no existing statement of conservation status is available, an assessment is made against the existing status and condition of the habitat or species population, as recorded by survey data and background information, taking into account the level of ecological resilience or existing conditions that a habitat or species is currently subject to. An effect resulting in a long-term change to the existing background population trend or status at a given geographical level would be considered as significant. In this regard, a significant beneficial impact could be defined as one that prevents or slows an existing decline in the favourable conservation status of a habitat or population as much as one that permitted a population or habitat area to increase. The likelihood or uncertainty of an effect occurring as predicted is also considered. To assist with defining certainty, the following scale is used (with broad confidence levels indicated):

• Certain/near-certain - probability estimated at 95% chance or higher;

• Probable - probability estimated above 50% but below 95%;

• Unlikely - probability estimated above 5% but less than 50%; or

• Extremely unlikely - probability estimated at less than 5%.

Documents

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT SCOPING REPORT · 1.12 Specifically, this Scoping Report sets out the views of the Applicant, as to the proposed scope of the environmental issues