LANDSCAPE AND EXCHANGE LAND

Transcription

1 THE NORTH SOMERSET COUNCIL (SOUTH BRISTOL LINK CLASSIFIED ROAD) SIDE ROADS ORDER 2013 THE NORTH SOMERSET COUNCIL (SOUTH BRISTOL LINK) COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER 2013 THE NORTH SOMERSET COUNCIL (SOUTH BRISTOL LINK) COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER (No 2) 2014 EXCHANGE LAND CERTIFICATES IN RESPECT OF SPECIAL CATEGORY LAND PROOF OF EVIDENCE OF NICHOLAS JOHN ROWSON BSc(Hons)Hort, BLD, CMLI, MloH North Somerset Council On behalf of I n respect of

2 Contents 1. Personal Details 2. Scope of Evidence 3. Statement of Experience of those Assisting the Historic Environment evidence section 4. Background to the Environmental Design of the Scheme 5. Planning History 6. Environmental Design 7. Appraisal of the Scheme 8. Highridge Common Exchange Land 9. Open Space and Exchange Land 10. Open Space Within ReseNed Corridor 11. Historic Environment 12. Consideration of Objections 13. Conclusions Appendices (Contained in NSC5/2) Appendix 1 - Appendix 2 - Appendix 3- Appendix 4- Appendix 5 - Appendix 6- Appendix 7- Scheme Landscape Design Drawings National Character Area 118: Bristol, Avon Valleys and Ridges (Extracts) North Somerset Landscape Character Assessment SPD (Extracts) Scheme Sections Location Plan NSC and BCC Planning Conditions relevant to Landscape & Heritage - Summary table Commons Registration Act Record and Plan Extent of Common Land Required for CPO and Exchange ii

3 Appendix 8- Appendix 9- Appendix 1 0- Appendix 11 - Appendix 12 - Appendix 13 - Appendix 14 - Appendix 15 - Appendix 16 - Common Land Options Plan Common Land Option 1 and Option 2 Plan Common Land Construction Area Plan SNCI Essential Mitigation Plan Site Photographs - Option 1 and Option 2 Exchange Land A370 to Railway Line Open Space CPO and Exchange Land Plan ReseNe Corridor Open Space CPO Land Plan Heritage Asset Table and Plan Glossary iii

4 1. PERSONAL DETAILS 1.1 I am employed by Atkins Limited as Principal Landscape Architect for the South West of England and Wales. 1.2 i have practised as a landscape architect since I joined Atkins Ltd. in January 1988 and have been in my current post, as manager of the landscape department, since then. I am also part of the Bristol regional management team. I have acted as landscape architect or environmental coordinator for a number of major landscape design, land use, highway and environmental schemes for which i have prepared, or overseen the preparation of, environmental assessment studies. 1.3 i am a holder of a Bachelor of Science, with Honours, Degree in Horticulture from the University of Bath and a Bachelor of Landscape Design Degree from the University of Manchester. i am a Member of the Institute of Horticulture and a Chartered Member of the Landscape Institute. 1.4 I am duly authorised to make this statement on behalf of North Somerset CounciL. I hereby declare that insofar as the contents of this proof of evidence are matters within my knowledge they are true. Insofar as they are not within my direct knowledge, they are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and are drawn from documentation and information to which I have had access. The evidence which I have prepared and provided for this Inquiry has been prepared and is given in accordance with the guidance of the Landscape Institute and I confirm that the opinions expressed are my true and professional opinions. 4

5 2 SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 2.1 I am the Environmental Coordinator and lead appraisal Landscape Architect for the South Bristol Link (lithe Scheme"). I have worked on the Scheme since April 2011 and have visited the area on a number of occasions between then and 2014 to support the preparation of the landscape design, the preparation of the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment chapter of the EIA, the coordination of the environmental aspects of the scheme, the preparation and submission of the planning application and to prepare evidence. 2.2 Whilst my area of special ism is Landscape Design and the assessment of Landscape and Visual Impacts (LVIA), i regularly act as the Environmental Coordinator for major transportation schemes. This entails the co-ordination of the assessment of environmental impacts and provision of appropriate mitigation across the range of environmental specialisms identified by formal scoping and screening. I have acted as Environmental coordinator for this scheme and in this capacity my proof of evidence addresses landscape design, LVIA and other environmental assessments not confirmed as screened out by North Somerset and Bristol City Councils and not covered by other expert witness. The Scheme design was prepared by CH2M Hill Halcrow in liaison with the Atkins environmental team. The Scheme landscape designs (Appendix 1), together with the landscape strategy, Photomontage Report and Artistic impressions prepared by CH2M Hill (CD/4/6) formed part of the planning application. As explained later, some details of the landscape submission are being updated to address specific planning conditions relating to the scheme design 2.3 My evidence will demonstrate that in making the Orders which are the subject of this Public Inquiry, due account has been taken of all landscape and heritage considerations and the environmental aspects of the scheme would meet North Somerset Council's scheme objectives. 2.4 My evidence begins by describing the background to the environmental design of the Scheme, the policy context and the environmental issues covered in the Major Scheme Business case (MSBC) and Best and Final Bid (BAFB) submissions for funding approval to the Department for Transport. It then 5

6 summarises the Scheme changes since BAFB was awarded and sets out the Landscape design strategy and the environmental features. 2.5 The evidence continues with a detailed description of the Scheme approach to landscape design and to the mitigation of landscape and visual impacts arising from the Scheme; this is done by reference to a logical division of the Scheme into 5 sections, following the approach taken in the LVIA and DAS. 2.6 In a separate chapter within my proof (Chapter 8) I set out the rationale for the selection of the exchange land for the area of Highridge Common lost to the development and for the extent of land taken for this purpose, together with the exchange land proposals elsewhere in the scheme (Chapter 9). 2.7 My evidence then provides a summary of the potential heritage impacts (Chapter 11) from the Scheme and the proposals for their mitigation. I then address each of the formal objections to the CPO and SRO draft orders which relate to landscape, visual or heritage matters received. I conclude my evidence by summarising how the environmental aspects of the proposals would meet the Scheme objectives. 6

7 3 STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE OF THOSE ASSISTING THE HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT EVIDENCE SECTION 3.1 In preparing my evidence, I have been assisted on matters of Heritage and Archaeology by Mr Ken Sabel and Mr Andrew Holmes, both of Atkins Ltd. 3.2 Mr Ken Sabel is Associate Director at Atkins Ltd and has worked in the Historic Environment field for over 28 years. He has a certificate in Architectural History and an MSc in Historic Conservation. He has extensive experience on large scale infrastructure projects including on various road schemes. Mr Sabel leads the built environment projects within Atkins Heritage and is widely published. Twice a year he presents the masterclass for the RTPI on the Historic Environment on the Planning Process. 3.3 Andrew Holmes is a Principal Archaeologist at Atkins Ltd. He has worked as a professional archaeologist for over 16 years. He has a BA (Hons) in Archaeology and an MSc in Advanced Environmental and Energy Studies. He has extensive experience in transport and other infrastructure projects. He is currently managing the archaeological and built heritage issues for several large infrastructure projects. Mr Holmes has been actively involved in the development of the Scheme and in undertaking consultations with the County heritage officers and with English Heritage. Andrew Holmes is a full member of the Institute for Archaeologists (MlfA). 7

8 4 BACKGROUND TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN OF THE SCHEME Site Description 4.1 The Scheme is proposed within two distinct character areas, passing from the rural hinterland south west of Bristol within North Somerset District, into the suburban areas of Withywood and Bishopsworth in south BristoL. The rural section of the route, from the A370 to the eastern edge of Highridge Common, lies within the Green Belt. In developing the Scheme and the mitigation for landscape and environmental impacts, consideration was given to the designated landscape characters of the area, supplemented by more detailed site obsenation and review. Landscape Character 4.2 This section involves the identification of those features or combinations of elements that contribute to the character of the landscape, thereby enabling the special character and qualities of an area to be understood. 4.3 Assessment starts at a national level which is now under the remit of Natural England to undertake National Character Area (NCA) assessments. These descriptions are broad scale, and were used as a starting point in understanding landscape character for this assessment. County and district wide assessments are the next tier that were studied and described. The descriptions of these landscape character areas were taken as a design tool for development. They establish whether the proposed development is responding to its context. They also inform the development of appropriate mitigation measures. National and regional landscape character assessments 4.4 Landscape character guidance is fully described in Chapter 2.14 of the ES (CD/4/2). In summary the following character areas were considered in the development of the Scheme design: a) National Character Area 118: Bristol, Avon Valleys and Ridges (Appendix 2 - Extracts). b) North Somerset Landscape Character Assessment SPD (adopted December 2005) (Appendix 3 - Extracts). 8

9 National Countryside Character 4.5 The Scheme falls with character area Bristol, Avon Valleys and Ridges. There are a number of broad objectives given for this character area, those relevant to the Scheme being: a) Much of the area falls within the Forest of Avon Trust, a charity established in Their objectives include getting trees planted individually, in gardens, streets, green spaces or as woodlands, with a strong focus on areas of low tree cover. They provide advice to improve the management of woodlands and help safeguard these where they are under threat. b) On agricultural land there are many areas where hedgerow management could be improved for landscape and wildlife benefits. c) The continued management of pastures and calcareous grassland is important. d) The area has a rich and complex industrial history. The consenatiön and interpretation of historic features, particularly those associated with the coal industry, rural mills and early factory building, needs to be addressed. Regional Countryside Character 4.6 The far northern section of Scheme falls within landscape character type B1 - Land Yeo and Ken River Floodplain which forms part of the North Somerset Landscape Character Assessment (Appendix 3- Extracts). The Landscape Character assessment advocates a number of landscape guidelines for this area, those relevant to the Scheme being: a) Conserve the rural, pastoral character of the area. b) Enhance the hedgerow network (ensuring cyclical hedge cutting and nurturing new and existing hedgerow trees). c) Management of streams and ponds for biodiversity including planting bank side trees for light shade. d) Promote opportunities for creating areas of unimproved grassland and wetland habitats. e) Consider opportunities to introduce wet woodland possibly for screening intrusive land uses, urban edge and transport corridors. 9

10 4.7 The central section of the Scheme falls within character area J4 - Colliter's Brook Rolling Valley Farmland. Relevant landscape guidelines for this area are: a) Promote sensitive, cyclical/rotational management of hedgerows and nurture new and existing hedgerow trees. b) Consider opportunities for grassland, woodland and wetland habitat creation, particularly in areas which are marginal for farming. c) Minimise visual effects of modern settlement along the A roads for instance through careful screening and replanting of hedgerows and or new woodland belts. 4.8 A full description of the character of the land along the proposed route alignment and surrounding area is provided within the Landscape and Visual Impact chapter (Chapter 2.14) of the Environmental Statement (CD/4/2), summarised in the Design and Access Statement (CD/4/6). For ease of reference a brief summary is provided below following the same 5 route sections: a) Section 1 - A370 to Railway Line; b) Section 2 - Railway Line through to Castle Farm and the A38 (Bridgwater Road) c) Section 3 - A38 to the edge of Highridge Common; d) Section 4 - Highridge Common to King Georges Road; and e) Section 5 - King Georges Road and Queens Road junction to Hengrove Way 4.9 These are illustrated on a scheme sections location plan (Appendix 4). Section 1: A370 to Railway Line 4.10 This section is bounded by the A370 along the northern extent of the Scheme and the main Bristol to Taunton railway line on embankment to the south. The settlement of Long Ashton, which is a designated ConseNation Area, lies to the north. The Ashton Court Grade 11* Registered Park and Garden is located at a distance of 0.5km directly north of the A370. Landscape surrounding the Court is identified as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) The Long Ashton Park & Ride site lies adjacent to the A370 in the north east of this section, which will link with the proposed bus-only route via the Ashton 10

11 Vale to Temple Meads BRT route. Ashton Vale Fields Wildlife Site lies immediately east of the bus only route. Public Rights of Way (PROWs) and a National Trail known as the Community Forest Path meet and cross the proposed road carriageway and bus route at various points, with Longmoor Brook dissecting the area in an east-west direction The landscape within this section is characterised by level open ground comprising agricultural fields lain to grassland, aligned by hedgerows and scattered trees. An area of floodplain lies in the north of the section, which includes marsh and semi improved grassland. There is an existing crossing of the railway provided by an underpass. Section 2: Railway Line to Castle Farm and A38 (Bridgwater Road) 4.13 Southwards from the railway line, the route passes through countryside designated as Green Belt between Ashton Vale and south west BristoL. The route is aligned to the west of Colliter's Brook which is identified as a Site of Nature ConseNation Importance (SNCI). Here the route passes through the eastern flanks of South Bank Meadow Yanley Wildlife Site and Hanging Hill Wood Wildlife Site, an area of ancient woodland The route crosses the former Yanley landfill site owned and managed by Viridor Waste Exeter Ltd and ascends to reach the A38 to the east of Castle Farm, a Grade 1I Listed Building. An existing access road runs to the west of the brook and the proposed route broadly follows the alignment of this existing track in this section. PROWs and the National Trail run alongside and cross the route through this section The wider landscape is characterised by large scale pastoral fields separated with hedgerows and trees. The buildings of Yew Tree Farm are located to the east of the route, with the extensive Computershare office building situated further east, accessed from the A38. The urban edge of south west Bristol lies beyond the route corridor to the south of the A38. Section 3: A38 to the edge of Highridge Common 4.16 This section completes the extent of the route within the Green Belt, passing from North Somerset District into Bristol City at the western boundary of 11

12 Highridge Common. The proposed roundabout junction with the A38 will be centred over an existing triple conjoined Lime Kiln structure which, although not formally designated, is recognised as a locally important heritage asset and will hence be retained. Open fields and gently undulating terrain continue to the south of the A38, with the wider landscape dominated by the backdrop of the residential properties forming the urban edge of Bristol lying east. The residential property of Highridge Cottage and the cluster of buildings of Burnell Ltd are located south of the proposed route, with Chestnut Cottage and its associated curtilage buildings to the north. Section 4: Highridge Common to King Georges Road 4.17 The proposed route crosses the northern section of Highridge Common, an area of designated common land comprising open grassland with scattered scrub and tree cover, enclosed along the western boundary by hedgerows. The Common is identified as an SNCI Highridge Green and Highridge Road align the eastern and southern boundaries of the Common, fronted by two storey detached and semi-detached residential properties within generous sized plots, most with individual vehicular accesses. Section 5: King Georges Road and Queens Road junction to Hengrove Way 4.19 This forms the urban section of the proposed route passing through the Withywood and Bishopsworth areas of south BristoL. The route passes along King Georges Road, a residential street of two storey detached and semidetached properties, each with front and rear gardens enclosed by a variety of boundary treatments. Each side of the road is fronted by a strip of wide amenity grass with a row of intermittent trees and standard lighting columns. This is traversed by strips of tarmac surfacing used as crossovers to individual properties and informal parking. Footways align the road alongside the property boundaries. The proposed route then crosses Queens Road to enter an area of unmanaged grassland and scrub scattered with trees which forms a BCC adopted resened corridor east-west between areas of housing from Queens Road to Hareclive Road, crossed by surfaced and unsurfaced pathway 12

13 connections between the housing estates. These estates are characterised by two storey detached and semi-detached properties with some three storey apartment blocks arranged along cui de sacs accessed from Goulston Road and Gatehouse Avenue. A large area of green space is located to the east of Hareclive Road which will accommodate a new junction for the proposed route. This is fronted by a mixture of residential properties along Whitland Road to the south and the commercial properties of Cater Road Business Park to the north, fronting Whitchurch Lane Once joined with Whitchurch Lane and onto Cater Road Roundabout, this will complete the new carriageway of the Scheme. Buses will then follow existing roads along Hengrove Way, through Imperial Park and onwards to Hengrove Park via Whitchurch Lane My evidence will demonstrate that the approved design appropriately reflects the existing landscape character of the area is appropriate in its extent to achieve this and does not have an unacceptable adverse impact on the landscape character of the area. 13

14 5 PLANNING POLICY 5.1 In respect of planning policy, Mrs Janette Shaw provides evidence on planning policy context. 5.2 I would note that, whilst the Forest of Avon Trust did make representations to the planning application, this was neutral in character. No objection to the planning applications was received from any of the statutory environmental bodies. Likewise, none of those organisations have objected to the CPO process. 14

15 6 ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN Scheme Background and Design Principles 6.1 In developing the Scheme since its inception a number of design principles have been established and have been considered in the design evaluation, review and development. These are set out in the Design and Access Statement (DAS), the South Bristol Link Route Corridor Guidelines, the SBL Visual Identity Guidelines (VIG) and the submitted Landscape Strategy (all forming CD/4/6). They can be summarised as follows: a) To satisfy the objectives of the Scheme. b) To design a road and associated facilities that comply with current design standards, resulting in a road that is accessible, effective and safe for all users. c) To minimise the environmental impact of the Scheme whilst achieving the overall objectives. d) To design the facilities with due consideration to all user groups, including those driving the route and those cycling or walking along or across the route. e) To design the Scheme with due consideration to those adjacent to the route and who will be impacted upon by the road and its associated facilities. f) To design the route with due consideration to the views expressed by all stakeholders, from statutory consultees to local residents and businesses. 6.2 The final alignment of the Scheme and details of the engineering design are provided in the evidence of Mr Philip Paterson (NSC/2/1). Environmental Consultation - Public, Stakeholders, Statutory Environmental Bodies (SEBs), NSC/BCC Officers 6.3 Throughout the development of the Scheme there has been wide ranging engagement with the public, stakeholders, SEBs and the officers of the two councils. 6.4 Two Environmental Liaison Group meetings were held in Statutory organisations (Environment Agency, English Heritage and Natural England) and local authority officers were invited to these meetings, which covered both the SBL and NFHP schemes, their design and the potential environmental 15

16 issues arising. Subsequently separate meetings and liaison took place between the designers, the EIA team and individual consultees to review and agree design and environmental mitigation approaches. As noted, this extensive liaison resulted in no formal objections from those bodies to the planning application or CPO publication. SCOpin9 Opinions 6.5 The EIA process commenced in earnest with the preparation of the Scoping Report issued to the two local authorities in March 2012 (CD/4/3). Formal Scoping Opinions were received in May 2012, which have formed the basis for the environmental assessment and the extent of issues to be addressed as part of the planning application, which in turn have informed the early scheme design process. Pre-application Consultation 6.6 The Scheme design and route alignment remained largely unchanged between the BAFB submission in September 2011 and the draft scheme consulted upon at an initial pre-application stage in November 2011 with BCC and NSC Development Management Officers. Minor amendments to the alignment and Scheme layout were made during this period to enhance the environmental benefits, reduce environmental impacts and to enable a safer and more pleasant non-motorised user experience of the Scheme. These developments were led by the environmental and landscape team working with the highway engineers to ensure a balanced approach to the Scheme design. The resultant design formed the basis of the formal pre-application public consultation held in May and June The methodology for the pre-application consultation strategy for the Scheme, prepared in April 2012 was driven by the Statement of Community Involvement documents (SCI) produced by Bristol City Council and North Somerset CounciL. 6.8 As a result of the pre-application consultation held in May and June 2012, a total of 1502 comments were received from some 290 statutory organisations, local and special interest groups and the residents and businesses surrounding the proposed scheme. 16

17 Issues Raised at Pre-Application Stage and Main Design Changes 6.9 As a result of comments received in response to the pre-application consultation, a comprehensive review of the scheme design followed from July 2012 to March This involved ongoing engagement with local and statutory organisations and a further review of environmental and engineering options. The Scheme layout was developed with regard to optimising: a) The alignment, with particular regard to the potential impact on the Ashton Court 'borrowed landscape' and the section between the A370 and the A38, and the section over Highridge Common; b) The junction layouts, with particular consideration to achieving a balance between traffic capacity, facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, junction footprint and environmental impact; and c) The route for pedestrians and cyclists along the route, as far as possible keeping the shared facility to one side of the highway The final Scheme design has been developed as a collaborative exercise balancing landscape and environmental mitigation with engineering standards. Mr Philip Paterson deals with and explains these design developments in his Proof of Evidence The close involvement of landscape designers and other environmental disciplines in the Scheme development in large part culminated with an Environmental Statement and an application scheme layout which raised no objection from the statutory environmental bodies and which was approved by the two Local Planning Authorities (CD/2/1, CD/2/2). 17

18 7 APPRAISAL OF THE SCHEME Landscape Scheme 7.1 Full details of the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment are set out in the Environmental Statement (CD/4/1 to CD/4n inclusive). 7.2 The Scheme layout and design features are provided in the Core Documents (CD/2/19 to CD/2/23 inclusive). 7.3 The landscaping proposals are shown on the Landscape Drawings (Appendix 1). 7.4 The landscaping and habitat creation/enhancement measures are an integral part of the Scheme, pay due regard to local distinctiveness and contribute positively to the local context. The Scheme provides mitigation for impacts on landscape character, visual amenity and biodiversity. 7.5 The landscape scheme, which forms the basis of the environmental mitigation, has been developed alongside, in particular, the ecological and heritage suneys. Environmental constraints and opportunities for essential mitigation or landscape improvement have informed and assisted in the development of the engineering scheme, both in terms of horizontal and vertical alignment and in respect of the extents of land take. 7.6 The landscape design seeks to integrate the Scheme improvements into the existing landscape; ensuring essential mitigation is provided whilst minimising the land take necessary to achieve the mitigation aims. 7.7 A number of trees will be affected by the Scheme. These have been assessed by a qualified Arboriculturist in accordance with BS5837:2005.Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction' and are considered to be of low value. The loss of the trees will not have a great effect on landscape amenity as they are only viewed by a few properties and the users of the existing road. The desirability of the Scheme outweighs the amenity value of the trees to be removed. Trees which are close to the Scheme will be protected. 7.8 Mitigation which forms part of the design is as follows: a) New hedgebank and hedgerow planting, new woodland planting, new species rich grassland, earth shaping, mounding, hard and soft materials which are sympathetic with the local landscape character, 18

19 b) Avoiding loss and damage to valuable landscape features notably the existing vegetation during the construction; c) Use of native planting and seeding of local provenance; d) An appropriate diverse mix of species in planting to enhance biodiversity and habitat creation; and e) Visual screen planting. Relevant Planning Conditions 7.9 The conditions to the BCC and NSC Planning Approvals (CD/2/1 and CD/2/2 respectively) provide a significant degree of environmental protection, confirm many of the assumptions and design intent within the application documents and plans and set out some specific design changes required to be made. In terms of Landscape, visual and heritage considerations, the relevant conditions are tabulated in Appendix 5. Landscape and Visual Considerations 7.10 See Section plan (Appendix 4) for location of each section. Section 1: A370 to Railway Line 7.11 The landscape of this section of the proposed route is typified by rolling valley farmland with good quality pasture fields being divided by mature hedges and hedgerow trees. Much of the area is low lying and prone to occasional flooding. A network of drains connect into Ashton, Colliter's and Longmoor Brooks The proposals focus on screening views of the road and any associated highway infrastructure from the Ashton Court Estate; reinstating vegetated field boundaries whilst retaining the open rolling landscape character An industrial estate forms part of the eastern edge with the Park & Ride link generally hugging the east side of the fields it passes through. The existing public right of way running parallel to this link will be amended and routed immediately adjacent to the carriageway The proposals include: a) Native tree and shrub belts to reinforce existing belts of vegetation between existing public right of way, roads and the new highway. 19

20 b) A native woodland belt immediately east of the proposed A370 roundabout and on the north side of the Scheme. Planted partially on the embankments, once well-established this will provide a good belt of screening. c) Native hedgerow parallel to the Scheme on the embankments set back sufficiently for ease of future maintenance. d) Scattered small groups of native trees on embankments ensuring trees are set sufficiently back from the carriageway edge. Typically feathered trees and light standards. e) Highway grass verge immediately adjacent to carriageway. f) Embankments (with the exception of those in front of native tree and shrub belts) seeded with a species rich grass. g) The integration of drainage basins, parts of which are intended to be permanently wet. Bank profiles vary to create undulating margins allowing growth of emergent vegetation. The basin structures will be seeded with a 'pond edge' type grass mix. Seasonal variations in water levels will naturally dictate what species within the mix thrive and where. h) Creation of flood storage areas north of the retained Community Forest Path avoiding the loss of any 'Category A' trees. i) An area of native woodland to reinforce screening of the Industrial Estate j) An area of native woodland west of the Brookgate junction which responds to existing hedged field boundaries. k) Access for maintenance vehicles is provided alongside the existing vegetation at the southern end of the industrial estate and along the two stream lines. Section 2: Railway Line to Castle Farm and A38 (Bridgwater Road) 7.15 This section is largely distinguished by a rural environment that has been the subject of considerable change, substantially as a result of extensive landfill operations. It is well wooded and includes Hanging Hill Wood, an important landscape feature In the main the proposed road corridor runs along the current alignment of the landfill access road. However, given the complex topography of the location and the requirements to create a safe road accordant with legal requirements, engineered slopes and cut require some land take and loss of vegetation. 20

21 7.17 As well as protecting areas of retained trees as indicated in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment (CD/4/3), the proposals consist of: a) The section between the railway and Hanging Hill Wood generally consists of seeded embankments and small belts of native tree and shrub planting. The native tree and shrub planting will help tie the existing retained vegetation back into the fabric of the landscape. b) Topsoil stripped through this section of woodland will be re-used locally on areas of compensatory native woodland and some embankments to act as a natural, local provenance seed bank. c) Embankments through the central area of this section will be covered with topsoil from other areas of the Scheme. d) An area of proposed native woodland adjoining Hanging Hill Wood as a new area of compensatory tree planting to create an extension to the wood. e) The reuse of brash and felled lumber within the landscape proposals along this section will enhance the biodiversity of the local area. Chipped brash generated from the arisings of felled vegetation will be used as hibernacula to create new habitats for amphibians, reptiles and invertebrates. Section 3: A38 to the edge of Highridge Common 7.18 This section of the route is currently in use as farmland with good quality pasture fields divided by mature hedges and hedgerow trees The positioning of the roundabout has enabled a group of valued remnant kilns to be retained at the centre of it. Retaining clear visibility splays on the approaches to the junction has been considered. South of the A38 roundabout the land is primarily in agricultural use, grassland and associated hedges of a number of farmsteads. Through this section the route is purposefully sinuous to discourage high speeds and increase the amount of usable space on either side The proposals in the section will include: a) Reinforcing the existing screening vegetation between Castle Farm and the roundabout, minimising any adverse effect on the setting of the listed building. b) Native belts of tree and shrub planting which both reform field boundaries as well as screening the junction and associated highway infrastructure. 21

22 c) Heading south towards Highridge Common the proposals consist of reinstating vegetated field boundaries with native hedgerows and occasional hedgerow trees. d) Small, agriculturally unviable pockets of field will be planted as belts of trees and shrubs, tying into retained field hedgerows. e) Just before the point where the route runs through common land a 'Gateway' is proposed. This will be a semi-formal arrangement of trees and mounding with appropriate signage to reinforce the change in landscape character and use. Section 4: Highridge Common to King Georges Road 7.21 The strategy through the Common has been one of minimal final soft land take by utilising as much of the existing road (High ridge Green) as possible. The road should have minimal visual impact in views from the west (Le. from the larger part of the Common). Landscape features will include: a) Shallow, grassed, linear depressions to aid the drainage of the Common parallel with the road on the south side. b) A kerb with a small up-stand along the south side of the road to visually soften the character of the road through the Common. c) Semi mature tree planting at the south east corner of the main Common area to mitigate for the loss of the existing trees and help absorb the proposed bus stop into the landscape. d) There will be no additional planting on the Common Exchange Land in order to retain its open character. e) Exchange land for the Common will be managed to promote grassland of similar quality and appearance to the Highridge SNCI. Section 5: King Georges Road and Queens Road junction to Hengrove Way King Georges Road 7.22 A suburban streetscape with wide grass verges containing mature trees of moderate value. Footways on both sides are along the rear edge abutting setback property boundaries. 22

23 7.23 The accommodation of the route along King Georges Road will require the removal of all the existing trees, totalling some 13 number, but which will be replaced with 39 new trees, matched to form a more appropriate avenue In general, underground services along this section are towards the highway boundary. There are a number of underground senices within the verge which creates a significant constraint when planting trees. The footway and shared footway/cycleway is proposed along the edge of the highway boundary adjacent to the residential properties. This maximises the amount of space available for tree planting adjacent to the carriageway Proposals include: a) Semi mature tree planting within the grassed verge along King Georges Road where possible. b) The inclusion of a 1.5m wide flush central reserve finished in a contrasting coloured surface applied buff material. This provides an informal waiting space for pedestrians choosing to cross the road whilst allowing residents to access their driveways as they currently do. c) Formal pedestrian crossing points are provided at regular intenals along the road via kerbed islands 2.0m wide. d) Amenity shrub planting - groundcover and small to medium sized shrubs. e) Bulb planting within grassed verges for seasonal colour. Queens Road to Hareclive Road 7.26 This existing green corridor can be considered in two sections. The west end is relatively narrow with edges on both sides under scrub with some trees before boundary fencing to adjacent properties. The east end is substantially an open grassed corridor with edges of suburban residential development along its north and south sides. There are some individual trees, tree groups and areas of scrub The proposed route alignment through the reserved corridor between Queens Road and Hareclive Road will require the removal of a small number bf trees and ornamental species of low amenity value. The proposed shared footway/cycleway runs parallel and adjacent to the north side of the carriageway. The footway along the south side of the corridor deviates away from the carriageway where the corridor is wider. The overarching principle 23

24 along this section is to create a green corridor using species and forms more familiar with an urban park. Trees and shrubs will tend to be more ornamental and earth modelling more geometric in form. The landscape proposals for this section also formed part of the Bristol mayor's review of the wider MetroBus network Proposals include: a) The creation of a strong framework of tree cover along the road corridor that links through and beyond the Hareclive Road junction. b) Retention of a number of existing trees that provide some screening and established structure towards the edge of the resened corridor c) Management to an existing belt of vegetation where the Scheme passes through the narrow section of the resened corridor. d) A 4m wide central resene containing semi mature trees and ground cover planting. e) Amenity planting arranged to form smaller spaces. f) Bulb planting for seasonal variation. g) Controlled and uncontrolled pedestrian crossing facilities linking the residential areas on either side of the resened corridor. h) Where the footway is not adjacent to the westbound carriageway, kerbs shall be splayed and the grass verge will be reinforced to allow broken down vehicles to pull off the road. Hareclive Road to Cater Road roundabout 7.29 The existing grassed area is currently open and featureless with very little tree cover. The south and south western edge is surrounded by housing, the south corner by the Gatehouse Centre, and along the northern edge by Whitchurch Lane with a Lidl supermarket and car park The alignment of the Scheme through this section utilises much of Whitchurch Lane. The landscape proposals for this section also formed part of the Bristol mayor's review of the wider MetroBus network Taking the underground senices into account the proposals: a) Introduce small groups of semi mature trees. b) Include a set of drainage basins forming part of the landscape proposals. Bank profiles vary to create undulating margins allowing growth of emergent 24

25 vegetation. The basin structures will be seeded with a 'pond edge' type grass mix. Seasonal variations in water levels will naturally dictate what species within the mix thrive and where. c) Provide distinct areas of amenity and species rich grass for biodiversity enhancements and visual diversity. d) Continue from the previous section of more formal arrangements of grass mounds and tree planting associated with the pedestrian routes at Hareclive junction. Conclusion 7.32 The landscape proposals will deliver a number of different functions once wellestablished post construction. These include: a) Screening via belts of native woodland and hedgerows; b) Re-establishing field boundaries as tree lined hedgerows; c) Small blocks of native woodland to tie parcels of land back together; d) Large blocks of native woodland as mitigation for loss of overall tree cover; e) Species rich and semi improved grassland; f) Street tree planting adding vertical form and colour to residential areas; g) Suburban tree and shrub planting of a more ornamental variety; h) The resened corridor - The creation of a linear green corridor visually attractive for pedestrians and cyclists to pass through and live adjacent to; and i) Permanently wet drainage basins with a varied bank profile to improve biodiversity The landscape proposals have been the subject of considerable design development over a long period of time. They have been developed in conjunction with the engineering design and taking account of formal and informal consultation with officers, statutory environmental bodies, the public and other interested bodies. An iterative process of Landscape and visual impact assessment, supported by the appraisal of other environmental disciplines, has challenged and informed the design to ensure landscape proposals are appropriate, proportionate and provide the requisite level of impact mitigation. This and the appropriateness of the extent of the proposals 25

26 have been confirmed by the lack of statutory environmental body objection and by the granting of planning approval. 26

27 8 HIGHRIDGE COMMON EXCHANGE LAND Details of Highridge Common, the commoners and their rights 8.1 The Common is registered under number B/CU3 with Bristol City Council as the Commons Registration Authority for the area. The plan showing the extent of the registered Common together with the relevant extract from the Registration Act Record forms Appendix The Common is approximately 8.9ha in area and contains two "horns" at the north and east where the land narrows significantly. The Tithe map from 1840 shows the same general extent of the Common as now, with small areas of enclosure around the boundaries that correspond to the adjacent fields and the older adjacent houses that can be seen today. 8.3 Land use within the locality is primarily residential and commercial in the suburban areas of Highridge and Bishopsworth, with areas of open space within the suburban developments and agricultural or related uses to the west of the Common. 8.4 The Common falls from about 83m AOD at its southernmost corner beside Highridge Road to about 64m AOD beside Highridge Green where this meets Sandburrows Road, before rising slightly again towards the northern corner. 8.5 The higher south-western part has expansive views over the southern suburbs of Bristol to the hills beyond. The views from the eastern part are less expansive and partly curtailed by the surrounding housing area, but the feel is still open. 8.6 Highridge Common is a locally designated Site of Nature ConseNation Interest (SNCI) (also part of the Dundry Strategic Nature Area (SNA)). The designated land comprises a large, generally flat area of, mainly damp, unimproved neutral grassland with some patches of unimproved calcareous grassland. To the north-west of the site there are wetter areas which support good populations of sedges and rushes. Mr Matthew Bowell explains the ecological value of this land in his proof (NSC/6/1). 8.7 The road surface of Highridge Green is included in the registered Common for some 875m, as is the road surface of Highridge Road to the east of the junction of King Georges Road. This represents 1.2ha, just over 13%, of the registered Common. 27

28 8.8 Highridge Green is for the most part not kerbed along its west side and follows the undulations of the Common, giving the appearance of being a route within the Common. The Common is also crossed by property accesses in several places. Rights exercised over the Common 8.9 There are five Commoners' rights over the Common. All have rights of pasture, for which sheep, cattle, horse and goats are listed. Two also have rights of estovers, one of which is listed as 'rough grass and weeds as forage'; and one also has right of turbary The Commoner's rights are shown in the extract from the register held by the Commons Registration Authority (BCC) and provided as Appendix 6. These rights of Common will be preserved in the exchange land. Use of the Common by the public 8.11 This land is also included as public access land under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CRoW) and is shown as such on the Countryside Agency website and the recent issue of the Ordnance SUNey (OS) map. The use of the Common is principally as an area of general recreation by the public. The Scheme's impact on the Common 8.12 Mr Phi lip Paterson has in his Proof of Evidence (NSC/2/1) explained the major changes to the Scheme design leading up to the planning application and those subsequently promoted to meet planning conditions In respect of Highridge Common, the Scheme route originally entered Highridge Common immediately north of Highridge Cottage, running straight across the Common to form a new junction arrangement with Highridge Road and King Georges Road. Highridge Green road was stopped up as part of the Scheme Prior to public consultation on the Scheme as a whole, a number of alternative routes were considered as part of the design development process. These are described in more detail in the Burges Salmon Report on Common Land dated 8 July 2013 (CD/2/5). 28

29 8.15 Having carefully considered the alternatives, it was concluded that the original scheme should be taken forward in the design development leading to the public consultation exercise held between 4 May and 29 June The alignment, including the working strip, includes highway land but is still registered as common land During and following the consultation process, no objector suggested any alternative alignment for the route across the Common, however following consultation; a number of minor changes were made to the alignment across the Common. These can be summarised as: a) Improvements to the junction at Highridge Road including adjustments to individual property accesses; b) Alignment moved east to increase the amount of Highridge Green alignment used, thus reduce the amount of soft estate common land lost; c) Alignment made more sinuous, moving the alignment away from Highridge Cottage and improving the natural traffic calming; d) Reintroduction of a junction with Highridge Green; e) Introduction of a central refuge hatched zone; and f) Changes to MetroBus stop locations Land included in the CPO includes land required not only for the new highway but also for its construction. Appendix 10 shows the extent of this land Following construction and completion of the Scheme the construction land, some 2,932m2, will be restored to grass and therefore its character and appearance will be much like the existing common land albeit that it will remain highway. The fact it will be highway means that there will be a public right of way across this land to the common, thereby ensuring the public continue to have access to the Common. The land will not be returned to the Common as there is a need for unfettered access for emergency and maintenance work to the highway in the future without needing to apply for consents under the Commons Act 2006 to undertake works on a Common. 29

30 Legal requirement for exchange land - Exchange land considerations 8.20 Land which is a part of common and is to be acquired under a CPO is subject to a special parliamentary procedure unless the relevant Secretary of State (in this case the Secretary of State for EFRA) provides a certificate in accordance with section 19 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 (the ALA 1981) (CD 6/2) 8.21 Before granting a section 19(1 )(a) certificate the Secretary of State must be satisfied that:- (a) "there has been or will be given in exchange for such land, other land, not being less in area and being equally advantageous to the persons, if any, entitled to rights of Common or other rights, and to the public, and that the land given in exchange has been or will be vested in the person in whom the land purchased was vested, and subject to the like rights, trusts and incidents as attached to the land purchased; or (aa) that the land is being purchased in order to secure its presenation or improve its management; or (b) that the land does not exceed 250 square yards (209 square metres) in extent or is required for the widening or drainage of an existing highway or partly for the widening and partly for the drainage of such a Highway and that the giving in exchange of other land is unnecessary, whether in the interests of the persons, if any, entitled to rights of Common or other rights or in the interest of the public Under section 19(1 )(a), Common includes any land "subject to be enclosed under the Inclosure Acts ". Such land includes land subject to Rights of Common which is not common land unless registered The fact of registration is not conclusive in respect of status as common land in the case of highway. However, it is necessary to include all the registered common land for the avoidance of doubt as to its status. This includes the need to ensure that common land immediately beneath the two spits below the highway surface, which will be required for the construction of the scheme, is brought within the ambit of the acquisition Furthermore, once registered, I am advised that there is no scope for deregistration in these circumstances. 30

31 8.25 In relation to private accesses over the common, where affected by the scheme, they also need to be included as common land since I am advised that in the case of private accesses over common land the fact of registration as common land is conclusive in respect of its status as common land In respect of the Scheme, as it affects Highridge Common, the Secretary of State will have to be satisfied that the criteria of section 19.1 (a) are met (as set out above). An application for a certificate has been made by North Somerset Council by letter to DEFRA through the Planning Inspectorate. The Secretary of State has issued a "minded to grant" notice (CD/1/3). Two objections have been received to this and are addressed in Section 11 of my proof When considering whether or not to grant the certificate the Secretary of State will only consider the merits of the exchange land being offered as at the date of exchange rather than the benefits of the CPO scheme as a whole The merits of the exchange land will depend on the category of land it is replacing. Guidance is set out in Circular 06/2004 (the Circular) (CD/6/5). Paragraph 25 of Appendix L to the Circular states the requirements for identification of suitable Exchange Land as being: (a) no less in area than the order; and (b) equally advantageous to any persons entitled to rights of Common or to other rights, and to the public 8.29 Paragraph 25 of Appendix L to the Circular goes on to say that in determining whether the offer land meets the criteria above the Secretary of State may have regard to the relative size and proximity of the exchange land when compared with the land identified for compulsory purchase The provision of replacement land is a requirement of the legal mechanism of compulsory land acquisition. However, it can incidentally provide various elements in mitigation of the Scheme, such as additional planting and habitat creation The CPO provides for the Commoners' existing rights to apply to the exchange land. The exchange land will also be placed into the same ownership as the existing common land. The Council has agreed with Bristol City Council that 31