24 Landscape

24 Landscape

National policy

24.1 NPPF paragraph 187 recognises that Local Plan policies should enhance the natural environment including protecting and enhancing valued landscapes. Policies for new developments should respond to local character, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting. This should be supported by a Landscape Character Assessment and / or a Landscape Study. NPPF applies great weight to enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and National Landscapes which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues. Development should be limited within all these designated areas.

Evidence base

Key issues

  • Consider if key settlement gaps are still necessary and if so, whether they need reviewing.
  • Consider whether ASCVs are still necessary and if so, whether they need reviewing.
  • A potential National Landscape (AONB) in Cheshire West.
  • Renewables can cause landscape harm, and the need to consider whether a dispensation should be made.
  • How to link the new Local Plan policy to the emerging borough-wide Design Code that is in preparation.

Current adopted policy

Local Plan

Policy reference

Policy summary

Local Plan (part One)

ENV 2 Landscape

Protects and wherever possible enhance landscape character through identification of key gaps in the Local Plan (Part Two), supporting the designation of Local Green Space and protecting the character of the borough’s estuaries and undeveloped coast.

Local Plan (Part Two)

GBC 2 Protection of landscape

Protects countryside and landscape character, and defines Areas of Special County Value for protection and enhancement. 

Local Plan (Part Two)

GBC 3 Key settlement gaps

Defines key settlement gaps, where development is only supported where it does not harm the separation or identity function.

Suggested policy approach

24.2 We believe that the new Local Plan should seek to protect and enhance landscape character through mechanisms such as key settlement gaps and Local Green Space. Local Plan (Part One) Policy ENV 2 currently seeks to deliver this goal in combination with detailed Local Plan (Part Two) policies GBC 2) and GBC 3.

24.3 Key settlement gaps around settlements are recognised in Local Plan (Part One) policy ENV 2, and Local Plan (Part Two) GBC 3 as an important mechanism for protecting local distinctiveness and preserving the character of the landscape. At the time of preparing Local Plan Part One, the approach avoided identifying key gaps in the Green Belt, however with recent changes to national Green Belt policy, we think that there may be an enhanced role of key settlement gaps in the new Local Plan.

Map 24.1 Cheshire Sandstone Ridge (View full image)

Map showing the Cheshire Sandstone Ridge National Character Area (NCA) outlined in purple, surrounded by the Mersey Valley NCA to the north, highlighted in light blue, and the Shropshire, Cheshire and Staffordshire Plain NCA to the east, west, and south, highlighted in yellow. Black lines indicate local authority boundaries.

24.4 Natural England have been investigating whether the Sandstone Ridge should be designated as an Area of Outstanding Beauty (National Landscape). The area being reviewed relates to the Cheshire Sandstone Ridge national landscape character area which runs from Helsby/ Frodsham in the north to the Peckforton/ Bickerton area and includes land within the adjoining borough of Cheshire East. Natural England will consider whether any areas have sufficient natural beauty to be considered outstanding as well as the desirability of designation.

24.5 There are a number of Areas of Special County Value (ASCV) that cover the Ridge but not all parts of the area under consideration are covered. The consultation is seeking views on how, pending final decisions on designation, the area can be protected. When landscape evaluation work is published by Natural England this will help inform the best approach.

24.6 The suggested approach would retain and combine Local Plan (Part One) policy ENV 2 and Local Plan (Part Two) policy GBC 3. Local Plan (Part Two) policy GBC 2 relating to Areas of Special County Value would be retained and updated as necessary. Under both policy approaches we will have to consider how best to integrate a potential National Landscape designation.

LA 1

Landscape

The suggested approach is to retain Local Plan (Part One) policy ENV 2, and combine with elements of Local Plan (Part Two) policy GBC 3  ensuring that any policy wording will continue to: 

  1. Protect and, wherever possible, enhance landscape character and local distinctiveness;
  2. Prevent development in previously identified key gaps, as currently defined in Local Plan (Part Two) policy GBC 3 between settlements outside the Green Belt, proposals should only be supported where it does not harm the settlement separation and identity functions of the gap. Development within key settlement gaps will only be supported where it would not lead to coalescence, increase the intervisibility between settlement edges, harm the undeveloped character or materially alter historic form of the settlements;
  3. Support the designation of Local Green Space and protect the character of the borough's estuaries and undeveloped coast;
  4. Support proposals that take full account of the characteristics of the development site, its relationship with its surroundings and views into, over and out of the site;
  5. Recognise, retain and incorporate features of landscape quality into the design of new developments, taking account of the Council’s borough-wide Design Code.

The identification of additional/ new key settlement gaps may be considered.

Consider the best approach to any future National Landscape designation.

Question LA 1

Do you agree with the suggested policy approach towards landscape, as set out in LA 1 ‘Landscape’ above? If not please suggest how it could be amended?

Question LA 2

Should the key settlement gaps currently defined in Local Plan (Part Two) policy GBC 3 be reviewed? Could they be expanded, and/or should new key settlement gaps  be identified in the Green Belt, or other areas to help protect the character of settlements?

Question LA 3

In advance of any formal designation of national landscape, how should the Local Plan deal with it?

24.7 The policy approach will continue to seek to protect Cheshire West’s landscape character and distinctiveness by retaining, and updating where necessary, the content of Local Plan (Part Two) policy GBC 2.

LA 2

Areas of Special County Value

The suggested approach is to retain and update, where necessary, Local Plan (Part Two) GBC 2 ensuring that  any policy wording will continue to: 

  1. Protect and, wherever possible, enhance existing Areas of Special County Value (ASCV) as currently defined in Local Plan (Part Two) policy GBC 2;
  2. Ensure development in or affecting the setting of an Area of Special County Value integrates into the landscape character of the area, is designed to take account of guidance in the Landscape Strategy and improves the landscape character and appearance.

ASCVs would continue to be identified on the policies map and are designated for their special landscape character and scenic value.

Consider the best approach to any future National Landscape designation.

Question LA 4

Do you agree with the suggested policy approach towards landscape, as set out in LA 2 ‘Areas of Special County Value’ above? If not please suggest how it could be amended?

Question LA 5

Should the Areas of Special County Value currently defined in Local Plan (Part Two) policy GBC 2 be reviewed and updated?