-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
1/11
Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental
Assessment of LTPs issues to c onsider
A disc ussion pa pe r prepared for: Countryside Agenc y (LAR Division)
Prepa red by : Peter Nelson and Maritta Bod en
(Land Use Consultants)
Draft Com pleted Quality Reviewed Approva l for Issue
7th July 2005 Sarah Young
8th July 2005
Pete r Nelson
8th July 2005
-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
2/11
1
LANDSCAPE INDICATORS FOR SEAs
OF LOCAL TRANSPORT PLANS
PURPOSE
1. This note d ic usses the deve lop ment and app lica tion of landsc ape indica tors
in SEAs of Loc a l Transport Plans (LTPs). It b egins by summarising the und erlying
requirements and then considers baseline information that is likely to be
ava ilab le to most loc a l authorities. The prac tica l difficulties of quant ifying the
nature and magnitude of landscape changes are acknowledged and the
mo st p rom ising a rea s of investiga tion a re highlighted . The note stresses tha t
for most authorities it will be necessary to develop individual and locally
relevant indicators in the absence of national standards which are under
development.
LANDSCAPE OBJECTIVES, TARGETS AND INDICATORS
2. Landsc ape is one of the environm enta l c harac te ristics tha t is spec ifica lly
identified in the SEA Direc tive a nd in the UK Reg ulations (Environm enta l
Assessment of Plan and Prog rammes Regulations S1 2004 No 1633). It is
essentia l tha t every SEA o f an LTP should g ive d ue weight to land sc ape issues.
3. The SEA Direc tive and UK Reg ulat ions do not spec ific a lly require the use of
objectives, targets or indicators, but they are a beneficial mechanism to
de sc ribe , ana lyse and c ompa re environme ntal effec ts. An objective is a
statement of what is intended, specifying a desired direction of change.Targe ts should be set to describe what results are required within a specific
timescale and indicators provide the tool for determining whether or not
ta rge ts are me t.
4. The basic req uirem ents for a ll forms of transport ind ica to rs a re set out in theFull Guidanc e on Loc al Transpo rt Plans, Sec ond Edition, DFT (2005). This sta tes
that indicators should be based on the hierarchy of targets defined within
LTPs. In add ition, the p lan should inc lude Loca l Transport Targe ts for outc ome
indicators that are visible and clearly linked to the plan authorities wider vision
and ob jec tives.
Sc ope
5. To be effec tive, ind ica tors need to be ta rge ted on measurable a ttributes. This
is less easy to achieve for landscape than for other environmental
c ha rac te ristic s like noise or a ir and w ater qua lity. Nevertheless it is possible to
define landscape characteristics that are measurable in a qualitative if not
quantita tive wa y. Land sc ape in this context is taken to inc lude both
c ountryside and townsc ap e.
6. Polic ies and proposa ls in loc a l transport plans can a ffec t landsc ape and
tow nscape in two basic ways. Firstly they can imp ac t on q uality lead ing
either to the enhancement or deterioration in features that are valued by
soc iety. Examp les wo uld inc lude unsymp athetic roa d widening in a
designated landscape, or construction of a fly-over adjacent to a major
-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
3/11
2
pub lic build ing. Sec ond ly, LTP policies and prop osa ls c an a ffec t the
c harac ter of the land sc ap e or townsc ap e. Effec ts of de velopme nt or
changes in transport patterns on character are likely to be more subtle and
take place over longer time spans than those affecting quality. A third
c onsideration relates to the fa c t tha t LTP polic ies and prog ram me s can a ffec t
not only the physical form a nd p erc ep tions of land scap e a nd to wnscap e, buta lso p eo ples enjoym ent of these a ssets.
PROVIDING BASELINE INFORMATION
7. It is com mo n expe rienc e tha t it is ea sier to create indica tors than to find the
evidenc e tha t will ensure the ind ic a tor is effec tive. With bo th landsc ap e and
townsc ape the re is rea lly no substitute for p rop erly resea rc hed assessme nts of
existing q uality a nd charac ter as a basis for develop ing indica tors.
8. Landscap e Quality: In its 2002 Rural White Paper, the Go vernme nt c a lled for anew indicator of change in countryside quality in order to ensure that policies
are develope d on sound evidenc e. The Countryside Ag enc y (CA) has
c om missioned resea rc h which is lea d ing towa rds an ind ic a tor for c hange incountryside quality based on an analysis of:
The t ransformation in wo od land bo undary fea tures,
Agriculture, Settlement and d evelopm ent,
Sem i na tural habitats,
Histo ric fea tures,
Rivers and coastal elements within the Joint Character Areas ofEngland.
9. Potent ial indica to rs c over:
The extent or stock of characteristic landscape element (semi natural
vegetation, types of woodland, build and settlement, hedgerows andtrees),
Whether these characteristic elements are in good condition and
subject to appropriate management (roadside verges, conditions of
streams and rivers, uptake of woodland grants and countryside
stewa rdship sc hem es, SSSI co nd ition and anc ient mo numents a t risk,
The extent and form of new elements in the countryside (roads,
communication infrastructure, Greenfield development),
A measure of key factors affecting the countryside experience -
(tranquillity/disturbance) and benefits it has to offer (e.g. access,
experienc e o f wild life).
Source :Tracking Changes in Co untryside Qua lity Constructing a n Ind ica to r
of Change in Countryside Quality, June 2004, Nottingham University
Consultants Ltd and CRN 85 Countryside Quality Counts, CA, 2004.
-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
4/11
3
10. These indica tors on cha nge in countryside qua lity a re held in ma p form and
include an a ttribute d ata ba se w hich c an b e d isag grega ted to a regional and
character area level through the Countryside Quality Counts (CQC) website.
Further work will be undertaken by CA and its successor, Natural England,
including the updating and revision of new landscape typologies, integration
of CA descriptions with information from historic landscape characterisationand refinement of methods used to create the CA profiles for the next
assessment, so that they can be more spatially explicit and consistently
described.
11. Outputs from the resea rc h programme may not be readily ava ilab le to loc al
authorities in the short term, but all authorities have maps showing the extent
of areas with sta tuto ry designa tions includ ing Nat iona l Parks, AONBs and
Conservation Areas. Othe r designa tions ma y also a pp ly inc lud ing Heritage
Coasts, World Herita ge Sites, and loc a lly defined histo ric o r sc enic a rea s. All
such areas should be identified on maps as a basis for assessing effects on
quality.
12. Landscape (and townscape) character is equally important when assessing
the pote ntia l and ac tua l effec ts of LTPs bec ause it relate s to the environm ent
that affects everyones daily lives; changes to it are no less important than
those a ffec ting areas of highe st qua lity. Landsc ap e c harac ter assessme nt
(LCA) is widely ac c ep ted as an e ffective tool for de sc ribing land sc ap e type s
and simila r me thods exist for c ha rac te rising tow nsc apes. Every loc a l autho rity
should develop landscape and townscape character appraisals for their
a rea s as a b asis for eva luat ing a nd influenc ing land scape c hang e.
13. Tranquillity : is anothe r pote ntially va luab le ind ic a tor for landscape and
environmental effects of transport schemes and there is continuing research
into ways of rec ording tranquility. A pa rticipa to ry appra isa l c onsulta tion has
been undertaken in Northumberland National Park and the West Durham
Coalfield to und ersta nd what tranq uillity is, is not and w hy it is important. The
stud y wa s subseq uent ly extended to c over the Chilterns AONB. Consultat ions
were held with key local stakeholders and countryside users (Understanding
Tranq uillity, CRN 95).
UNDERSTANDING LIKELY EFFECTS OF LTPS ON LANDSCAPE
14. In order to develop landsc ap e indica tors it is imp ortant to unde rsta nd the
nature o f the e ffec ts tha t LTPs ma y have sinc e these c an be both d irec t andind irec t. Large sca le deve lop me nt p rojec ts a re likely to have rea d ily
discernable impacts on landscape and townscape that can be measured
using the techniques specified in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges
(DMRB) and the New Ap proa c h to Transport Assessment (NATA) and rela ted
professional guida nce. How eve r, many p olic ies and plans are likely to ha ve
subtler effects; for example, encouraging modal shifts from private cars topub lic transport, or introduc ing schem es like c ar sha ring. These initiat ives ma y
reduce levels of congestion and improve peoples overall perceptions of the
environment of either highways or public open spaces without being readily
d isc ernab le as a c hange in landsc ape qua lity, c harac ter or tranquillity. The
cumulative benefits may, in any event, be masked by the fact that there is no
-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
5/11
4
appreciable change in traffic density since the measure may only
d iscourage growth in tra ffic ra ther than reduc e the existing flow levels.
15. Given the p rac tica l c onstraints tha t have been outlined ab ove it is c lea r tha t
the process of developing landscape and townscape indicators must be
pragma tic and take into c onside ration how monitoring will ac tually be c arriedout.
DEVELOPING LANDSCAPE INDICATORS
16. Loc a l authorities who are wrestling with the problem of c rea ting effec tive
indicators should consider setting up a small group of professional and
informed individuals (representing professional staff in transport and
land scap e, land scap e c onservation b od ies and c ivic and am enity soc ieties)
to b rainstorm an a pproa c h for their a rea . The a im should be to a gree on the
classifications to be employed and the process for evaluating chosen
indica tors. Idea lly, the g roup should be c onstituted a s a pa nel to overseefuture monitoring work. The group should aim to cove r land scape qua lity,
c harac ter and p ublic enjoyment.
17. Idea lly the setting of ob jec tives, ta rge ts and ind ic ators should take p lace as
part of the sc op ing sta ge of the SEA and befo re baseline surveys a re
c om plete d . For example a key issue for ma ny prote c ted land sc apes and
sensitive character areas is the degree of light pollution to which they are
exposed . Transport corridors c an have a ma jor adverse influence if
unsympathetic lighting solutions are adopted and it is therefore desirable to
record those stretches of road which are lit and the type of overhead lighting
employed . It is muc h easier to a rrange for this information to be c ollec tedand p resented in map fo rm when the requirement is identified a t the outset o f
the SEA, ra ther than as a bolt-on extra in the fina l stage s whe n time and
resources a re o ften no t a va ilab le.
Preparing Baseline Information
18. Baseline c harac teristics tha t can be rea d ily desc ribed and ma pp ed from
pub lished sources include:
Histo ric set tlem ents,
Histo ric Parkland and Ga rdens,
Urba n parks and op en spa c e, Archa eo log ic al sites and bat tlefields,
Monuments, follies, and other landmarks, Environm enta lly Sensitive Areas, whe re landsc ape q ua lity ha s p layed
an important part in designation,
Important woodlands, open grasslands or features of geological
importanc e g iven SSSI sta tus (eg . Limestone p aveme nts c overed by
Limestone Protec tion Orders).
19. Baseline cha rac teristics tha t may need to be ob ta ined b y survey, if the
relevant stud ies have not b een undertaken inc lude:
Important streetscapes (due to architectural style, landscape
c harac ter etc .)
-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
6/11
5
Prom inent buildings of histo ric a l and / or a rc haeo log ic a l interest
20. Where a Landsc ape Cha rac te r Assessme nt exists this should ma ke refe renc e
to a number of landscape criteria that may be relevant when setting targets
and indic a to rs for LTPs. These c rite ria inc lude :
landscape quality (intactness of the landscape and the condition of
features, scenic qua lity,
rarity,
representativeness,
conservation interests, wilderness, histo rica l and c ultura l assoc iations, and ,
tranquillity which is a c om posite feature rela ted to low levels of built
deve lop ment, tra ffic , noise a nd artific ial light ing.
Source : Landsc ape Cha rac ter Assessme nt Guida nce for England and
Sc ot land , Ca rys Swanick and LUC, 2002
Developing Objec tives and Indicators
21. Experienc e shows tha t most landsc ape ob jec tives a re set too broa d ly to be of
p rac tica l releva nc e to transport issues. This is illustrate d by the o b jec tive of
Protecting and enhancing landscape and townscape which is used in a
number of published SEAs of LTPs. It is very d iffic ult to develop p rac tica l
indicators unless specific features of landscape or townscape are descibedthat a re subjected to p otential c hang e through the ac tivities or developm ent
prop osed in LTPs.
Indicators need to provide a good indicator of change in character, have
resonance (capture public attention), be capable of measure and use
meaningful data that is either easily available or capable of being easily
collected.
Source: Landsc ape Cha rac te r Assessme nt; Top ic Paper 2: Links to other
Susta ina b ility Tools.
22. Spec ific guidance on land sc ape ind ic a tors is provided in Guidelines for
landscape and visual assessment, second edition which suggests that
indicators of significance and sensitivity c an include protec tive d esigna tions,
areas of nature or heritage conservation interest, scenic quality or the
presence of detracting features. Impac ts tha t LTPs should t ry to monitor
include:
Landscape degraded by traffic, congestion, air quality, visual
intrusion, landscape erosion or areas where on current transport trends
there is likely to be significant loss of landscape character and/or
quality,
Areas where transport has had or is likely to have a significant impacton landsc ap e,
-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
7/11
6
Land sc ap e de signa tions where c harac ter/q uality has be en e rod ed .
23. Two New App roa c h to Transport Assessme nt ob jec tives tha t a re releva nt to
landscape are:
Environmental impact (protection of the built and naturalenvironment),
Accessibility to improve access to facilities for those without a car and
to red uc e severanc e (see TAG Unit 2.11).
24. Loc a l Authorities who are p reparing SEAs for LTPs should also conside r wha t
information ma y be ava ilab le on landscape ind ic a tors from highe r tier SEAs or
SAs, inc luding work on reg iona l spatia l strateg ies. The South West Reg iona l
Spatial Strateg y, for examp le, quote s two indica tors under the ob jec tive of
Ma inta in and imp rove e nvironmenta l quality and assets w hic h are:
Countryside Quality Counts Nationa l Indic ator of Change , and , CPRE Tranq uil Area s.
25. These broa d ind ic a tors ma y help to provide a conte xt for wo rk a t loc a l
authority level but they are unlikely to be sufficiently detailed for use at local
level unless spec ific surveys have a lrea dy be en c arried out . As a sta rting
po int, land scap e indica tors should be ba sed on w ork alrea dy undertaken a t
local authority level, such as landscape character area assessments, or
supp lementa ry p lanning guidanc e on design standards. Hav ing de fined
areas of imp ortanc e, ta rge ts or ob jec tives should b e set, for example:
Targe t:Transport schem es within the LTP should have no net adverse e ffec t on
the character or quality of protected landscape, historic settlements
etc..
Indicator:The LPA w ill underta ke a review (annua lly, 5 yea rly) of the effe c ts of
new transport schemes on protected landscapes, historic settlements
etc..
26. In c onsidering the po tent ia l imp ac t of transpo rt sc hemes, the indica tors
should be designed to measure not only physical change brought about byconstruction work, but also the direct and indirect effects on landscape
quality brought about by changes in traffic volume, density, vehicle type and
vehicle speed, as in the c ase o f the Plymo uth LTP which c a lls for me asurement
of traffic levels on sensitive routes passing areas designated for their
landscape quality or tranquility. Where tranquility ma pp ing has taken plac e
it should be possible to provide a quantitative basis for the assessment, but in
othe r cases a q ualita tive judge me nt will be c a lled for.
27. Considera tion should a lso be g iven to the use of indica to rs to rec ord positive
change in landscape character or quality arising from sustainable transport
initiatives for example improvement of the public enjoyment of sensitive
-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
8/11
7
landsc apes or tranq uil area s throug h substitution o f bus services for priva te c ar
ac c ess, or the introd uc tion o f c ar-sharing sc hemes.
EXAMPLES OF LANDSCAPE AND TOWNSCAPE INDICATORS
28. In this c onc lud ing sec tion examples a re g iven of releva nt baseline informa tion
and the typ es of indicato rs tha t ma y be used . The lists a re not exhaustive.
Local authorities should seek to identify those indicators that are relevant to
the specific landcape issues in their area and can be effectively monitored
ove r time.
Subjec t Area: Land scap e
Objec tive 1: To p rote c t landsc ape fea tures and a ssets from inap prop ria te
transpo rt- related de velop ment.
Objec tive 2: To a void g row th in roa d traffic a nd c onseq uent d ete rioration in
the character, quality and enjoyment of sensitive landscapes through traffic
movem ent,cong estion, adverse a ir qua lity, and visua l intrusion or landsc ape
erosion.
Baseline Informa tion
Required
Potential SEA
Indicator
Target Sourc es of
dataEnvironmentallySensitive Areas, where
land scap e q uality hasplayed a n imp ortant
pa rt in d esigna tion
Daily flow of vehicleson key sec tions of
roa d p assing throughsensitive a reas
Set spec ific ta rgets interms of %age dec line
(or restric ted grow th) intraffic flows
Routinehighway
monitoringprogrammes
Examples of BaselineInformation
Potential SEAIndicators
Target Sourc es ofdata
Designated landscapeprotection area s
Landscape character
areas
Imp ortant woo dlands
Op en g rasslands
Fea tures of g eolog ica l
importance (eg scarp
slopes, limestone
pavements, d rumlins)Histo ric Parkland and
Gardens
Archae ologica l sites
and ba ttlefields
Prominent buildings ofhistorical a nd/ or
archa eological interest
Monuments, follies, and
other land ma rks
Assessment of theland scap e or other
environmental effectsof LTP polic ies or
proposals resulting in
ma jor c onstruc tion
within identified areas
suc h a s:
Airport extensions
New flight p aths
New road / rail routes Roa d widening
Transpo rt
interchanges,
Ca r pa rks
Park and ride sites
No significant a dverseland scap e effec ts from
transport-relateddeve lopm ent in
sensitive landscape
areas
EIAs of majorprojects
Monitoring of
development
control
planning
decisions
-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
9/11
8
Objec tive 3: To minimise the impac t of transport p rop osa ls on sensitive
landscape a rea s c aused by light p ollution.
Baseline Informa tion
Required
Potential SEA
Indicator
Target Sourc es of
dataCurrent distribution of
roa d lighting scheme s
within and a djac ent to
(within 1 mile) of
protected landsca pe
(Nationa l Park / AONB/
Heritage Coast
Tranquil Area Ma ps
Leng ths of road w ith
ove rhead lighting
columns
No a dd itional lighting to
be introd uced (or)
All new light ing
scheme s to b e
designed to red uce
glare and lateral light
displacement
Highways
Authority
Objec tive 4: To promote e njoyment of areas of high landsc ape qua lity and
spe c ial cha rac ter.
Townscap e
Objec tive 1: To avo id dama ge to a nd , whe re possible, enha nc e the visua l
appe aranc e a nd a esthetic qua lities of sett lements throug h transpo rt-related
de velopme nt with pa rtic ular empha sis on d esigna ted heritag e and
c onservation a rea s.
Examples of Baseline
Information
Potential SEA
Indicator
Target Sourc es of
dataProtec ted landscap e
areas
Landscape character
areas
Loc al a uthority records
of innovative transport
scheme
No. of new p ublic
transport, sha red
transport or otherinnovative access
schemes
Lengths of Rights of
Way, trails, access
trac ks, Quiet Lanes
and Greenways
within notified areas
A m ea sure o f use i.e.
no. o f passeng ers
transported annually
Length of netwo rk
Local
authority
records
Commissioned
surveys
-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
10/11
9
Sources of Informa tion
Guidanc e is ava ilab le throug h the Department o f Transport s Transport
Analysis Guidance website www.we bTAG.org.uk and for landscape inparticular und er the Landsc ape Sub O b jec tive TAG Unit 3.3.7, Dec em ber 2004
References
1. SEA Direc tive 2001/ 42/EC on the Assessment of the Effec ts of Ce rtainPlans and Prog ramm es on the Environme nt.
2. UK Regulations (Environmental Assessment of Plan and ProgrammesRegulations S1 2004 No 1633).
3. Full Guidanc e on Loca l Transport Plans, Second Ed ition, DFT (2005).4. Rural White Paper, Our Countryside: the future, a fair deal for rural
England 2000, Defra.
5. Tracking C hanges in Co untryside Q ua lity Co nstructing a n Ind ica to r ofCha nge in Countryside Qua lity, June 2004, Nottingham University
Consultants Ltd.
6. CRN 85, Count ryside Qua lity Counts, CA, 2004.
7. CRN 92, Und ersta nd ing Tranq uility, CA 2005.
Examples of Baseline
Information
Potential SEA
Indicators
Target Sourc es of
dataSignifica nt urban vista s,
and imp ortant views for
loca l residents
Tree lined avenues and
streets
Squares, round abouts
and other trafficintersections with
extensive landscaping
Urba n pa rks and op en
space,
Important building
fac ad es in terms ofarchitec tural qua lity or
historical interest
Imp ortant Streetscape
with p rominent
buildings, monuments
or street furniture ofhistorical a nd/ or
archa eological interest
No. and typ e o f LTP
policies and proposals
that have the
po tential to alter theapp earance and
qualities of important
townsc ap es
No. and size (a rea
covered) of
pedestrianisation
schemes, trafficca lming m ea sures,
etc.
No. of deve lopm entschemes
ac comp anied by
detailed land scap e
and tow nsca pedesign
Achievement of
goals set out in
relevant Loc al
DevelopmentFramework
Documents
SEA of the LTP
Routine
monitoring byPlanning
Department
-
8/2/2019 Landscape Indicators for Strategic Environmental Assessment - Issues to Consider
11/11
10
8. Environmental Assessment, Vol 11, Design Manual for Roads andBridges, Highways Ag enc y (as ame nded , 2005).
9. Transport Ana lysis Guida nc e, TAG , Unit 1.1 New Ap proach to TransportAssessment. 2005.
10. Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England andSc ot land , Ca rys Swanwick and LUC, 2002.
11. Guidelines for Landsc ape a nd Visua l Assessment, Sec ond Ed itionLandscape Institute and Institute of environmental Management and
Assessment, Spons 2002.
12. Ma pp ing tranquility defining and assessing a va luab le resource, CPRE2005.
Case Studies reviewed a s a b asis for this guidanc e no te
Scop ing rep orts fo r LTPs of Derby City Counc il, North East Lincolnshire, West
Sussex, and Plymouth.