LAND AT COMMON MOOR, GLASTONBURY
Landscape Character related to Application Land at Common Moor, Glastonbury
1.0
Background
1.1
In 1996 a ‘Landscape Character Assessment of the Fringes of the Towns in Mendip
District’ was carried out by Chris Blandford Associates (CBA) for Mendip District
Council (Ref. SD/85). This was linked with the ‘Landscape Assessment of Mendip
District’ (May 1997) which was also produced by CBA.
1.2
A further ‘Strategic Landscape Appraisal of the Main Towns’ of Mendip District was
undertaken 10 years later in October 2006 by Enderby Associates (Ref. SD/83). This
was intended to inform the LDF and preparation of the Core Strategy.
1.3
The Enderby Appraisal states in Para 1.3 ;
’The Landscape Character Assessment of the District, undertaken by CBA in August
1996, provides a useful summary of the landscape character of the District. Part of
that study considered the landscape setting of the main towns in the District
particularly with a view to informing decisions about the selection of sites for
allocation in the last Local Plan. Much of this material remains relevant today,
although development that has taken place since that assessment may have had
implications for landscape character in certain areas.’
1.4
In Para 2.17 the the Enderby Appraisal states:
•
•
‘There are therefore few areas remaining around the periphery that could be
considered for potential development: these are limited to:
Land at Common Moor, north of the Bypass (A39).
Land east of the new hospital at Brindham Lane’.
1.5
In Para 2.19 the Appraisal states that:
‘Land at Brindham Lane is not considered suitable for development, despite the
recent introduction of the new hospital into the area.’
1.6
In para. 2.18, the Appraisal states:
‘The land at Common Moor could potentially accommodate some development in
landscape terms. It comprises a number of fields subdivided by tall belts of willows.
Whilst it would be overlooked from higher land on the north side of Wearyall Hill it is
well removed from the Tor and issues of its setting do not appear to arise. Due to the
flat nature of the Moors to the north vegetation is extremely effective in containing
the area from the wider countryside such that, with additional reinforcement
planting, the area could be very well contained.’
1.7
Although the Enderby Appraisal was carried out 8 years ago it is still relevant to the
land at Common Moor. However the ‘Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment’
carried out by Bridges Design Associates Ltd in January 2014 (LVIA, BDA – 2014)
assesses the Application Land at Common Moor in further detail.
1.8
The original ‘Landscape Character Assessment of the Fringes of the Towns in Mendip
District’ (CBA - 1996) made general statements related to the broad character areas,
which did not take into account local variations which inevitably occur within such
wide zones. The Application Land fell within the broad area of land classified as the
‘Godney / Meare Moors’ within that Assessment. The LVIA (2014) provides a more
detailed assessment of the Application Land and this can be used to update and
expand on the original CBA Assessment.
2.0
Landscape Character
2.1
Para. 6.1.5 of the ‘Landscape Character Assessment of the Fringes of the Towns in
Mendip District’ (CBA -1996) notes the following typical characteristics of the
Godney / Meare Moors:
2.1.1
Flat landform;
The Application Land at Common Moor displays a fall of around 1 in 30 in contrast to
the characteristically flat land of the Godney / Meare Moors.
2.1.2
Predominantly pasture use with some arable;
The Application Land and area to the north-west are in pasture, but there are mixed
land uses in the area including allotments, sport and leisure facilities, a plant
nursery, caravan park, storage barns and reclamation yard.
2.1.3
Wet ditches (rhynes);
The meandering line of the ditch to the west of the Application Land follows the
grain of the topography and does not exhibit the straight, rectilinear, man-made
pattern characteristic of the Moors drainage.
2.1.4
Scattered farms;
The mixed land use around the Application Land still has evidence of scattered
farms, but these have been integrated within other leisure and amenity land uses.
2.1.5
Intermittent willow pollards, small belts and blocks of willow and occasional poplars;
While the trees adjacent to the ditch along the western edge of the Application Land
are predominantly willows and there are some poplars in the area, the general
vegetation around the site boundaries is more varied. Species include field maple,
hawthorn, blackthorn, elder, elm, dogwood and ash (as described in the
Arboricultural Impact Assessment (Bosky Trees, September 2013). This variety is
more typical of general agricultural landscape than the Moors landscape.
2.1.6
Wide views;
Although there are some long distant views from within the Application Land looking
above the surrounding hedgerows to the distant ridges, these are in marked
contrast to the expansive, open views which are a characteristic feature of the
Godney / Meare Moors further to the west. The effectiveness of vegetation in
containing this area from the wider countryside (and consequently limiting wider
views) was noted in the Enderby report
2.1.7
Causeway roads slightly elevated above the moors.
These are evident in roads beyond fields to the west of the Application Land where
levels have fallen down to the lower-lying land.
2.2
It can be seen from the above, that the typical characteristics of the Godney /Meare
Moors are not demonstrated in the Application Land which lies on the extreme edge
of the defined character area.
3.0
Landscape Quality
3.1
Para 6.1.7 of the ‘Landscape Character Assessment of the Fringes of the Towns in
Mendip District’ (CBA 1996) states that:
‘The surrounding Moors landscapes are of high quality for the following reasons.’
These reasons are set out below with a response in relation to the Application Site.
3.1.1
Although lacking conventional variety of relief and vegetation they have wide views
and a very varied backdrop of the surrounding hills and the Isle.
Section 2.0 above demonstrates that the Application Land has more variety of
topography and vegetation than the Moors landscapes and it does not enjoy the
wide views characteristic of that area.
3.1.2
Their sense of place is extremely strong. There is a unique combination of wildness
associated with the wetland features and a strong man-made pattern of straight
ditches and roads.
The land at Common Moor does not have a wild character and the single ditch to the
west is the only wetland feature evident. Furthermore, it does not display evidence
of a strong man-made pattern of ditches and roads
3.1.3
They are largely unspoilt. There is generally a ‘crisp’ junction between the Isle and
the Levels with only local dominance of the industrial estate buildings on the western
edge.
The land at Common Moor forms a transitional zone between the steep slopes of
the Isle of Avalon to the east and the flat land within the Levels to the west. It is not
a ‘crisp’ junction at this location. The land adjoins the A.39 Glastonbury by-pass,
Abbey Moor Stadium, a reclamation yard and allotments and cannot be described as
‘unspoilt’.
3.1.4
They have limited recreational use with in the area of study.
The land in the vicinity of Common Moor is used for a variety of recreational
purposes, including the sports stadium, rugby club, allotments and public footpath.
3.1.5
They are of very high conservation and historic interest.
The land at Common Moor is not covered by any conservation or historic
designations
3.1.6
There is a wide consensus that they are ‘different’ although not necessarily that they
are of high landscape quality.
The land at Common Moor does not have a distinctive ‘different’ quality but appears
as fairly typical agricultural land on an urban edge.
3.2
Within the Fringes Report, Figure 6.1 ‘Glastonbury Principal Landscape Features and
Landscape Character Areas’ does not identify the land at Common Moor as ‘Highest
quality landscape essential to the setting of the town.’
3.3
The whole of the Godney / Meare Moors character area (including the land at
Common Moor) is classified as ‘Good Quality land which is prominent and important
in the setting of the town’. However, the fact that the land does not demonstrate
many of the features which make this landscape character area ‘high quality’ has
already been highlighted above.
3.4
Furthermore, both the Enderby Assessment and the LVIA highlight the containment
of the land at Common Moor.
4.0
Visibility
4.1
Figure 6.2a ‘Glastonbury Landscape Analysis’, (‘Landscape Character Assessment of
the Fringes of the Towns in Mendip District’, CBA -1996) classifies the land at
Common Moor as ‘Prominently visible land at edge of town’. However, the Enderby
Report notes that ‘vegetation is extremely effective in containing the area from the
wider countryside...’ and this is further demonstrated in the recent LVIA (BDA –
2014).
4.2
In the original panoramas in the Fringes Report (CBA 1996), Panorama No. 6.3 from
Black Pit Drive demonstrates that the Application Land at Common Moor (together
with much of the residential area of Glastonbury beyond) is not visible from the
wider landscape. A similar view is illustrated in Panorama No. 13 from Godney Road
(LVIA, BDA - 2014) which demonstrates the same point.
4.3
This contrasts with local views from near Common Moor Farm (Panorama No. 6.4 of
the Fringes Report – CBA, 1996) where Common Moor is seen in the context of
commercial buildings and the residential development in Glastonbury prior to the
planting maturing on the by-pass. The residential development in Glastonbury is still
evident from this area as illustrated in Panorama No. 8 of the LVIA (BDA - 2014).
4.4
Para. 6.18 of the Fringes report (CBA- 1996) states:
‘The Isle and the town can ben seen over a wide area. The area shown on Figure 6.3
‘Glastonbury Photograph Locations and Visual Envelope’ is very approximate.’
4.5
Residential development of the Application Land at Common Moor Drove would not
extend the Visual Envelope as defined in this report.
5.0
Summary
5.1
The 1996 ‘Landscape Character Assessment of the Fringes of the Towns in Mendip
District’ formed the basis of the ‘Figure 2 - Landscape Setting’ plan prepared for the
Mendip District Council Local Plan, Part 1: Strategy & Policies, Sustainability Report Appendix 12 (Ref. SD/44). However, this broad brush assessment does not take into
account the subtle differences at the edges of the character areas, as noted in the
Enderby report and further demonstrated through the assessment work carried out
for the LVIA (BDA - 2014).
5.2
The land at Common Moor does not demonstrate all the key characteristics of the
Godney / Meare Moors landscape and more significantly, lacks the features which
are evident in the ‘high quality’ landscape of the Moors.
5.3
The Visual Envelope of Glastonbury would not be extended by residential
development of the Application Land at Common Moor.
5.4
The detailed assessments of the Landscape and Visual Impact of development of the
Application Land at Common Moor demonstrate that there will be minimal impact
on the landscape character and visual amenity of the area.
BRIDGES DESIGN ASSOCIATES
20-02-14