Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment

CRES Biogas Ltd September 2011 Anaerobic Digestion Facility Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment

Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment

Issued: 12th September 2011 Intended Recipient: Cheshire East Planning Council

Prepared For: Mr Ray Brown

CRES Biogas Ltd

Orchards Farm

Twemlow

Holmes Chapel

Cheshire

CW4 8DS

This report has been prepared with reasonable care, skill and diligence and this copy of the report has been issued on the condition that anyone who consults it, recognises that the copyright rests with the author. No part of this document should be reproduced without prior consent from the author.


1

Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................1

2. SCOPE OF LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL ASSESSMENT ................................1

3. SITE DESCRIPTION ...........................................................................1

4. SURROUNDING AREA AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ..............................2

5. METHODOLOGY................................................................................3 5.2 Methodology Criteria................................................................................ 3 5.3 Presentation of Results............................................................................ 5 5.4 Limitations ................................................................................................ 5 5.5 Desk Study................................................................................................ 5 5.6 Site Survey................................................................................................ 6

6. VISUAL IMPACTS..............................................................................7 6.1 Introduction............................................................................................... 7 6.2 Impacts from public highways ................................................................ 7 6.3 Impacts from residential properties........................................................ 8 6.4 Impacts from public rights of way .......................................................... 9 6.5 Impact from the railway.......................................................................... 10

7. MITIGATIONS ............................................................................... 10

8. CONCLUSION................................................................................ 11

REFERENCES ......................................................................................... 12


1

1. Introduction 1.1.1 This is an assessment of the landscape and visual impact of a proposed

biogas development located within the Twemlow parish of Cheshire East at approximate National Grid Reference (NGR) 378067, 368995.

1.1.2 The nature of landscape and visual impact is described by Wilson (2002) in the “Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment”, as follows:

“Landscape and Visual assessments are separate, although linked procedures”

“Landscape effects derive from changes in the physical landscape, which may give rise to changes in its character and how it is experienced.”

“Visual effects relate to the changes that arise in the composition of available views as a result of changes to the landscape, to people’s responses to the changes, and to the overall effects with respect to visual amenity.”

2. Scope of Landscape and Visual Assessment 2.1.1 This assessment has been carried out in accordance with the “Guidelines

for Landscape and Visual Assessment” Wilson (2002). 2.1.2 A desk study review and site visit was conducted in order to assess the

scope of the survey and potential sensitive receptors. 2.1.3 The survey covers the following areas:

• Analysis of the existing landscape character that applies to the site and surrounding area

• A brief visual appraisal of the current site within its surroundings • An evaluation of the site in terms of potential landscape and visual

impacts. • Recommendations for mitigations

3. Site Description 3.1.1 The site can be seen in appendix A, highlighted with a red boarder. The

approximate National Grid Reference (NGR) of the site is: 378067, 368995.

3.1.2 The existing use rights are as a fuel storage depot and the previous owners were the Ministry of Defence (MoD) who developed the land as part of the Crown Estate in the early 1950s. The site was used as a fuel storage depot until the mid 1980s and the office buildings were used up until 2005. Since then the MoD has kept the site under care and maintenance until its sale to Ray Brown & Partners in February 2011.

3.1.3 Ray Brown & Partners own Orchards Farm, on Twemlow Lane and actively farm approximately 1000 acres of land in the surrounding Goostrey and Twemlow area. The land that is under control of Ray Brown & Partners is highlighted in appendix A, along with a brief description of fields adjacent to the site.

3.1.4 The current site infrastructure consists of: 6 fuel storage tanks of approximately 1.25 million gallons each. The tanks are currently covered


2

with earth and grassed over, this was done presumably to avoid detection from the air, however also provides excellent mitigation of visual impact for the local receptors. The site also has 10 vehicle loading gantries that are disused and although possibly still serviceable, appear dilapidated due to weathered and broken concrete platforms surrounding them. The site has a few buildings, including 3 security huts, 2 of which are near to the roadside entrances to the site. There is also an office building with a flat roof on the Northern side of Twemlow Lane at the site entrance. These huts and office buildings are aesthetically akin to the other 1950s style of buildings along Twemlow Lane, however due to their dilapidated structure and boarded up windows they have an aesthetically adverse presence within the local surroundings. The site also has a maintenance shed of the following approximate dimensions: 7m(height) X 30m(length) X 10m(width). This building has roller shutter doors that have been subjected to vandalism and graffiti. Photos of the current site infrastructure can be seen in appendix B.

3.1.5 Appendix C shows an aerial photo of the site taken from Google Maps (2011). As can be seen from appendices B and C the site has very good visual screening from the dwellings along Twemlow and Goostrey Lane due to a row of tall trees lining the South Eastern boarder of the site.

3.1.6 Due to the submerged grass-bunded area where the tanks are housed and their similarity in contrast with the surroundings, their current visual impact is of relatively low significance from the public highways and other public rights of way. More adverse impacts from the current site steam from its disused and dilapidated appearance of the on-site buildings that are visible from the public highways.

4. Surrounding Area and Landscape Character 4.1.1 With reference to the “Cheshire Landscape Assessment” (2008) Character

is defined as:

“A distinct, recognisable and consistent pattern of elements that make each place different. Landscape character is essentially that which makes a place unique and gives a locality its “sense of place”. Landscape Character is influenced by particular combinations of visual, natural and historic elements together with settlement patterns and built components. Intangible aspects such as tranquillity and sense of place also have a strong influence upon the way the landscape is perceived.”

4.1.2 The Cheshire Landscape Assessment map published in 2010 can be seen in appendix D. The proposed biogas development lies within the region marked as “LFW1”. This region is defined as “Landscape Characteristic Type 10: Lower Farms & Woodland” and LFW1 refers to the Marthall character area highlighted with a red boarder in appendix E. This area is between 40m – 90m AOD.

4.1.3 According to the “Cheshire Landscape Assessment” (2008), LFW1 is characterised by the following features:

• Low lying gently rolling topography

• Hedgerow boundaries and standard trees in a mix of medieval and post-medieval reorganised fields (irregular, semi-regular and regular up to


3

8ha) but with a loss of boundaries leading to formation of large fields and a large proportion of fences adding to this impression.

• Horsiculture – fenced horse paddocks.

• High density of woodland – blocks, coverts and riparian

• Medium settlement density - A mix of dispersed farms and nucleated hamlets/ villages

• Mosses and some meres resulting from glacial deposits

• Large number of water bodies

4.1.4 In relation to the proposed biogas development the nearest villages and hamlets can be seen in appendix A and C, these are: Goostrey, approximately 1-2 miles North of the site and Twemlow, approximately 0.25 miles to the South of the Site. Holmes Chapel is a much bigger settlement approximately 2-3 miles South West of the site.

4.1.5 Within the surrounding landscape, one of the most predominant features that can be seen from many of the sensitive receptors is Jodrell Bank radio telescope. Located approximately 2 miles North East of the site, this can be seen in appendix C. The Crewe to Manchester railway line also lies on the North Western boarder of the site and is a prominent feature of the landscape within the LWF1 region, with the Holmes Chapel viaduct approximately 1 mile South West of the site.

4.1.6 “There is a substantial concentration of small-medium (up to 8ha) medieval fields with semi-regular pattern in the Lower Peover/Peover Hall area. Much of the remaining area comprises regular small-medium post medieval enclosure with some medieval and large modern fields (over 8ha). Boundaries are a mix of patchy hawthorn hedges with standard trees and fences. Horsiculture also has made an impact on this area e.g. stables and modern fenced horse paddocks. Red brick buildings, some with white wash are typical and there are also a number of half timbered, brick nogged cottages.” Cheshire Landscape Character Assessment (2008)

5. Methodology 5.1.1 The methodology has been developed in accordance with the guidance set

out in the Landscape Institute and The Institute of Environmental Management “Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment” Wilson (2002). Aspects of the site that may have a direct effect on the surrounding landscape have been identified and sensitive receptors local to the site that may be affected by the site’s infrastructure have also been identified within this study.

5.2 Methodology Criteria 5.2.1 The GLVIA states that:

“No such formal guidance exists for the assessment of significance for landscape and visual effects and the assessor must clearly define the criteria used in the assessment for each project, using his or her skill based on professional judgement.”


4

5.2.2 Therefore in order to standardise the process of obtaining a significance rating for the impact that the site will have on its surroundings, a matrix has been created. With reference to the guidance set out by the “Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments” Wilson (2002) on significance; “the two principal criteria determining significance are the scale or magnitude of effect and the environmental sensitivity of the location or receptor.” This matrix can be seen in section 5.2.9.

Sensitivity of Receptor

5.2.3 The sensitivity of a receptor is determined by the location and context of the viewpoint. For example, an opening in a hedgerow where a view of the site becomes apparent momentarily for a passing highway user is a less sensitive receptor than a permanent view of the site from a residential window. The expectation or occupation of the receptor is also a factor in determining sensitivity. For example, a view of the site from a commercial estate would be regarded as a less sensitive a receptor than of that from a residential property. Finally the importance of the view has to be taken into consideration, for example does the view appear in guidebooks or tourist guides? How many people are affected by its change and can the surrounding landscape accommodate the change arising from the development, without detrimental effects on its character?

5.2.4 The following is the classification used for receptor sensitivity:

• High Sensitivity – Views from ground floor windows of residential properties and public rights of way.

• Medium Sensitivity – Views from upper floor windows of residential properties, recreational facilities and views from vehicles.

• Low Sensitivity – Industrial or commercial places of work.

Magnitude of Change

5.2.5 The magnitude of the change in view is determined by:

• The proportion of the view occupied by the new development and the contrast of this new feature when compared to the current background and surrounding landscape.

• The contrast of new features within the existing landscape in terms of form, scale, height, colour and texture.

• The timescale of the changes, for example some high magnitude changes may be of low significance if they are to be removed after construction, such as cranes.

• The distance and angle of the view.

5.2.6 Viewpoints can be classified as to; close (<500m), medium (500m-2km) and long distance (>2km).

5.2.7 Duration of change can be classified as long term (>5 years), medium term (1-5 years) and short term (<12 months).

5.2.8 It should also be noted that although the magnitude of change has different tiers, the magnitude may not always be negative (adverse) it could also be positive (beneficial).


5

Significance of the visual impact

5.2.9 Based on these two criteria of “sensitivity” and “magnitude” the following significance matrix has been developed:

Moderate significant and significant have been highlighted as unacceptable levels of significance and changes causing this level will have to be mitigated.

5.3 Presentation of Results 5.3.1 A number of photoview locations have been highlighted in appendix G.

These photoviews correlate to local sensitive receptors and the methodology for selecting these locations is discussed in further detail in section 5.5. These photoviews have been used as a foundation for determining the visual impact from these receptors and are accompanied by a table that highlights the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of the change from the respective photoview location. A description of its current view, distance from the site and its potential future view of the site also accompany each vantage point.

5.4 Limitations 5.4.1 The “Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments” Wilson

(2002) states that:

“The relationship between the sensitivity of the receptor and the nature and scale or magnitude of the effect is not linear, as the nature and scale of effects are largely derived from objective data, while the sensitivity and value of a landscape resource is largely derived from subjective judgements.”

Therefore the determination of significance is a complicated interaction of two different factors and could be seen as highly subjective. This is the limitation of a visual impact appraisal.

5.5 Desk Study 5.5.1 The desk study took into account several different sources of information

concerning the site and surrounding area, including; The Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC-mapping) website, OS

High Moderate Moderate Significant Significant

Moderate Slight Moderate

Moderate Moderate Significant

Low Slight Slight Moderate

Moderate

Negligible None Negligible Slight

Mag

nit

ud

e o

f C

han

ge

/ Eff

ect

Low Medium High

Sensitivity of Receptor


6

maps, the Cheshire Landscape Character Assessment (2008), the MoD and other statutory agencies relating to the environment such as Natural England.

5.5.2 The Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) website was searched for details of national designations. This did not reveal any statutory designations in the area, of relevance to the landscape and visual impact assessment. The MAGIC website was also consulted for Open Access Land designated under the Countryside Rights of Way Act (2000). The search returned no results.

5.5.3 The Natural England website doesn’t identify any national parks or areas of significance for the proposed biogas development. The nearest SSSI is a section of the River Dane, approximately 1.5km to the South West of the site. However due to the low lying nature of the river feature and trees lining the Southern boarder of the site, this bears no particular interest to this assessment.

5.5.4 The Cheshire East & West Interactive Mapping software was also consulted in order to identify potential sensitive receptors within visual range of the development. The public rights of way and national cycle networks (NCN) that could potentially be visually infringed by the development can be seen in appendix F.

5.5.5 The Heritage Gateway website identified a grade two listed building within 500m of the site. “The Gables is a grade II listed timber framed cottage built in the late 17th century. Removed from Plumley, near Knutsford, and re-erected on this site in 1974.” Heritage Gateway (2011). The potential visual impacts from this location were identified in the site survey.

5.6 Site Survey 5.6.1 A site survey was carried out on the 8th of September 2011, the weather

was overcast with some breaks in the cloud and no precipitation was encountered. All of the potential sensitive receptor locations were visited and assessed as to their relevance to the study in terms of visual envelope. All of the relevant viewpoints within the visual envelope of the development have been identified and are shown in appendix G.

5.6.2 Photos were taken with a digital camera with an equivalent of a 50mm lens. The photos were positioned within the appendices section of this report and given a black outline boarder using Adobe Photoshop CS4.

5.6.3 Due to the existing development, houses along Twemlow and Goostrey Lanes, nucleated farmhouses and existing trees and vegetation, the site is well screened from many of the potential visual receptors. The North of the site is however open to view from the public highway and also three public footpaths, identified in appendix F.


7

6. Visual Impacts

6.1 Introduction 6.1.1 Appendix G shows the full detailed results from each photoview location. 6.1.2 All impacts discussed in this appraisal are long-term. Short-term impacts of

the development are predicted to be of a low significance due to the existing storage tanks being retrofitted from the inside and no use of cranes during the installation of equipment.

6.1.3 The maximum height of any of the development’s infrastructure will be the

bio-filter stack at 12.2m, just 0.2m above the apex of the reception building’s roof. The current tanks are 7.3m in height and due to the stack’s close, proposed proximity to the tanks in the centre of the site, the lower angle of viewing from outside the site’s boundary will mean that only a small proportion of the roof and stack will be visible. The photo-representation drawings of the elevations view after construction, with no mitigation, can be seen in appendix I.

6.1.4 The colour scheme of the development’s infrastructure can also be seen in

the photo-representation drawings in appendix I. Colours have been selected that will not contrast sharply with the current background and landscape.

6.2 Impacts from public highways 6.2.1 It has been determined that the site will generate visual impacts from

sections of the following public highways: • Goostrey Lane • Twemlow Lane

6.2.2 Road users will generally be of a medium sensitivity to the visual impacts of the development.

Twemlow Lane

6.2.3 The development’s entrance will be visible for road users along Twemlow Lane when in close proximity to the site as seen in photoview 1. There are trees bordering the Northern side of the Twemlow Lane verge and these provide excellent screening from road users up until the development’s entrance itself. If travelling from the West along Twemlow Lane the site is not visible at all until a small break in the hedgerow for a field gateway, approximately 325m from the site, seen in photoview 9.

6.2.4 The site entrance is currently disused and dilapidated with boarded up

windows and small amounts of graffiti on the office building walls. The new development will create a moderate change in view as the South side of the food waste reception building will be just visible through the site entrance way. The change may however be seen as beneficial as the buildings will be renovated and potentially re-established as community rooms such as in the past when they were rented from the MoD and used as a Scout hut.


8

6.2.5 The view from Twemlow Lane when travelling from the West will remain essentially unchanged, except for a gap in the hedgerow opposite Blue Slate farm. This view will have a low magnitude of change and therefore the significance is only slight.

Goostrey Lane

6.2.6 The site will be visible from Goostrey Lane from just past Goostrey railway station when travelling towards the site from the North, seen in photoview 5. This view is intermittently disturbed by vegetation and the topography surrounding the road until it goes permanently out of view again just past the Goostrey Lane entrance to the site, shown in photoview 4. This viewing envelope is approximately 500m in length.

6.2.7 This site is not visible at all from the Goostrey Lane junction with Twemlow

Lane as there is a line of trees on the Southern boarder to the site that provides excellent screening. There are also residential properties on the left hand side of the road when travelling towards the North, that provide screening from views of the site.

6.2.8 When travelling South from Goostrey railway station the site will be clearly

visible across a field of grassland in the foreground, this is seen in photoview 5. The site is boarded on this side by an 8ft wire fence with barbed wire running along the top. The view behind this fence is of the fuel storage tanks and the site’s outer earth-bund wall. This earth-bund provides excellent mitigation of visual impacts from the current on-site infrastructure. The future development will maintain the earth-bund to mitigate views of the tanks, however the roof apex of digestate storage building will be just visible above the nearside bund wall, seen in appendix I. The view of the development will however been seen in the context of existing railway line electricity transmission towers and the fuel storage depot itself. Mitigations are discussed in section 7.

6.2.9 The Goostrey Lane entrance to the site is clearly visible from the road in

both directions. The entrance is currently closed off with an 8ft high wire mesh fence with barbed wire running along the top. The state of the fence is in poor condition and a disused sign is still in place on the entrance. This view can be seen in photoview 4.

6.2.10 The impact of the new development should be moderately beneficial with

respect to this view point as the entrance is not to be reused for highway access and can therefore be permanently or semi permanently screened with vegetation.

6.3 Impacts from residential properties 6.3.1 Very few properties will have views of the site and where these exist, will be

from upper floor windows, this will be seen as medium sensitivity.


9

Twemlow Area 6.3.2 Properties in the Twemlow area will have very limited views of the site due

to substantial screening provided by a line of trees on the Southern boarder of the site. The view from the properties along Twemlow Lane can be seen in photoview 2. The change will be none due to the vegetation and therefore the significance is slight.

6.3.3 The properties in the Twemlow area along Goostrey Lane are slightly more

susceptible to views of the site from their rear upper floor windows due to their closer proximity. However again due to the trees lining the Southern boarder of the site, the views will remain essentially unchanged.

6.3.4 Particular care has been taken when viewing the site from Goostrey Lane

due to the presence of a grade II listed building, “The Gables”. Photoview 3 was taken from in front of The Gables, facing towards the site, with the aim of assessing any visual impact on the surrounding character of the listed building in question. Again due to the existing vegetation that will not be removed, the development will be of only slight significance to the houses and listed building along Goostrey Lane.

Goostrey Area

6.3.5 There will be a limited few buildings (<5) in the Goostrey area that will be able to see the site, even from upper floor windows. These houses have been identified by the site visit and a view from the houses has been established in photoview 6.

6.3.6 The view of the site from these houses will be seen though a gap in the

hedgerow for a field access gateway. The view of the site from these properties is similar to the view of the site from photoview 5, with additional screening provided by hedges, trees and the railway line and bridge. The magnitude of change will be low due to this screening and the significance will be slight. However, mitigations in place to protect views from Goostrey Lane will also protect these dwellings from any visual impacts of the new development.

6.4 Impacts from public rights of way 6.4.1 Impacts from public rights of way are seen as highly sensitive, therefore all

of the public footpaths and bridleways found during the desk study to be within the potential visual envelope were assessed during the site visit as to their relevance within this assessment.

6.4.2 Due to the nature of the landscape character within this area, the dense tree

lines, high hedgerows and nucleated hamlets and settlements provide excellent screening from the otherwise potentially large visual envelope caused by the flat lie of the land.

6.4.3 Three of the public rights of way within the site’s predetermined potential

visual envelope were found to have views of the site, however Twemlow footpath number 6 (seen in appendix F) only has views of the site from the side of the road when entering onto the footpath. This can be seen in


10

photoview 5. This view will again be mitigated by the same mitigation procedures covering the views from the public highway along Goostrey Lane discussed in section 6.2.8.

6.4.4 Goostrey footpath number 2, (seen in appendix F) runs from behind

Goostrey primary school through farmland towards Twemlow and the site. The view from this footpath can be seen in photoview 7.

6.4.5 During the site visit, views of the site from Goostrey footpath number 2 were

impeded due to the crop plantation in the fields directly in front of the site’s visual envelope. The height of the crop was assessed in line with the height of the surrounding hedgerows and other vegetation and it is predicted that without the crop plantation during the winter months that there may be a slight view of the site’s North Western boarder behind the railway electricity transmission towers. However due to the tree line in between the viewpoint and the site, and other existing vegetation it is negligible as to whether there would be any change in view. The significance is therefore slight.

6.4.6 Twemlow footpath number 3 is the closest public right of way to the site and

runs along its Western boarder with the train line and a grazing field separating the site from the footpath.

6.4.7 The current site is clearly visible in the mid distant views shown in

photoview 8. The visual change from the footpath will not be of high magnitude as the existing grass bunding is to be kept in place covering the digester tanks, therefore retaining the character of the surrounding landscape. The apex of the reception building roof will be visible above the bunding, however due to the proposed aesthetics and character of the building, it will match other surrounding farm buildings and therefore the magnitude of this change will be of low significance. The view will be benefited by a “habitat management plan” Cooper (2011). This aims to implement an area of long grass and natural vegetation for wild birds and other local wildlife, on the South Western boarder of the site. This will mitigate the views of the current office buildings. The magnitude of change of view from Twemlow footpath number 3 has been assessed as moderate due to the potential visibility of the top of the gasholder and also CHP stacks. These buildings are not in character with the existing landscape and mitigation procedures are discussed in section 7.

6.5 Impact from the railway 6.5.1 The Crewe to Manchester main railway line runs past the Western boarder

of the site, however due to the local difference in ground level between the railway line and the site, it is not expected that any view of the site will be possible from passing trains.

7. Mitigations 7.1.1 With reference to PPS1 (Creating Sustainable Communities) and PPS7

(Sustainable Development in Rural Areas) the following statements should be considered when applying mitigations:


11

“All development in rural areas should be well designed and inclusive, in keeping and scale with its location, and sensitive to the character of the countryside and local distinctiveness.”

“Planning should facilitate and promote sustainable and inclusive patterns of urban and rural development by making suitable land available for development in line with economic, social and environmental objectives to improve people's quality of life; Also by protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment, the quality and character of the countryside, and existing communities.”

7.1.2 It is understood that CRES Biogas has employed habitat surveyor and ecologist, Val Cooper, to assess the natural habitat within the site and construct a habitat management plan in order to enhance the wildlife, local to the area. The habitat management plan has been referred to as the information provided is from a professional ecologist on the recommended species of new plantation that will be suitable to the site in keeping with the surrounding habitat and landscape.

7.1.3 Based on the potential visual impacts assessed in section 6 and analysed in detail in the photo views seen in appendix G, mitigation of visual impacts via screening using plantation is recommended to avoid impacts on the surrounding landscape to the North and West of the site.

7.1.4 Appendix H shows developers drawing of the site and the recommended location of new plantation to the North and West boarders of the site. It has been assessed that the South and East boarders to the site maintain sufficient screening from local receptors to avoid any significant visual impacts. Due to the existing nature of the screening it is recommended that no screening is removed from the site including the grass bunds covering the existing storage tanks. It is also understood that due to the implementation of the habitat management plan an area of long grasses and natural habitat will be maintained in the South West corner of the site. This will provide additional screening from the existing buildings.

7.1.5 It was recommended during the site visit that if possible the original height of the digestate storage building should be lowered to 7m and be built inside of the bund wall in order to avoid higher magnitude changes in view, from the road. This change has been implemented in the plans.

7.1.6 The buildings are to be built in keeping with the style and character of the local surrounding buildings and farms. They will be red brick based and clad with green panels at higher levels. The gas storage holder will be green in colour as to avoid any high levels of contrast with the surroundings.

8. Conclusion 8.1.1 If all of the aforementioned recommendations are implemented, including

the habitat management plan, then the new development should overall, provide a moderate, beneficial impact on the surroundings.


12

References Cheshire East & West Council [Online], Available from URL: http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/environment_and_planning.aspx [Accessed September 2011] Cheshire Landscape Character Assessment (2008), [Online], Available from URL: http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/environment_and_planning/planning/heritage_natural_environment/landscape/landscape_policy/landscape_character_assessment.aspx [Accessed September 2011], Cheshire Country Council Landscape & Regeneration Service Cooper. V (2011), Habitat Management Plan, 2011(12)/HMP/CRESBL/01 Cotterill. S, (2011), Site Plans – Drawing Numbers: MB408100, MB408101, MB408102, MB408103, Marches Biogas Ltd Emapsite [Online], Available from URL: http://www.emapsite.com/mapshop/ [Accessed September 2011] English Heritage [Online], Available from URL: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/caring/listing/ [Accessed 2011] Google Maps [Online], Available from URL: http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&tab=wl [Accessed September 2011]

Ministry of Defence (Not Dated), Layout of Tankage Site Showing All Services, Revision C, Monk & Co

Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) [Online], Available from URL: http://magic.defra.gov.uk/ [Accessed September 2011] Natural England [Online], Available from URL: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/maps/default.aspx [Accessed September 2011] Shell Mex & BP Ltd (Pipeline Department) (1968), Emergency Ops Manual – Volume V111

Wilson. S (2002), Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Second Edition, Spon Press

Young. D (2011), Odour Dispersion Model, Oak Tree Environmental, Winsford

Documents

Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment