JCA No. 121 - Low Weald
Overall comments (note 1)
The Low Weald is a broad clay vale extending through Sussex, Surrey and Kent. It forms a low-lying, rural well-wooded landscape in contrast to the adjacent landscapes of the Greensand Ridge, High Weald and South Downs. These generally have AONB or National Park designations which may extend into the Low Weald. Although the area has considerable potential for biomass crops, particularly SRC, local landscape character is under pressure and vulnerable to change, so sensitivity to local conditions will be needed.
| Generic landscape characteristics (note 2) | Key landscape characteristics (note 3) | Potential effects (PA, N, PB) (note 4) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SRC | Miscanthus | ||
| Topography (note 5) | Broad low-lying gently undulating clay vales with outcrops of limestone or sandstone providing local variation. |
PB - Low undulating topography will help to assimilate biomass crops into the landscape. Avoid prominent outcrops or ridges of higher land |
PB - Low undulating topography will help to assimilate biomass crops into the landscape. Avoid prominent outcrops or ridges of higher land |
| Woodland (note 6) | An intricate mix of woodlands (a high proportion of it ancient) – including extensive broadleaved oak over hazel coppice, shaws, plus small field copses and tree groups, and lines of riparian trees along watercourses. |
PB - The existing pattern of mixed types of woodland, including coppice, has potential to accommodate some SRC. Maintain the balance between woodland and other land uses - avoid over-planting which could aversely affect character. |
PB - Woodland will help to assimilate Miscanthus into the landscape |
| Boundary features (note 7) | Field boundaries of hedgerows and shaws enclose small, irregular fields. Occasional lines of hedgerow trees mark former boundaries. |
PB - Small fields with dense boundaries will visually enclose SRC. Historic boundaries should be respected – avoid field enlargement. |
PB - Small fields with dense hedges will visually enclose Miscanthus. Historic boundaries should be respected – avoid field enlargement. |
| Agriculture (note 8) | Permanent pasture is the main farming land use. Arable farming is associated with lighter soils on higher ground |
N - SRC has potential to be assimilated into mixed farming areas. |
PA - Miscanthus could appear alien in areas which are predominantly pasture. |
| Settlement and development (note 9) | Settlements tend to be small and scattered forming linear groups along roadsides or centred on greens or commons. Urban influences to west around Gatwick/Horley/Crawley. |
N – Avoid planting where it would affect views into and out of locally distinctive rural settlements. Urban fringe areas may offer potential. |
N – Avoid planting where it would affect views into and out of locally distinctive rural settlements. Urban fringe areas may offer potential. |
| Semi-natural habitats (note 10) | Unimproved permanent pastures, species-rich damp grassland, roadside verges, small streams, rivers and ponds, and extensive ancient woodland are habitats of high value. |
PA - Avoid semi-natural habitats |
PA - Avoid semi-natural habitats |
| Historic features (note 11) | Roman iron industry revived in the 15th century has left legacy of hammer ponds. |
PA - Avoid archaeological sites and historic parklands and their setting, and respect historic landscape character. |
PA - Avoid archaeological sites and historic parklands and their setting, and respect historic landscape character. |
| Rivers and coasts (note 12) | Heavily dissected by river floodplains with many small, narrow streams plus main rivers of the Adur, Arun, Beult and Medway. Ponds frequently occur on the edges of fields and woodlands. |
N - There could be scope for SRC in larger floodplains. Avoid obscuring the small scale drainage pattern by over-planting. Avoid ponds |
PA - Miscanthus is not likely to be suited to floodplains and narrow valleys |
| Views and inter-visibity (note 13) | There are good views over the Low Weald from adjoining hills and ridges. Within the lowland, views may be interrupted by hedges, woodlands or topography. |
N - Avoid planting which would affect known viewpoints. |
N - Avoid planting which would affect known viewpoints |
The information contained in the above table and accompanying footnotes has been produced by Natural England, on behalf of Defra, to assess opportunities and optimum sitings of energy crops
1. Overall comments
This section summarises the key characteristics of the JCA and the potential impacts and issues concerned with energy crop planting. It aims to provide an overall indication of the suitability for biomass crop establishment. In JCAs where the physical characteristics are so extreme that it is unlikely that land managers will want to plant biomass crops this is generally noted.
2. Generic landscape characteristics
The headings are based on those used in Natural England’s Countryside Quality Counts (CQC) project, with the addition of ‘topography’ and ‘views and inter-visibility’. They provide a way of breaking down the physical and visual qualities that help to make up the landscape. The potential impacts of energy crops have been assessed against this common framework.
3. Key landscape characteristics
This section aims to highlight for each of the generic categories, the specific landscape features and characteristics within each JCA that may be relevant to the growing of energy crops
4. Potential effects
This section summarises the main potential effects of SRC and miscanthus on each of the key landscape characteristics and features. In making the assessment we considered both the presence or absence of crops, and the the effects of scale and pattern in the landscape. Where the impacts are likely to differ between SRC and miscanthus this has been noted. Although it is very difficult to estimate impacts at such a general level we have attempted to assess whether the landscape impact could be beneficial, neutral or adverse, as follows:
- PB - Potentially beneficial
- N - Neutral
- PA - Potentially adverse
5. Topography
Topography, or landform, is often one of the main influences on landscape character, particularly in hilly or upland areas. We have summarised the overall topography of each area, together with an explanation of any specific or exceptional areas or major landform types. Topography will influence how obtrusive energy crops might be in some areas, or how they might fit in well in others.
6. Woodland
This covers all types of woodland, from ancient and semi-natural woodlands to commercial plantations, and includes broadleaved, conifer and mixed woodlands. As well as woodland type, we are interested in the pattern and scale of woodlands and how woodland cover varies across the JCA. In some areas there are close associations between specific types of woodland and particular landforms. Issues of concern include how biomass crops might contribute to or impact on local patterns of woodland cover, and what layouts or scale might be appropriate.
7. Boundary features
These include all forms of traditional boundaries, including hedgerows, stone walls and ditches. We are also interested in field patterns, particularly where these are of historic importance or are distinctive to the area. Issues considered included whether the establishment, growth or harvesting of energy crops could have an impact on traditional and valuable boundaries, either through direct damage (eg to allow access for farm machinery) or by obscuring or affecting the integrity of existing field patterns.
8. Agriculture
Agriculture includes arable, pasture (livestock), horticulture and mixed farming. In areas that are already intensively cropped, energy crops are likely to be less of an issue, and the impacts could be beneficial or neutral depending on scale. Adverse impacts are more likely in pastoral areas, particularly in low intensity, unimproved grassland areas. In areas where there is an existing underlying trend from grass to arable, the assessment has taken account of any existing landscape and land management priorities that may exist.
9. Settlement and development.
This covers population centres, roads, other infrastructure and mineral workings. In most cases energy crops are unlikely to have a significant impacts. However, in some cases there may be issues concerning the scale or pattern of planting where this would impact on the character of the local road network, or significantly affect the setting of towns or villages.
10. Semi-natural habitats
In this section we are concerned with the presence or absence, scale, and pattern of semi-natural habitats, other than woodland which is covered under 6. In general, many impacts will only be apparent at the detailed site level, which is outside the scope of this exercise. We have only commented where it is likely that biomass crops would impact on semi-natural habitats that are an integral part of the landscape.
11. Historic features.
Historic features refer not just to visible monuments and remains, but also historic areas such as parks and battlefields. As well as the presence or absence of features, we are interested in their density and pattern of distribution, and whether they are above or below ground. Specific, extensive archaeological or historic landscapes are noted. Issues considered included whether planting would obscure or damage historic sites, or whether it would affect the setting or integrity of a historic site. It is important to note that historic remains are extremely widespread and many have not been fully recorded. At this scale we have only referred to obvious sites and concentrations of sites. More detailed site assessment will normally be necessary.
12. Rivers and coasts
Water plays a key role in determining landform and defining landscape character. Issues of concern include whether energy crops could obscure watercourses or disrupt drainage patterns, and any hydrological and coastal management issues.
13. Views and inter-visibility
In some JCAs, views in, out or across an area are a key characteristic of the landscape. These may be broad, sweeping views or local, intimate ones. A key concern will be whether biomass crops would obscure or otherwise have an impact on the nature of these views.
Page last modified:
29 March, 2007
Page published: 10 December, 2002