Landscape and Visual Impact
When you stand in the valley at Furtho, what you see today is open countryside: fields rolling down to the Dogsmouth Brook, the Grand Union Canal winding quietly through, and the distinct edges of Old Stratford and Cosgrove still holding their own identities. It’s a landscape that feels rural, spacious, and separate.
The developer’s Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) tries to paint a different picture. It suggests this is an “urban” setting, that the warehouses can be tucked away behind landscaping, and that a new country park will somehow balance out the harm. But when Peter Radmall Associates looked at the evidence, they found the reality is very different.
Their review shows the developer’s LVIA is unreliable. The images used are more like artist’s impressions than accurate photomontages. The sensitivity of the land has been understated, especially in the central and eastern parts near the canal. And the claim that planting will hide 18‑metre‑tall warehouses within ten years is simply not credible. Even at maturity, the megasheds would dominate views across the valley.
What’s more, the LVIA ignores night‑time impacts altogether. Logistics sites operate 24/7, and the floodlighting needed will spill across the countryside, changing the character of the valley permanently. The proposed country park is presented as a benefit, but Radmall concludes it does little to mitigate harm; in fact, it reduces the openness of the floodplain.
In short, this isn’t just about numbers in a report. It’s about how the countryside looks and feels to the people who live here, walk here, and value the heritage of the canal corridor. The warehouses would overwhelm that experience, erasing the rural character and merging villages into one continuous sprawl.
Landscape and Visual Impact
When you stand in the valley at Furtho, what you see today is open countryside: fields rolling down to the Dogsmouth Brook, the Grand Union Canal winding quietly through, and the distinct edges of Old Stratford and Cosgrove still holding their own identities. It’s a landscape that feels rural, spacious, and separate.
The developer’s Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) tries to paint a different picture. It suggests this is an “urban” setting, that the warehouses can be tucked away behind landscaping, and that a new country park will somehow balance out the harm. But when Peter Radmall Associates looked at the evidence, they found the reality is very different.
Their review shows the developer’s LVIA is unreliable. The images used are more like artist’s impressions than accurate photomontages. The sensitivity of the land has been understated, especially in the central and eastern parts near the canal. And the claim that planting will hide 18‑metre‑tall warehouses within ten years is simply not credible. Even at maturity, the megasheds would dominate views across the valley.
What’s more, the LVIA ignores night‑time impacts altogether. Logistics sites operate 24/7, and the floodlighting needed will spill across the countryside, changing the character of the valley permanently. The proposed country park is presented as a benefit, but Radmall concludes it does little to mitigate harm; in fact, it reduces the openness of the floodplain.
In short, this isn’t just about numbers in a report. It’s about how the countryside looks and feels to the people who live here, walk here, and value the heritage of the canal corridor. The warehouses would overwhelm that experience, erasing the rural character and merging villages into one continuous sprawl.
“The LVIA has under-stated the value and sensitivity of the site, particularly its central and eastern parts, with the result that the landscape impact of the development has been under-reported.”
Peter Radmall Associates, Environmental and Landscape Consultants September 2025
Landscape & Visual Impact - Reasons to Object
- The developer’s LVIA is unreliable and misleading
- Warehouses would dominate the rural valley, destroying countryside character
- Old Stratford and Cosgrove risk coalescence into one sprawl, breaching Policy SS2
- The Grand Union Canal Conservation Area would suffer visual harm from massing and lighting
- Landscaping promises are exaggerated; 18‑metre sheds cannot be screened effectively
- Night‑time lighting impacts are ignored, despite 24/7 operations
- The proposed country park does not offset harm and reduces floodplain openness
- The scheme fails Local Plan policies SS2, NE4, HE6, ALP5
