7 Manchester’s Historic Character – Analysis and Recommendations 7.1 Unenclosed land broad type Figure 4 The area of the former Shadow Moss is indicated by the distinctive field boundary patterns depicted on OS 6” 1 st edition mapping of c1882 Description This character type comprises areas that are currently of low economic value and where there is little or no settlement. It includes marginal land such as open mossland and marsh, and other unimproved land which may nonetheless be exploited, such as common land, pasture and moorland. Unenclosed land only occurs in Manchester district as a previous type. 7.1.1 Open moorland Description and historical context Moorland does not exist as a current type within the Manchester landscape; it appears as a previous type only in the Baguley Moor area. Some areas of the former moorland have not been developed and although their character has changed, they may still contain palaeoenvironmental and archaeological evidence. 27 For example, the playing fields associated with Brookway High School (HLC Ref HGM13548) and the playing fields east of Church Stoke Walk (HLC Ref HGM13842) have both been enclosed from farmland that was formerly moorland. 7.1.2 Mossland Description and historical context Although there is no surviving untouched mossland in Manchester, there were several mosses in the district in the past. Mossland has thus been recorded as a previous rather than a current character type. Like the upland moors, the former lowland mosses were probably enclosed at a relatively late date. The three main former mosses in Manchester are Hough Moss in the area which is now Moss Side and Whalley Range; Shadow Moss, near Moss Nook and Manchester Airport in the south of the district; and White Moss, near Charlestown in the northern part of the district. Only Shadow Moss (Figure 4) is still visible within the landscape to any real extent. This has been recorded by the project as Drained wetland. Although Hough Moss and White Moss no longer exist as landscape features, there are areas within them such as public parks or recreation grounds which have not been disturbed or destroyed by development and may hold important archaeological and palaeoenvironmental evidence. Despite a lack of early settlement evidence for this region, mosses are archaeologically significant in relation to the preservation of organic and palaeoenvironmental indicators. Archaeological evidence found in the Manchester mosses includes human remains and stone tools relating to prehistoric exploitation. There is always the potential for the discovery of early settlement on the fringes of former wetlands. There is little evidence for the drainage of mosses before the 18 th century. Prior to formal drainage and enclosure, they were probably used for pasturage and turbary (peat extraction). All three mosses in Manchester had been drained and enclosed by 1894 (OS 1892-94). Hough Moss as depicted on the first edition Lancashire OS map (1848-51) includes a large number of ponds and a drainage ditch. White Moss appears to have been only partially enclosed by 1851 and included an area of rough grazing, some ponds and a culvert; this moss was fully enclosed by 1894. The third area of moss, at Shadow Moss, was fully enclosed by 1882 (OS 1881-82). 28 Key management issues relating to former areas of Mossland Below-ground Potential for surviving archaeological remains, likely to be archaeological well-preserved where present due to waterlogged conditions. potential Remains may include: • Prehistoric artefacts, settlement evidence and human remains • Peat deposits, which can preserve palaeoenvironmental evidence relating to past climates, flora and fauna Above-ground Some potential for remains associated with the post-medieval archaeological exploitation of mosses. potential • Moss-side settlements may include examples of vernacular buildings • Boundary features relating to piecemeal enclosure at the edges of mosses, particularly drainage ditches, may survive Historic • Areas of former mossland may retain distinctive 18th or 19 th landscape century enclosure patterns interest Threats • Contamination of archaeological and palaeoenvironmental deposits by industry and utilities, including waste disposal • Peat extraction • Agriculture and drainage • Large-scale development, particularly of industrial or commercial parks Opportunities Even where some exploitation has taken place, areas of former mossland can still contain important palaeoenvironmental and archaeological evidence. • Areas where the geology suggests a high potential for evidence of human activity, such as former sand and gravel islands where prehistoric camps or shelters may have been erected, can be targeted for archaeological evaluation • Environmental assessments of specific sites can identify survival of palaeoenvironmental deposits, informing research and allowing the mitigation of development impact Management • Where good legibility of historic character exists, there recommendations should be enhancement through positive management, including restoration where appropriate and protection through the planning process • Where planning permission is granted for a site located in an area of mossland or former mossland, conditions should be attached to ensure that provision is made for the investigation of the site’s archaeological potential and for the preservation in situ or recording of any 29 archaeological deposits that are encountered • Awareness of issues relating to the importance of historic mossland should be promoted and should feed into Local Development Frameworks, Parish Plans and Spatial Strategies There are a range of designations which can offer statutory protection to sites that are significant for their archaeological remains or for their ecology: • Scheduled Monuments • Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) • Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) • Special Protection Areas • Ramsar Sites 30 7.2 Enclosed land broad type Figure 5 Map showing the distribution of Enclosed land HLC types 31 Definition of the broad character type This type comprises land that has been demarcated and enclosed, particularly cultivated fields. Much of this land will not have been developed in the past, but the type does include the former sites of buildings and complexes, often relating to industry or extraction, that are no longer extant. These sites have reverted to once more form part of the landscape of fields. Areas with a 20 th century ‘enclosure’ date identified by the project, therefore, may represent sites currently in use as fields that were in a different use in the 19 th or earlier 20 th century. HLC type Area covered % of Enclosed by HLC type Land (km 2) represented Piecemeal Enclosure 1.87 68 Drained Wetland 0.26 9 Paddocks and Closes 0.04 2 Surveyed Enclosure 0.49 17 (Parliamentary/Private) Agglomerated Fields 0.12 4 Totals 2.79 100% Table 2 Area covered by the different Enclosed land HLC types Figure 6 Pie chart showing the percentage of different HLC types making up the Enclosed land broad type in Manchester 32 Enclosed land in Manchester There is very little enclosed land in Manchester – it covers just 2% of the district (2.79km 2). The majority of this is concentrated in the southern part of the district, with a small amount near the northern edge. Whilst there are other areas of land within the district that are not built up, these are mainly used for leisure rather than agriculture, and include golf courses, parks and country parks. Manchester was extensively rural until the early to mid-20 th century, before the construction of large housing estates such as Wythenshawe. The most prominent enclosed land HLC types in Manchester are Piecemeal enclosure (1.87km 2), Surveyed enclosure (0.49km 2) and Drained wetland (0.26km 2). Paddocks and closes and Agglomerated fields each represent less than 5% of the total area of enclosed land. No evidence of prehistoric enclosure was recognised during the HLC; the earliest enclosure identified in Manchester district is thought to have originated in the medieval period. However, it must be noted that periods of origin assigned to areas of fields during the course of the HLC are based on the interpretation of enclosure patterns shown on 19 th century and later mapping and do not constitute a detailed or definitive study. The current agricultural landscape is a product of an often complex evolution. In the 19 th century in particular large areas of the landscape were remodelled, fields were enlarged and boundaries straightened. 7.2.1 Piecemeal enclosure Description and historical context It is reasonable to assume that a piecemeal enclosure pattern was prominent throughout Manchester district in the medieval and post medieval periods. Where land was more favourable for agricultural exploitation it can be assumed that settlement and enclosure were earlier than elsewhere. Piecemeal enclosure occurs in the southern part of Manchester district. The largest such area lies on the hill slopes above an area of steep-sided wooded cloughs, with the external boundaries respecting the break in slope. The other areas represent fragmentary survival of earlier field patterns on the margins of 20 th century roads and residential developments (HLC Refs HGM13256, HGM11888). 33 About 5% of piecemeal enclosure has survived since 1851 with little boundary loss (‘little’ has been defined for the purposes of the HLC project as less than 15%). However, these earlier patterns suffered at the end of the 19 th century when it was common for fields