New Central / East Secondary School Archaeological Statement Desk Based Assessment

Archaeological Desk-based Assessment Report

Manchester New

High School,

Gorton, Manchester

Client: Laing O’Rourke

Technical Report: Sarah–Jayne Murphy

Report No: 2017/6

Archaeological Desk Based Assessment New High School, Gorton, Manchester 2017, (6).

Site Location: The study area occupies a large rectangular plot of land currently used as heathland, the area is located off Matthews Lane, Gorton, Manchester.

NGR: SJ 87861 95024

Project: Proposed development of land located off Matthews Lane, Gorton Manchester.

Internal Ref: SA/2017/6

Prepared for: Laing O’Rourke

Document Title: Archaeological Desk-based Assessment: Manchester New School, Gorton Manchester.

Document Type: Desk-based Assessment.

Version: PL01

Author: Sarah–Jayne Murphy Position: Archaeologist Date: January 2017

Approved by: Ian Miller Signed: Position: Assistant Director of Archaeology Date: January 2017

Contact: Salford Archaeology, Centre for Applied Archaeology, LG 19 – 25 Peel Building, University of Salford, the Crescent, Salford, M5 4WU.

Telephone: 0161 295 4467 Email: [email protected]

Disclaimer:

This document has been prepared by the Centre for Applied Archaeology, University of Salford for the titled project or named part thereof and should not be used or relied upon for any other project without an independent check being undertaken to assess its suitability and the prior written consent and authority obtained from the Centre for Applied Archaeology. The University of Salford accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequences of this document being used for a purpose other than those for which it was commissioned. Other persons/parties using or relying on this document for other such purposes agrees, and will by such use or reliance be taken to confirm their agreement to indemnify the University of Salford for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. The University of Salford accepts no liability or responsibility for this document to any other party/persons than by whom it was commissioned.

Archaeological Desk Based Assessment New High School, Gorton, Manchester 2017, (6). Contents

Summary 1

1. Introduction 2

2. Methodology Statement 4

3. The Setting 5

4. Archaeological and Historical Background 7

5. Gazetteer of Sites 13

6. Significance of the Remains 14

7. Impact of the Development 17

8. Further Investigation 18

9. Sources 19

10. Archive 20

11. Acknowledgments 21

Appendix 1: Figures 22

Appendix 2: HER Data 28

Archaeological Desk Based Assessment New High School, Gorton, Manchester 2017, (6). Summary

In January 2017, Salford Archaeology was commissioned by Laing O’Rourke to undertake an archaeological desk-based assessment of land located Matthews Lane, Gorton, Manchester (centred on NGR SJ 87861 95024). The Site Area comprises an open space heath land currently undeveloped within the Gorton area of Manchester. The assessment aimed to identify, as far as possible, the nature, extent and significance of the archaeological resource, so as to enable informed recommendations to be made for the future treatment of any surviving remains. The proposed development area does not contain any designated heritage assets and only one non-designated heritage asset. There is one listed building that has been identified within a 500m radius, which is nationally designated Grade II listed building, located to the north-east of the Site Area, this being the Church of Our Lady and St Thomas of Canterbury, there is also a further 14 non-designated heritage assets. The buildings of Yew Tree Farm appear from cartographic evidence to have been the only development constructed on the Site Area within recent history. There are no further known developments and there appears to have been no further construction on the site of the farm. The requirement for any further archaeological investigation in advance of any future development will be decided by the Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service, in their capacity as archaeological advisor to Manchester City Council. In light of the results obtained from the present assessment, it is concluded that a program of trial trenching be carried out over the area of Yew Tree Farm, dependent on the survival and content of the trial trenching a further, more in-depth program of excavation may be necessary, in order to properly record the archaeological remains, this decision will be determined by GMAAS.

1.1 Planning Background In January 2017, Salford Archaeology was commissioned by Laing O’Rourke to undertake an archaeological desk-based assessment of land located off Matthews Lane, Gorton, Manchester (referred to herein as the Site Area). The aim of the archaeological assessment was to identify as far as possible the nature, extent and significance of the archaeological resource in the Site Area so as to enable informed recommendations to be made for the future treatment of any surviving remains. This information was required in order to inform the feasibility of the site for future development.

1.2 Government and Local Planning Policies

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) The significance of the archaeological resource identified within this report has been assessed as recommended in National Planning Policy Framework (Department for Local Communities, March 2012). NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies and outlines the presumption in favour of sustainable development, which is defined by three principles: economic, social and environmental. Of the 12 core planning principles underpinning decision making, conserving ‘heritage assets in a manner appropriate to the quality of life of this and future generations’ is one. Section 12 specifically deals with this historic environment (paragraphs 126-41), and local planning authorities should consider: • The desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; • The wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits that conservation of the historic environment can bring; • The desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness; and • Opportunities to draw on the contribution made by the historic environment to the character of a place.

Paragraph 128 states that local planning authorities, when determining applications, should require the applicant to describe the significance of any affected heritage assets. This should be sufficient so as to understand the potential impact on their significance and this should be done using the appropriate expertise where necessary.

© CfAA: Land adjoining Manchester New School, Gorton, Manchester Page | 2 Paragraph 135 indicates that the effect of the proposal on non-designated heritage assets (designated assets are covered in paragraphs 132-34) should be taken into account. Paragraph 141 requires developers to record and advance understanding of heritage assets to be lost, in a manner appropriate to their importance and impact.

1.2.2 Local Development Framework NPPF outlines the need for local planning policies to create local plans and frameworks to implement NPPF at a local level. Manchester adopted a Core Strategy in 2012, which is scheduled until 2027. The heritage strategy is outlined in Objective 6: Environment and summarises the approach the local authority will take in determining planning applications which may affect the historic environment. Policy EN3 states: Throughout the City, the Council will encourage development that complements and takes advantage of the distinct historic and heritage features of its districts and neighbourhoods, including those of the City Centre. New developments must be designed so as to support the Council in preserving or, where possible, enhancing the historic environment, the character, setting and accessibility of areas and buildings of acknowledged importance, including scheduled ancient monuments, listed buildings, registered parks and gardens, conservation areas and archaeological remains. Proposals which enable the re-use of heritage assets will be encourage where they are considered consistent with the significance of the heritage asset. Manchester City Council is advised on archaeological matters by the Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS), which has been consulted during the preparation of the present assessment.

2.1 Research The assessment considers the potential impact of a proposed development upon any buried archaeological remains within the Site Area, and comprises a desk-based study and site inspection. The production of the assessment followed the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) standard and guidance for undertaking archaeological desk- based assessments (Institute for Archaeologists, Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-based Assessment, 2014).

The desk-based assessment made use of the following sources: • Published and unpublished cartographic, documentary and photographic sources; • The Greater Manchester Historic Environment Record, maintained by the Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service; • Salford Archaeology’s extensive library of archaeological work carried out in the vicinity of the Site Area.

The aim of the research was to provide the relevant historical and archaeological background relating to the development of the site. The available sequence of historical mapping was the principal source of information, as this provides evidence for the development of the Site Area since the late eighteenth century.

2.2 Site Inspection The aim of the site inspection was to relate the findings of the desk-based study to the existing land use of the Site Area, in order to identify any evidence for surviving below-ground remains, and also to consider the potential impact of the development on the historic built environment.

2.3 The Document The following presents the historical and archaeological evidence for the study area. A gazetteer (Chapter 5) is presented of heritage assets and sites of potential archaeological interest identified within the Site Area and this information, along with map regression (Appendix 1), is used to assess the significance of the remains (Chapter 6) and impact of the development (Chapter 7). A strategy for further investigation is outlined in Chapter 8, based on the assessment presented in the previous chapters.

3. The Setting

3.1 Location, Topography and Land use The Site Area lies of Matthews Lane, situated 1.2km to the south of Hyde Road (A57) within the Gorton area of Greater Manchester (centred on SJ 87861 95024). The Site Area is broadly rectangular-shaped, and bounded to the north by Longsight Road, to the east by The Grange School and Gorton Mount Primary Academy, to the south by Matthews Lane, and to the west by housing (Plate 1).

Plate 1: Recent aerial view showing the Site Area boundary

3.2 Geology & Topography The underlying solid geology of the Site Area, as mapped by the British Geological Survey at 1:50000, is comprised of Chester Pebble Beds Formation - Sandstone. The overlying drift geology is comprised of Till, Devensian Diamicton (http://www.bgs.ac.uk). The Site Area occupies land with a slight incline to the south, the north standing at 59m above Ordnance Datum (AOD) and the south 55 AOD. The land is currently heathland.

3.3 Designations The Site Area does not contain any designated heritage assets and only one non- designated heritage asset. There is also 1 designated and 14 non-designated heritage

assets within 500m of the Site Area. The designated heritage asset is a Grade II Listed Building, which is located just outside of the Site Area to the north-east.

Although not contained within the Site Area it is worth noting that just outside of the southern boundary along the line of Matthews Lane runs Nico Ditch.

The designated heritage assets around the Site Area being the Grade II Listed Building is listed in the table below:

HER Site Name Designation NGR Number 12166.1.0 Church of Our Lady and St Thomas of Grade II SJ 8812 9535 Canterbury

Table 1: Designated heritage assets associated with the Site Area

4. Historical Background

This section of the report is based on cartographic and documentary research, and provides a framework to the present study, working chronologically through the periods listed below. Each section details evidence of archaeological remains and the potential for their recovery. Key sites are summarized in the Gazetteer of Sites (Chapter 5).

Period Date Range Prehistoric Palaeolithic Pre-10000 BC Mesolithic 10000 – 3500 BC Neolithic 3500 – 2200 BC Bronze Age 2300 – 700 BC Iron Age 700 BC – AD 43 Romano-British AD 43 – AD 410 Early Medieval AD 410 – AD 1066 Late Medieval AD 1066 – AD 1540 Post-Medieval AD 1540 – AD 1750 Industrial Period AD 1750 – 1914 Modern Post- 1914 Table 2: Summary of British archaeological periods and date ranges

4.1 Prehistoric Period 4.1.1 Archaeological Evidence

The current understanding of any activity in Manchester during the prehistoric period is very poor, physical indications for any settlements are, at best, fragmentary, prehistoric settlements tended to be on areas of land, usually promontories and close to a water source. Evidence has been found in what is now Manchester City Centre on Liverpool Road, Castlefield, to the north-west of the Site Area during the course of this work, two Mesolithic flints, one Neolithic/Bronze Age waste flake, and a single fragment of late Bronze Age/Iron Age pottery were recovered, although none was found in securely stratified deposits (UMAU 2002). In addition to this evidence, a collection of Neolithic flints were found on Ashton Moss to the north-east of the Site Area. There is no known evidence for prehistoric activity within the boundary of the Site Area,

4.1.2 Archaeological Potential There are no known prehistoric remains or finds from within or near the Site Area, and the potential for buried archaeological remains deriving from this period is considered to be low.

4.2 Roman Period 4.2.1 Archaeological Evidence

The first military occupation of Manchester was established during the governorship of Agricola (AD 77-84), and commenced with a five-acre wooden fort, known as Mamucium (Bruton 1909). The site of this encampment is marked today by Camp Street in Castlefield, situated over 5km to the north-west of the present Site Area. During the second century, the fort was developed in association with a substantial extramural settlement, or vicus, which expanded in both a northerly direction, and along the line of Chester Road to the south (Grealey 1974, 11). Roads from the fort linked Manchester with Ribchester to the north, Castleshaw, Slack and York to the north-east, Wigan to the north-west, Northwich and Chester to the south, and Buxton to the south- east, it is this section of the road that lies within 500m to south-east of the Site Area.

4.2.1 Archaeological Potential

The Site Area lies within less than 500m of the possible line of the Roman Road to Buxton. The Site Area has had relatively little development over the last 250 years, chance finds relating to this period should not be ruled out, although this potential for Roman remains is considered to be low.

4.3 Medieval Period 4.3.1 Archaeological Evidence

There is very little archaeological evidence in the region as a whole that represents the period between the end of the Roman occupation and the Norman Conquest. The area around Manchester came under the control of several kingdoms during this period. In AD 620, Edwin conquered and occupied Manchester, and it may have been at this time that settlement in the town was established around the cathedral (Farrer and Brownbill 1908). Located along the southern boundary of the Site Area is the line of Nico Ditch, this is s c.7km long linear earthwork which is believed to have originally extended between Ashton Moss and Hough Moss. At the western end a second earthwork, known as Carr Ditch is found, which is most likely later in date but continues the line of Nico Ditch to the mosslands at Urmston (Arrowsmith & Fletcher 1993). The earthwork was composed of a c.3-4m wide ‘U’-shaped ditch, which is first mentioned in a charter from 1190-1212 AD relating to the granting of land in Audenshaw. The ditch has been known by several names over its history, the most widely used of these in modern times being Nico or Nikker Ditch, this has been assumed to arise from the Old English ‘nicor’, meaning a ‘water sprite’ however, it is most likely to derive from a corruption of the earliest attested names of ‘Mykelldiche’, ‘Mekeldyche’ and Muchildich, which are derived from the Anglo-Saxon word ‘micel’, meaning big or great, whether this refers to the line of the monument or its size is unclear.

The earliest references mention only the ditch, however, Higson c.1850 noted that a’ hedge is on the Gorton or Manchester side all along. It seems to imply that when the land was first divided into fields the remains of the old breastwork were used as a cop or backing’ (Crofton 1905, 155). Gorton is named in 1282 as being held in bondage of the lord of Manchester, being assessed as sixteen oxgangs of land and paying 64s rent. By one of the lords of Manchester Gorton seems to have been granted or leased to the Booths, for in 1433 Sir Robert Booth and Douce his wife enfeoffed Sir John Byron and William Booth, clerk, of his lands in the hamlets of Gorton, &c., described in a fine as twenty-four messuages, 500 acres of land, 40 acres of meadow, and 500 acres of pasture, also 2s. 6d. rent, in Manchester. In 1473 John Byron held the vill of Gorton with the appurtenances, paying a rent of £30 11s to the lord of Manchester. It descended like Clayton till 1612–13, when the manor of Gorton with messuages, lands, water-mill, and horse-mill in Gorton, &c., appears to have been sold by Sir John Byron and the trustees to the tenants. It was in 1609 decided that Greenlow Marsh lay in Gorton and not in Chorlton or Greenlow Heath (Farrer and Brownbill 1911: IV)

4.3.2 Archaeological Potential

The Site Area during this period consisted of farmsteads there is therefore a low potential for archaeological remains dating to the medieval period to be uncovered within the Site Area.

4.4 Post-medieval and Industrial Periods

4.4.1 Archaeological Evidence During the eighteenth century, south-east Lancashire as a whole was predominantly an agricultural area of isolated settlements and market towns, with the growing town of Manchester at its centre (Williams with Farnie 1992, 3). Up until the Industrial Period the area appears to have consisted of mainly farmsteads, it wasn’t until the early to mid-nineteenth century that the area developed into a more industrialised periphery of Manchester City Centre. Power-loom weaving was about to be introduced in 1790; the Gorton cotton mills were started in 1824, and after a failure were restarted in 1844. There were by the early twentieth century a cotton factory, chemical works, iron works, and tanyard. Surrounding the Site Area there appears to have been the development of dye works, chemical and iron works in addition to workers housing

4.4.2 Archaeological Potential The Site Area appears to have gone through much of its development during this period, as a result of the growing industry in and around Manchester. As a result any archaeological remains on the site are likely to be dated to this period.

4.4 Development of the Site Area

The Site Area itself appears to have gone through little development, based on cartographic sources, throughout its history. Visible on …… map it shows that there was nothing contained within the Site Area, with little other development in the surrounding area.

Plate 2. Showing the Site Area on Johnson 1819 map.

The first development visible on cartographic sources was that of Yew Tree Cottage (later farm) on the 1848 OS map, see figure 2. This showed a square structure in the south-west corner of the Site Area, contained within its own rectangular boundary. This structure goes through various developments through its history, on the 1894 OS map (figure 3) it showed that there were now three buildings on the site, there was

possibly two further structures. The 1923 OS map (figure 4) shows that there was a stand-alone square building in the south-west corner with a large ‘U’-shaped building to the east, on the 1958 map (figure 5) this large square building was identified as Yew Tree Farm, with what is assumed to be outbuildings to the east.

The 1923 OS map showed that there were allotment gardens along the northern edge of the Site Area, these are no longer present on the 1958 map, with the entire northern half of the Site Area now being a clay pit. There are now on this later map allotment gardens along the southern boundary of the Site.

4.6 Site Visit

The site visit took place in January 2017 this showed the site to be mainly scrub land, there were tracks on which it was possible to walk, but these appeared to be present mainly through heavy use rather than design along with several formerly laid pathways. The areas around these paths had long self-seeded grass and young tree saplings present.

Plate 3. Showing the Site Area. Looking north.

Plate 4, Showing the Site Area. Looking south.

5. Gazetteer of Sites

The following gazetteer provides a list of the non-designated heritage assets identified within the boundary of the Site Area, their locations are shown on Figure 8. This has been compiled from Greater Manchester Historic Environment Record (HER) data, coupled with a study of the historical map sequence. A buffer zone was also applied to 500m around the Site Area, and these entries are listed in Appendix 2.

Site Number: 1 Site Name: Yew Tree Farm NGR: SJ 8773 9479 Designation: None Site Type: Building (Site of) Period: Nineteenth century Description: First visible on the 1849 OS map, located in the south-west corner of the Site Area, a small rectangular building contained within a larger rectangular boundary. It is labelled as Yew Tree Cottage. The next available cartographic evidence is the 1894 OS map, here the structure is now identified as Yew Tree Farm, and appears to consist of at least three buildings, two square and one rectangular, it is possible that there are two further structures associated with the farm, although the map is not detailed enough to show this. The 1923 OS map shows that there is a stand-alone square building on the very west of the Site Area against the boundary, to the east of this is a larger ‘U’-shaped building with several other smaller buildings associated with this. The 1958 OS map shows that the farm is a large roughly ‘L’-shaped building, with additional buildings to the north-east of this structure. Assessment: There appears to have been no further building on the site of the farm since its demolition, the likelihood of finding remains relating to the buildings of the farm are considered too high.

6. Significance of the Remains

6.1 The Policy Context of Heritage Assets The archaeological resource of an area can encompass a range of assets, including below ground remains, earthworks, and standing buildings and other structures. Some of these remains may have statutory protection, as Scheduled Monuments or Listed Buildings. Others do not but may nevertheless be of archaeological significance. Under both national and local planning policy, as outlined below, both statutory and non- statutory remains are to be considered within the planning process.

The NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework, March 2012) sets out the Secretary of State’s policy on planning and includes a section on the conservation of the historic environment (including historic, archaeological, architectural and artistic heritage assets, NPPF paras 126-141), and its wider economic, environmental and social benefits. NPPF emphasises the significance of an individual heritage asset within the historic environment and the value that it holds for this and future generations in order to minimise or avoid conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the planning proposals. NPPF draws a distinction between designated heritage assets of national importance and heritage assets that are not designated but which are of heritage interest and are thus of a material planning consideration (paras 134 and 135). In the case of the former, the presumption should be in favour of conservation; in the case of the latter, where this is warranted by its significance, the developer is required to record and understand the significance of the heritage asset before it is lost, in a way that is proportionate to the nature and level of the asset’s significance, by the use of survey, photography, excavation or other methods.

NPPF states that non-designated assets of archaeological interest that are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled monuments should be considered in the same manner as designated sites (NPPF para 139). Regarding this policy a lack of formal designation does not itself indicate a lower level of significance; in this instance the lack of designation reflects that the site was previously unknown and therefore never considered for formal designation. Wherever possible, development should be located and designed so as to avoid damage to archaeological remains, ensuring that they are preserved in situ. Where this is not possible, or appropriate, the developer will be required to make suitable provision to ensure that the archaeological information is not lost, and in many cases to secure the preservation of the remains.

The Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS) act as archaeological curator for the Greater Manchester Region and provide archaeological advice to Manchester City Council.

6.2 Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria

The most commonly accepted methodology for assessing archaeological significance is the Secretary of State’s criteria for the scheduling of ancient monuments, outlined in Annex 1 of Scheduled Monuments: identifying, protecting, conserving and investigating nationally important archaeological sites under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 (DCMS March 2010). These criteria have all been utilised in this assessment and are listed below:

• Period • Rarity • Documentation • Group Value • Survival/Condition • Fragility/Vulnerability • Diversity • Potential

6.3 Baseline Significance Conditions for the land within the Site Area Period The Site Area remained undeveloped as far as can be assessed until the nineteenth century, it is therefore likely that any finds will date from this period. However, due to its proximity of the site of a Roman Road, the possibility that there are finds dating to this should not be ruled out, although the chance is slight.

Rarity Any Roman finds may be considered to be of regional rarity. Those from the nineteenth century onwards, would not be anticipated to hold a rarity value, but again this should not be ruled out. It is most likely that any structural remains will relate to nineteenth century farm, which may hold some local interest. Documentation From the nineteenth century onwards, the general development of the Site Area can be traced reasonably well through cartographic sources. Further detail, including more precise dating of the construction of buildings within the Site Area, might be gained from documentary sources, but this is unlikely to modify the outcome of this report.

Group Value The group value of the remains within the Site Area are considered to be low.

Survival / Condition The extent to which any remains survive and their condition is presently unknown, as the Site Area appears to have remained vacant since their demolition, it can be anticipated that there are at least some remains on site.

Fragility/Vulnerability See below (Section 7.1) The Identification and Evaluation of the Key Impacts on the Archaeology.

Diversity It is most likely that the remains that are on this site will relate to the nineteenth century, as there has been little development on this site in recent history it is possible that any remains will be a good example of their type.

Potential There is some, albeit slight, potential for Roman remains, however it is most likely that any remains will relate to the nineteenth century onwards.

6.4 Significance Based on the information gained from the desk-based research, it can be concluded that the site as a whole is of archaeological interest, as there is evidence that the buildings that once inhabited the site date back to the mid-nineteenth century (based on cartographic evidence). The site is considered to be of Local Significance, pending the extent to which the buried physical remains survive in-situ.

7. Impact of Development

7.1 Impact of Development on Below-Ground remains If approved, the proposal involves the development of land located off Matthews Lane. This will involve substantial earth-moving works in order to lay foundations. As such, this work would result in the removal and destruction of any below-ground remains that do survive in situ.

The present assessment has concluded that any buried archaeological remains that exist in the Site Area are likely to be of Local Significance, pending the extent of survival of below-ground remains.

8. Further Investigation

8.1 Heritage Assets Where the loss of the whole or a material part of a heritage asset’s significance is justified by a development, the developer should be required to record that asset and advance understanding of its significance, and to make this evidence publicly accessible (NPPF para 141).

There are no designated heritage assets and only one non-designated heritage asset identified within the Site Area.

8.2 Further Investigation The impact of development can be seen to be major on Site 1. Thus, any redevelopment occurring within the Site Area would involve the loss and disturbance of a large proportion of the below-ground archaeological remains identified within this report. Where appropriate because of their significance, mitigation will need to be undertaken through an archaeological record (NPPF 2012, paras 141). It is recommended that any re-development of the site would require further archaeological evaluation, through a programme of evaluation trenching which should focus specifically on the remains Yew Tree Farm (Site 1). Further investigation may be required, which is dependent on the surviving remains, any decision regarding this will be in consultation with GMAAS. This heritage work would need to be scheduled and completed prior to the redevelopment of the site. Any archaeological works will require a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) to be produced in consultation with GMAAS and should be concluded at the earliest possible opportunity. Any appropriate mitigation strategy however is at the discretion of the Development Control Archaeologist at GMAAS.

9. Sources

9.1 Maps

William Johnsons 1819 Map of the Parish of Manchester in the County of Lancaster Ordnance Survey, 1:1056, Published 1848 Ordnance Survey 1:2500, Published 1894 Ordnance Survey 1:2500, Published 1923 Ordnance Survey 1:2500, Published 1958

9.2 Secondary Sources Arrowsmith, P & Fletcher, M, 1993. Nico-ditch and Carr ditch. A case of mistaken identity? Archaeology North West 5, 26-32

Bruton, FA, 1909 The Roman Fort at Manchester, Manchester.

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. 1994, revised 2014. Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment. Crofton, H, T. 1905. Agrimensorial Remains Round Manchester. Transcripts of the Lancashire & Cheshire Antiquities Society 23, 112-71 Department for Communities & Local Government, March 2012. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Farrer, W & Brownbill, J, 1911, A History of the County of Lancaster: Volume (Chadderton 115 – 121).Victoria County History, London. Grealey, S (ed), 1974 Roman Manchester, Altrincham. UMAU, 2002 Liverpool Road, Manchester: Archaeological Excavation, unpublished rep.

Williams, M, with Farnie, DA, 1992 Cotton Mills of Greater Manchester, Preston.

9.3 Web Sources Geology of Britain Viewer http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html Accessed 24.01.2017 Grid Reference Finder https://www.gridreferencefinder.com/ Accessed 25.01.2017

10. Archive

The archive comprises a historical map regression, historical photographs and historical research notes. This archive is currently held by the Centre for Applied Archaeology and a copy of this report will be forwarded to Laing O’Rourke

A copy of this report will be deposited with the Greater Manchester Historic Environment Record held by the Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS).

11. Acknowledgments

Salford Archaeology would like to thank Laing O’Rourke for commissioning the archaeological desk-based assessment. Thanks are also due to Norman Redhead and Andrew Myers with the Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS) for their support and advice. Thanks area also expressed to Lesley Dunkley, also of GMAAS, for supplying background data from the Greater Manchester Historic Environment Record (HER).

The report was written and compiled by Sarah – Jayne Murphy and edited by Ian Miller.

Appendix 1: Figures

Figure 1. Modern map of Manchester showing the site in its surroundings.

Figure2. The 1848 OS map with Site Area highlighted.

Figure 3. The 1894 OS map with Site Area highlighted

Figure 4. The 1923 OS map with Site Area highlighted

Figure 5. The 1958 OS map with Site Area highlighted

Figure 6. Site Area overlaid on modern map with Gazetteer sites highlighted.

Appendix 2: HER Data

HER (PRN) Name Site Type Location Description ID Buildings

9784.1.0 Iron Works on Industrial Site, SJ 8749 9555 Shown on the south side of Gore Brook as a medium-sized building (1896). Three Gore Brook Iron Works, smaller rectangular buildings added on the 1933 OS 25" (1933). Brick and slate industrial building. Legend at 1st floor level road elevation "WM Ayrton & Co Ltd, (Gorebrook Iron Date Stone Engineering Textile Winder Specialists". Basement windows, ground and 1st floor, Works) dye sheds on brook side with roof vent. (AM 1993). The main building on this site is brick built and has a plaque stone: "Gorebrook Works 1870". Its front gable features a clock. Phase 1 has 2 storeys and 14x2 bays and a gable slate roof. Water tower. Phase 2 has also 2 storeys and 3x2 bays. Both are late C19, replacing earlier buildings. Continuous longitudinal glass windows. Flat concrete roof. Clock face to front gable. A single-storey concrete rear section has been added to this building. There are no power features on this site. A large terraced mid-C19 brick house with a slate roof stands to the rear of this site, and this is possibly a manager's house or office. A long dyehouse completes the site. (3) Annotated 'Gorebrook Iron Works (Textile Machinery)' on 1950s mapping (4). NB – Ref. (3) appears to mistake this site for the dye works which stood on the opposite (north) side of Gore Brook until the mid-20th century [see HER 9783.1.0]. The text referenced as (3) has been taken from HER 2088.1.0, a building record named as 'Gorebrook Dye Works' but located on the iron works site. [LD 25/01/2017] 1409.1.0 Levenshulme Printing Works, SJ 8830 9457 Started as a yarn bleaching works in 1787. It was the printworks of Bradshaw, Printworks Bleachery, Rhodes and Hammond, with two machines in 1841. Various assorted irregularly Industrial shaped buildings with gardens, associated with large man-made pond. By 1895 the complex had been extended with more and larger buildings. Gardens have been lost Site, Finishing although the pond remains. It is now in use by the Calico Printers Association Works, Limited for coppering rollers. Tithe Award for Levenshulme, site No. 84, described Weaving Shed, as "Dwelling House, Print Works, Gardens, Lane, Pools, Streams and Yard" Chimney, Boiler occupied by Messrs Bradshaw Rhodes & Co, owned by Alexander Glendenning. House [FROM former duplicate record HER 2093.1.0]

Marked on (1845) (1904) as a printing works and on map (1933) as a finishing works. The main building on this site is brick built and has 3 storeys and 9x3 bays. Original vertical rectangular windows with brick arches and stone lintels, they have been modified. Unusual roof. Circular brick openings in various gable walls. There are also 3 very large weaving sheds on this site that date from the late C19 to the early C20; all are brick built with sawtooth style roofs. These are complemented by various smaller sheds. Octagonal brick chimney and a brick boiler house. Economiser. No engine house or warehousing. The site is still partly used for fabric dyeing by Tootals and the rest of the site is divided into separate units. 9764.1.0 Former Midway Inn, Public Centred SJ 8736 On Stockport Road at the crossing of Nico Ditch. 1 irregularly shaped building, 1 public house House, Building 9472 smaller building and lands, marked "Midway Ho. Inn" (1848). OS 1895, as 2 or 3 buildings of different shapes from 1st edition. Marked as "Midway House" (1895). (formerly 1922 OS 25" shows PH on corner of Matthews Lane and Stockport Road, with two Midway Hotel), bowling greens (1922). Boundary stone opposite blacksmith's at "Midway PH". Now site of owned by Chef & Brewer and called "The Midway". Brick with red sandstone earlier Midway dressings. Tile [roof?]; rendered 1st floor; entrance on N side. Road elevation has House (inn) central bay window and 2 symmetrical windows. Upper storey with jettied façade in timber, gable with decorative barge boards. Glazed brick plinth. Legend on bridge says Inn licensed 1604 rebuilt 1906. (AM 1993) Although still extant, the building is no longer in use as a public house. It looks to be subdivided for use by several small commercial enterprises, in 2016 including a bakery, 'Midway Business Centre', and a children's nursery. Listed Buildings 12166.1.0 Church of Our Church of Our SJ 8812 9535 Parish church. 1926-8 to the designs of Walter Tapper. Extended 1983 with narthex Lady and St Lady and St by Buttress Fuller architects, with meeting room and ancillary facilities. Variegated Thomas Thomas red brick laid in single Flemish bond, plastered interior. Roman red tiled roofs. Renaissance revival style. The design for the church was not fully carried out, and so of Canterbury of Canterbury there is only a one-bay nave and aisles. Chancel and apse, flanked by north chapel and south vestries. The form of the building thus reads as two large blocks flanked by lower accommodation. Iron-framed windows. The elevations of the chancel have plain round-headed blind arches with circular lights at the upper level. The west wall of the chancel is gabled above upward curving side walls, and the apse has simple pilasters. A pair of segmental-headed windows flank the apse. The north chapel has windows on the east and west similar to those in the apse. Interior. The church is chiefly of interest for its interior. The chancel consists of a major domed compartment linked by a tunnel vault to an apse with a semi-dome at the east. The north chapel occupies the small domed space on the east and the lower level of the

northern tunnel vault which contains a two-bay groin-vaulted gallery framed by semi-circular arches on the open sides. Above is the organ loft. The south vestries are contained within a structure similar to that on the north but the wall to the chancel is blocked at the lower level and treated as a two-bay blind arcade in which there is a door leading to the middle vestry. The division between nave and chancel is marked by a large rood loft at gallery level which is sited beneath the western arch of the main dome of the chancel. The nave consists of the second major domed compartment and is connected to the chancel by a short tunnel vault. Similar extensions to the north and south serve as aisles. The altar stands within the apse at the east end of the chancel and is raised on two black marble steps. It stands under a yellow marble baldacchino in the form of a groin vault with pyramidal roof supported on four Ionic columns with entablature. Carved details are in white veined marble. The altar is made of the same materials, the yellow marble being confined to panels. The east end is partly screened by a gallery bearing a rood. Font in west end of south aisle of painted stone. It is octagonal, with stem made up of attached shafts and flat wooden cover. Behind the font and attached to the wall is a painted and gilded tabernacle. North chapel is a Lady Chapel, enclosed by a handsome wrought- iron screen and with window of 1965 from St Philip, Blackburn. Small pipe organ in the north gallery by Nicholson and Lord of Walsall. The church was built at the bequest of Mrs Angelina Frances Clarke, who chose the dedication and form of decoration. The administration of Mrs Clarke's bequest was entrusted to the Community of the Resurrection at Mirfield who appointed their own architect, Walter Tapper (1861-1935), to prepare the design. This is a church of exceptional quality and interest. It is a rare surviving work by a major architect, many of whose works have already been demolished. Buttress's addition is simple and respectful, without being of special interest. Sources: Report of the Council for the Care of Churches, 1998. Monuments 9118.2.0 Crowcroft Garden, House, SJ 8729 9511 Large complex of domestic buildings located in their own grounds, with an orchard House (site of) Public Park (1848 & 1896). The house does not appear on the 1933 OS 25". In 1848 Crowcroft House shown in association with Crowcroft Mill 9761.1.0 Dye Works (site Dye Works, SJ 8768 9431 Small square building marked "Dye Works", with 3 ponds very close by (1848). of), off Pond Larger square structure, with only 1 smaller pond to the NE shown (1895). Cromwell Demolished before 1922 OS survey. Grove 9765.1.0 Manor House Farm, SJ 8785 9464 South of Nico Ditch, called the Brewster Tenement on the OS 1845 map. Possibly on (site of) Farmstead, Yates's map (1786). Appears on the OS 1895 map when the building is called "The

Outbuilding, Manor House". Square building form with outbuilding (1895). Tithe Award for Farmhouse Levenshulme, site No. 17/18 occupied by William Bradshaw, owned by William Bowler (1844). Not present on OS 1922. Site now used for housing. 9783.1.0 Dye Works on Printing Works, SJ 8748 9561 On the north side of Gore Brook, irregular-shaped building and reservoir of the dye Gore Brook (site Bleachery, Dye works (1896). By the time of the 1933 OS 25" map the works had expanded of) Works, considerably. A longer new building existed to the south (1933). Site now Reservoir demolished and used as a scrapyard. (AM 1993) Named 'Knutsford Vale Print & Bleach Works' on mid-C19 mapping (1848-51) and simply 'Dye Works' on 1890s and subsequent 25" OS editions. 9823.1.0 Crowcroft Industrial Site, SJ 8724 9512 Described as "Cotton Manufactory" (1820). Crowcroft Cottage & House [no ref]. Cotton Mill (site Textile Mill, House appears to have been rebuilt and the mill demolished (1896). of) Cotton Mill 28.1.3 Manchester to Road Centred SJ 8472 Part of the Roman road from Buxton to Manchester. "There seems no doubt that the Buxton Roman 9713 very direct road through Stockport to Manchester does indeed mark the course. Road (Area of Roman Manchester) 9928.1.0 Yewtree Farm Farmstead, SJ 8773 9479 1848 map shows 2 small buildings marked "Yew Tree Cottage" with associated (site of) Pond, lands to the north and a pond (1). 1895 map marked "Yew Tree Farm". 4 buildings – Farmhouse 2 as on 1st edition plus 2 additional. No pond marked (2). The 1922 map shows the farm with 4 main buildings (3). The site now lies under Matthews Lane and a couple of trees (Mayer, A Dec. 1993). 28.1.8 Possible Roman Road Centred SJ The Roman road is generally assumed to have crossed the Mersey by a ford Road 89617 90677 upstream from the later Lancashire Bridge. In the late 19th century this ford was still Manchester visible, when the water was low, as a paved surface on either side of the river. However, the ford itself is said to have still been used as late as about 1790. During to Buxton times when the bridge was being repaired or rebuilt, it may have provided the only local crossing point of the river. The date of this paving can, therefore, only be conjectured. (1) Roman road between Manchester and Buxton believed to have crossed River Mersey at Stockport using a ford known to have existed upstream of later Lancashire Bridge. In late 19th century ford was visible when water low as paved surface either side of river. Still said to have been in use as late as 1790, five centuries after first documented. During times bridge repaired or rebuilt may have provided only local crossing point of river. Site also suggested by earliest known map of town, c.1680, which shows road leading to edge of river and partly corresponding with modern Vernon Street. To N of ford line of Roman road believed to have been followed by

later Stockport to Manchester road. This may be supported by name ‘High Street’, documented early 17th century. Until 1794 when Lancashire Hill road built, course of Stockport to Manchester highway ran along Old Road, believed to follow Roman line. Since the late 19th century a small street off Old Road has been named ‘Roman Road’. 1404.1.14 Nico Ditch, Ditch SJ 88348 94912 Nico Ditch is a 7km long linear earthwork which originally extended between Gorton Ashton Moss and Haugh Moss. Second earthwork (Carr Ditch) is found at western Educational end, possibly later in date, continuing to mosslands at Urmston. Ditch runs east to west across Melland Field Sports Ground and represents one of only three surviving Village, Melland sections (others at Denton Golf Course and Unitarian Chapel by Platt Fields, Playing Fields – Fallowfield). It has been the subject of numerous archaeological excavations 2008 suggesting that it was originally composed of 3-4m wide U-shaped ditch re-cut on observations numerous occasions. Recorded as 'Mykelldiche' in AD1200 but still unclear when structure was first established or whether function was drainage or defensive. Clearance of modern detritus enabled a series of observations in 2008: 4m wide, extending for a depth of 2m below present ground surface. At western end a culvert had been inserted across profile of ditch, which now runs under Mount Road, subsequently following line of Matthews Lane. Stepped break in profile observed at western end of ditch, suggesting northern side previously re-cut. At this point ditch became noticeably wider (>4m) but more irregular. Approximately halfway along its course the ditch was found to kink; this possibly demarcates the position of an older field boundary. The existing profile of Nico Ditch was not altered during the current works. 1404.1.1 Nico Ditch at Ditch SJ 8830 9490 Nico Ditch still survives at Melland Playing Fields. At this point it is marked by a Melland Playing public footpath, along the south side of which runs a steep V-profile water-filled Fields ditch some 4m in overall width and c.1.5m deep. Footpath has removed all traces of a bank, although here as elsewhere, there is a pronounced difference (of c.1-2m) between ground levels to the north and south of the ditch. The traditional explanation of the earthwork's origin was that it was created in a single night by the Saxon inhabitants of Manchester as protection against the Danish invaders of AD 869-70. Another interpretation is that it was built by the native British population to repel Saxon invasion. Nico Ditch appears as a British earthwork on the OS map of Great Britain in the Dark Ages. 9783.1.1 Chemical Works Chemical SJ 8763 9567 On the north side of Gore Brook. Collection of 3–5 buildings shown on the OS 2nd off Nutsford Works, edition (1896). The chemical works are not shown on the 1933 OS 25" (1933). Vale Industrial Site (site of) Place

9118.1.0 Crowcroft Park Park, Public SJ 8725 9510 Site type: A1, B, C. Public park to the south of East Road, principal entrance in Park Stockport Road. Grounds of residence originally. In 1848 Crowcroft House shown in association with Crowcroft Mill. By 1895 mill gone and house and grounds developed. Acquired in 1900 on 999 year lease from the Dean and Canons of Manchester for £520 a year by Manchester Corporation. Improved by the Corporation providing a terrace walk, two bowling greens and ten tennis courts. Extant

New Central / East Secondary School