Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire

Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

for Pegasus Group

on behalf of Thornfield 007 Limited

CA Project: 5737 CA Report: 16022

July 2016

Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire

Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

CA Project: 5737

CA Report: 16022

prepared by Emily Taylor, Assistant Heritage Consultant

date July 2016

checked by Julia Sulikowska, Heritage Consultant

date July 2016

approved by Duncan Coe, Principal Heritage Consultant

signed

date July 2016

issue 01

This report is confidential to the client. Cotswold Archaeology accepts no responsibility or liability to any third party to whom this report, or any part of it, is made known. Any such party relies upon this report entirely at their own risk. No part of this report may be reproduced by any means without permission.

Cirencester Milton Keynes Andover Exeter Building 11 41 Burners Lane South Stanley House Unit 8 Kemble Enterprise Basepoint Business Kiln Farm Walworth Road Park Centre Kemble, Cirencester Milton Keynes Andover, Hampshire Yeoford Way Gloucestershire, GL7 Exeter, Devon MK11 3HA SP10 5LH 6BQ EX2 8LB t. 01285 771022 t. 01908 564660 t. 01264 347630 t. 01392 826185 f. 01285 771033 e. [email protected]

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 4 Outline ...... 4 Location and landscape context ...... 4 Summary of Development Proposals ...... 6 Scope ...... 6 2. METHODOLOGY ...... 6 General ...... 6 Sources ...... 7 Walkover Survey ...... 8 Limitations ...... 8 Heritage assets ...... 8 Significance of heritage assets ...... 9 The setting of heritage assets...... 10 3. PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT ...... 11 Legislative framework, national planning policy and relevant sector guidance ... 11 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (1990) ...... 12 National policy: National Planning Policy Framework (2012) ...... 12 Local planning policy ...... 13 4. OVERVIEW OF THE HERITAGE RESOURCE ...... 14 Introduction ...... 14 Previous archaeological works ...... 15 Prehistoric (pre-43 AD) ...... 16 Romano-British (AD 43 – AD 410) ...... 16 Early medieval (AD410 – AD 1066) and medieval (AD 1066 – 1539) ...... 17 Post-medieval (AD 1539 – 1800) and modern (AD 1801 - present) ...... 18 Historic Landscape Character ...... 21 5. SETTINGS ASSESSMENT ...... 22 Tanhouse Farmhouse (A) ...... 25 6. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 27 Significance of recorded heritage assets within the site ...... 27 Summary of previous impacts ...... 27 Potential buried archaeological remains ...... 28 Potential development effects...... 28 7. CONCLUSIONS ...... 29 8. REFERENCES ...... 31 APPENDIX A: GAZETTEER OF DESIGNATED AND RECORDED HERITAGE ASSETS ...... 33 APPENDIX B: GAZETTEER OF NOT ILLUSTRATED INFORMATION ...... 35 APPENDIX C: THE HEDGEROWS REGULATIONS 1997 ...... 37

1 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Site location plan Figure 2 Designated recorded heritage assets Figure 3 Prehistoric to Romano-British recorded heritage assets Figure 4 Early medieval to Modern recorded heritage assets

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS Photograph 1 View across the Site towards the south Photograph 2 View across the Site towards the north-east Photograph 3 View across the Site towards the north-east Photograph 4 Extract from the 1837 Melksham Tithe map Photograph 5 Extract from the 1901 Ordnance Survey map Photograph 6 View from the eastern corner of the Site towards Sandridge Park (arrow: location of the Old Coach House) Photograph 7 View across the Site towards Tanhouse Farm (arrow: location of Tanhouse Farmhouse)

2 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

SUMMARY Project Name: Land at Snarlton Farm Location: Melksham, Wiltshire NGR: ST93328 63736

Cotswold Archaeology was commissioned in January 2016 by Pegasus Group, on behalf of Thornfield 007 Limited, to carry out a heritage desk-based assessment in relation to a proposed development on land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire.

The known archaeological remains within the Site comprise the extant hedges along the boundaries of the Site. These hedgerows may be considered as historically important as defined by the Hedgerows Regulations 1997. Important hedgerows are not designated heritage assets; the Regulations are simply a notification mechanism, requiring notice to the Local Planning Authority prior to the removal of the hedgerow, in entirety or part.

There is some limited evidence for prehistoric and Romano-British activity within in the Site’s environs, including findspots, a burial and an enclosure. From the medieval period onwards, the Site is thought to have comprised part of a wider farming landscape, with known settlements located in close proximity, but not within the Site itself.

Whilst the presence of archaeological remains within the Site cannot be entirely ruled out, there is a relatively low potential for substantial archaeological remains to be uncovered within the Site.

An assessment of the potential changes to the settings of designated heritage assets within the wider area has identified that the proposed development will not affect the heritage significance of any of these assets. This includes fourteen Listed Buildings scattered within the surrounding rural landscape, and three Grade II Listed Buildings located within the study area. On that basis the proposed development would not lead either to substantial, or less than substantial harm to designated assets, as defined in the Framework. The key aspects of setting which contribute to the significance of Listed Buildings in the surrounding landscape would not be harmed. The proposed development is, therefore, consistent with the 1990 Act. The proposed development would also be in accordance with local and national planning policies relating to the protection of the historic environment.

3 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

1. INTRODUCTION

Outline 1.1 In January 2016, Cotswold Archaeology was commissioned by Pegasus Group, on behalf of Thornfield 007 Limited, to undertake a heritage desk-based assessment in relation to a proposed development on land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire, centred on NGR: ST93328 63736 (henceforth referred to as ‘the Site’; Figure 1).

1.2 This document will accompany a planning application for an anaerobic digester plant, which will be submitted to Wiltshire Council, the Local Planning Authority (LPA).

Location and landscape context 1.3 The Site is located in Prater’s Lane, a track running south-east of Sandridge Common (the A3102), approximately 1km to the east of the town of Melksham. Melksham, located on the River Avon, is approximately 19km north of Warminster on the A350, and 16m east of Bath. A tributary feeding into to Clackers Brook in the west runs along the southern corner of the Site. The Site for the proposed development covers 1.96ha, and lies adjacent to Sandridge Solar Farm (under construction) to the east.

Photograph 1: View across the Site towards the south

1.4 The Site is bordered to the north-west by Eight Acre Plantation, with further woodland adjacent to the south-east and south-west (Photograph 1-2). The Site,

4 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

which comprises an agricultural field currently utilised for pasture, is located on a relatively level plain enclosed by hedgerows, interspersed with mature trees.

Photograph 2: View across the Site towards the north-east from the west

1.5 The wider surroundings of the Site are characterised by agricultural fields interspersed with mature woodland and farmsteads. Residential development associated with Melksham is to the west, with overhead electricity lines traversing the agricultural landscape to the east (Photograph 3).

Photograph 3: View across the Site towards the north-east from the south

5 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Summary of Development Proposals 1.6 The Site is proposed for the development of an anaerobic digester plant and the development intends to utilise the existing track, recently upgraded as part of the neighbouring ground mounted solar scheme to the east (Sandridge Solar Farm), for access (Fig. 1). Access into the Site will be afforded via two options, comprising the use of the existing access arrangements along the north-eastern boundary of the Site, and the creation of a new access point 55m to the east of the existing apron. The Site for the proposed development covers 1.96ha, utilising half of the existing field for the anaerobic digester plant.

Scope 1.7 This assessment focusses upon the cultural heritage resource identified within the Site itself, as well as a minimum 1km ‘buffer’ around the site boundary, henceforth referred to as ‘the study area’ (Fig. 2). This assessment also considers potential adverse impacts on the settings of designated heritage assets within the wider area around the Site.

1.8 The main objectives of the desk-based assessment are:

 to identify designated heritage assets within the proposed development Site and study area;  to gather information on non-designated recorded heritage assets;  to assess the above baseline information, and offer an analysis of the potential for currently unrecorded heritage assets within the proposed development Site; and  to assess, as far as possible, the potential impact of the proposed development upon the significance of heritage assets, including the setting of designated heritage assets.

2. METHODOLOGY

General 2.1 The methodology employed during this assessment was based on key professional guidance, including the Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk- Based Assessment (Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 2014); and English Heritage’s (now Historic England) Conservation Principles (2008).

6 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

2.2 This desk-based assessment has considered a study area of 1km radius, centred on the Site (Fig. 2). The size of the study area ensured that data sources provided sufficient contextual information about the Site, and its surrounding landscape, from which to assess known and potential impacts on the heritage resource. The initial scoping for the settings’ assessment has considered designated heritage assets within 2km buffer around the Site.

2.3 Known heritage assets within the study area are discussed in Section 4. Two gazetteers of known and potential heritage assets in the study area have been compiled, and are presented as Appendices A and B. The assets are referred to in the text by a unique reference number 1, 2, etc. for archaeological records, A-C for designated heritage assets, and are illustrated on Fig. 2, 3 and 4.

Sources 2.4 The desk-based assessment involved consultation of readily available archaeological and historical information from documentary and cartographic sources. The major repositories of information consulted comprised of:

National Heritage List for England (Historic England)  List of World Heritage Sites;  Listed Buildings;  Scheduled Monuments;  Registered Parks and Gardens;  Registered Battlefields.

The Wiltshire and Swindon Historic Environment Record (WSHER):  Database of known archaeological sites, findspots, historic buildings and previous archaeological works (including features mapped from aerial photographs during the National Mapping Programme);  Published and unpublished documentary sources (including development control site reports).

Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre, Chippenham (WSHC):  Published documentary sources;  Historic maps and photographs.

Historic England Archives  AMIE (Archives and Monuments Information, England) data including known archaeological sites, findspots and previous archaeological works;

7 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Other sources  Online sources, including the British Geological Survey (BGS) Geology of Britain Viewer and local planning policy information.

Walkover Survey 2.5 A Site visit was undertaken on the 6th January 2016, along with a study area walkover in order to examine current land use and topography, and assess potential effects on the significance of heritage assets. Designated heritage assets in the vicinity were also assessed at this time. The walkover was undertaken in foggy weather, with poor visibility.

Limitations 2.6 This assessment is principally a desk-based study and utilised secondary information derived from a variety of sources, only some of which have been directly examined for the purpose of this assessment. The assumption is made that this data, as well as that derived from other secondary sources, is reasonably accurate. The records held by the WSHER are not a record of all surviving heritage assets, but a record of the discovery of a wide range of archaeological and historical components of the historic environment. The information held within it is not complete and does not preclude the subsequent discovery of further elements of the historic environment that are, at present, unknown.

2.7 A walkover survey was conducted within the Site. There was sufficient access to heritage assets to assess likely impacts upon the value of the assets due to changes to their setting, although the adverse weather conditions prevented clear visibility.

2.8 Archaeology is in principle a buried resource and there is always potential for unrecorded below ground remains to be present within the site.

Heritage assets 2.9 Heritage assets are defined by the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework, Annex 2) as ‘a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions because of its heritage interest. Heritage assets include designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing)’. Designated heritage assets include: World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, Protected Wreck Sites, Registered Parks and

8 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Gardens, Registered Battlefields and Conservation Areas. Non-designated heritage assets include sites held on the Historic Environment Record, as well as other elements of the landscape understood to have a degree of heritage value (see below).

Significance of heritage assets 2.10 Assessment of the heritage value (significance) of a site sets out to identify how particular parts of a place and different periods in its evolution, contribute to, or detract from, the identified heritage values associated with the asset.

2.11 Significance (for heritage policy) is defined in the Framework (Annex 2) as ‘the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical fabric, but also from its setting’.

2.12 To determine the significance of heritage assets, the significance is weighted upon the following criteria provided by Historic England (formerly English Heritage) in Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment (English Heritage 2008). Within this document, significance is weighed by consideration of the potential for the asset to demonstrate the following criteria:

 Evidential value derives from ‘the potential of a place to yield evidence about past human activity’ (ibid, 28). Primarily relating to physical remains or historic material, evidential value can be extended to include buried archaeology.  Historical value derives from ‘the ways in which past people, events and aspects of life can be connected through a place to the present’ (ibid, 28). Illustrative historical value depends on visibility in a way that evidential value does not; and ‘has the power to aid interpretation of the past […] through shared experience of a place’ (ibid, 29). Associative historical value creates resonance through felt connections with a notable family, person, event or movement;  Aesthetic value derives from ‘the ways in which people draw sensory and intellectual stimulation from a place’ (ibid, 30). Aesthetic value might be generated through conscious design and artistic endeavour, fortuitous and organic change, and the relationship of structures and materials to their setting;

9 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

 Communal value is tied to historical (associative) value and aesthetic value, deriving from ‘the meanings of a place for the people who relate to it, or for whom it figures in their collective experience or memory’ (ibid, 31). Communal value may be commemorative, symbolic or social. The latter is typically ‘associated with places that people perceive as a source of identity, distinctiveness, social interaction and coherence’ and might only be articulated when the resource is under threat (ibid, 32).

2.13 The significance of a heritage asset is typically derived from a combination of some or all of these values, and the setting of a heritage asset can contribute to, or detract from, any of these four values.

2.14 Further information on good practice in implementing historic environment policy in the NPPF is provided within the Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment (Historic England 2015a). This document provides advice on the assessment of the significance of heritage assets in support of applications for planning permission, and emphasises that the information required regarding heritage significance should be no more than would be necessary to inform the planning decision.

The setting of heritage assets 2.15 The guidance on setting and development management, including assessment of the implications of development proposals, is provided by the Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3: the Setting of Heritage Assets (Historic England 2015b).

2.16 In accordance with this guidance, setting comprises ‘the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced’ (Paragraph 4). All heritage assets have a setting, and elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to its significance and may affect the ability to appreciate that significance. The extent of the setting of a heritage asset is not fixed, and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve (Paragraph 4). The extent and importance of setting is often expressed by a reference to visual considerations, but also comprises other elements that contribute to the ways in which a heritage asset is experienced, including factors such as noise, dust and vibration; by spatial associations; and by an understanding of historic relationships (Paragraph 5).

10 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

2.17 The Advice Note provides guidance with regard to the assessment of the implications of development proposals upon the settings of heritage assets. The methodology for the assessment of the setting of heritage assets employed by Cotswold Archaeology has been informed by this guidance. A staged approach is recommended for this assessment. The first step is to identify the heritage assets affected, and their settings. The second step is to assess whether, how, and to what degree, these settings make a positive contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s), i.e. ‘what matters and why’. This includes a consideration of the key attributes of the heritage asset itself, and then considers:

 the physical surroundings of the asset, including its relationship with other heritage assets; and  the way in which the asset is appreciated.

2.18 The third step (where appropriate) is to assess the effect of the proposed development on the significance of heritage assets through the consideration of the key attributes of the proposed development in terms of its:

 location and siting;  form and appearance;  additional effects; and  permanence.

2.19 The fourth step is to maximise enhancement and minimise harm, and the fifth step refers to making and documenting the decision and monitoring outcomes.

2.20 The settings assessment presented in this report considers Steps 1, 2 and 3, which are the steps normally undertaken to inform the planning process. Step 4 is undertaken when it is considered necessary to specifically design or redesign a scheme to take heritage assets into account. This is not considered necessary in this case. Step 5 is a subsequent stage, also not applicable to this assessment.

3. PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT

Legislative framework, national planning policy and relevant sector guidance 3.1 This assessment has been compiled in accordance with the following legislative, planning policy and guidance documentation:

11 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

 Chartered Institute for Archaeologists: Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment’ (2014);  English Heritage (now Historic England): Conservation Principles: policies and guidance for the sustainable management of the historic environment (2008); and  Historic England: Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment (2015a);  Historic England: Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets (2015b);  National Heritage Act 1983 (amended 2002);  National Planning Policy Framework (2012);  Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (1990); and  The Hedgerows Regulations (1997).

Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (1990) 3.2 The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act sets out the laws on planning controls with regard of Listed Buildings and areas of special architectural or historic interest (Conservation Areas). The Act states that, “in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest that it possesses” (Section 66). National policy: National Planning Policy Framework (2012) 3.3 The Framework, sets out national planning policy, relates to the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment. It defines the historic environment as ‘all aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged, and landscaped and planted or managed flora.’ 3.4 Individual components of the historic environment are considered heritage assets: ‘buildings, monuments, sites, places, areas or landscapes identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of their heritage interest.’

12 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

3.5 Heritage assets include designated sites and non-designated sites, and policies within the Framework relate both to the treatment of assets themselves and their settings, both of which are a material consideration in development decision making.

3.6 Key tenets of the Framework are that:

 when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be (Paragraph 132);  significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset, or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to, or loss of, a grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to, or loss of, designated heritage assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional (Paragraph 132)  where a proposed development will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal (Paragraph 133); and  with regard to non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having due regard to the scale of any harm or loss, and to the significance of the heritage asset affected (Paragraph 135).

3.7 Local planning authorities are urged to request applicants to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected by a proposed development, including any contribution made to significance by their setting. The level of detail required in the assessment should be ‘proportionate to the assets’ importance, and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.’

Local planning policy 3.8 The site is located within the administrative boundary of Wiltshire Council. The current Local Development Plan for Wiltshire comprises the Wiltshire Core Strategy Development Plan Document, adopted in January 2015, which has replaced the

13 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

relevant policies of the former West Wiltshire District Plan (June 2004). Policies within the Core Strategy relevant to the historic environment include Core Policy 58:

‘Core Policy 58: Ensuring the conservation o the historic environment: Development should protect, conserve, and where possible enhance, the historic environment.

Designated heritage assets and their settings will be conserved, and where appropriate enhanced in a manner appropriate to their significance, including:

i. Nationally significant archaeological remains ii. World Heritage Sites within, and adjacent to, Wiltshire iii. Buildings and structures of special architectural or historic interest iv. The special character or appearance of Conservation Areas v. Historic parks and gardens vi. Important landscapes, including registered battlefields and townscapes.

Distinctive elements of Wiltshire’s historic environment, including non-designated heritage assets which contribute to a sense of local character and identity, will be conserved, and where possible enhanced. The potential contribution of these heritage assets towards wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits will also be utilised where this can be delivered in a sensitive and appropriate manner in accordance with Core Policy 57.

Heritage assets at risk will be monitored, and development proposals that improve their condition will be encouraged. The advice of statutory and local consultees will be sought in consideration of such applications.’

4. OVERVIEW OF THE HERITAGE RESOURCE

Introduction 4.1 This section provides an overview of the historical and archaeological background of the study area, and the region surrounding it, to provide a better understanding of the context and significance of the heritage resource that may be affected by the proposed development. The assessment will assess the potential for encountering buried archaeological remains within the Site, and to predict their likely nature, date, extent and condition.

4.2 Fig. 2 provides an illustration of the designated assets within the environs of the Site (A-C), prehistoric to Romano-British recorded heritage assets are illustrated on

14 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Fig. 3 and early medieval to modern heritage assets are illustrated on Fig. 4. All these assets are listed in Appendix A. Assets which are not illustrated comprise three modern farmsteads; seven outfarm buildings, and a magnetometry survey at Snarlton Lane. These assets are not considered to have influenced the Site’s historic development, but are nonetheless listed in Appendix B.

Designated heritage assets 4.3 There are no designated heritage assets within the Site; however three Grade II Listed Buildings are located within the study area. These comprise Tanhouse Farmhouse, located approximately 530m south-east of the Site (A), Blackmore House, located approximately 970m to the north-west (B), and The Old Coach House, located approximately 990m to the north-east (C).

4.4 A further fourteen Grade II Listed Buildings and one Grade II* Listed Building are located within the 2km buffer, mostly scattered within the rural agricultural landscape.

4.5 Encompassing a number of Listed Buildings, Melksham’s Conservation Area is located outside of the Site’s 2km buffer located approximately 4.02km east of the Site.

4.6 There are no World Heritage Sites, Registered Parks and Gardens, Scheduled Monuments or Registered Battlefields within the environs of the Site.

4.7 Designated heritage assets within the study area, and surrounding landscape, are considered further in the settings assessment presented in Section 5.

Previous archaeological works 4.8 There is no record of previous intrusive archaeological investigations within the Site. Within the study area, seven archaeological investigations have previously been undertaken, comprising an excavation, located approximately 540m and 420m north-west of the Site (4 and 6); an excavation, evaluation and environmental impact assessment, located approximately c. 1km west of the Site (2-3); a watching brief on the Beanacre to St Edith’s Marsh pipe line, located 40m east of the Site (1); and two magnetometry surveys, at Sandridge Solar Farm and Snarlton Lane.

4.9 Prior to the construction of Sandridge Solar Farm, located approximately 20m east of the Site, a heritage desk-based assessment and magnetometry survey were undertaken. The magnetometry survey (2013) revealed ridge and furrow, former

15 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

field boundaries, post-medieval/modern drains and possible fluvial and former woodland features across the Site. The results indicated the Site had a low potential for significant archaeological remains to be present, and in consideration to the level of belowground impact from the proposed solar farm, no further archaeological mitigation works were requested by the Wiltshire Council Archaeology team.

4.10 Archaeological finds and features were revealed in all of the investigations, aside from the magnetometry survey at Snarlton Lane. The results of the archaeological investigations are discussed in the appropriate sections below.

Geology, topography and the palaeoenvironment 4.11 The landscape in which the Site is located is situated on a gentle south-west facing slope, rising from c. 38m above Ordnance Datum (aOD) in the west, to 45m aOD, at the Eighteen Acre Plantation to the north-east. The area for proposed development is relatively level.

4.12 The underlying geology within the Site is mapped as Oxford Clay Formation, a sedimentary bedrock laid down in the Callovian (JC) to Oxfordian Age (JO), 166Ma to 157Ma. The Oxford Clay Formation comprises silicate, a smooth to slightly silty mudstone with sporadic beds of argillaceous limestone nodules (British Geological Survey).

Prehistoric (pre-43 AD) 4.13 No finds and features dating to the prehistoric period are recorded within the Site.

4.14 Prehistoric evidence within the study area comprises a barbed-and-tanged arrowhead, of likely Bronze Age date, found within an arable landscape, uncovered during archaeological investigations on land at Clackers Brook, c. 1km west of the Site (2-3).

4.15 Further prehistoric activity is recorded west of Redstocks, approximately 0.74km south-west of the Site (8). A medieval settlement and associated field system truncate a large enclosure, suggested to be of late prehistoric or Romano-British date.

Romano-British (AD 43 – AD 410) 4.16 There is evidence for Romano-British period activity within the study area. A large amount of pottery, animal bone, charcoal and iron fragments were revealed

16 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

approximately 520m north-west from the Site (4); with further finds of pottery, iron fragments and nails observed approximately 540m and 450m north-west from the Site (5 and 7). Pottery and animal bone were also found in a north-west to south- east aligned ditch, excavated approximately 410m to the north-west (6).

4.17 Romano-British activity in the study area also comprises an inhumation, considered to be of Romano-British or earlier date, located approximately c. 1km west from the Site (3) and the potential enclosure to the south (8). Roman deposits at Forest Farm, and the area between Lower Woodrow Road and the stream were revealed during the investigations to the east (1).

Early medieval (AD410 – AD 1066) and medieval (AD 1066 – 1539) 4.18 It is likely that Roman settlement patterns continued into the early medieval period and the boundaries of many of the villages and parishes within the wider landscape are thought to have based on earlier territorial divisions. Melksham is first recorded in the Domesday Survey as ‘Melchesa’ or ‘Melchesham’, possibly meaning ‘homestead or enclosure where milk is produced’ (Pugh and Crittall 1953; Dawson 2014). The first of the two entries relates to the Royal Forest of Melksham, in which the Site lay during the early medieval period (Pugh and Crittall 1953). Originally under the ownership of Earl (King) Harold (1066), the land was held by King William by 1086. The second record relates to an estate in the wider environs of the Site, held by Lidhsman before and after the Norman Conquest (Dawson 2014).

4.19 Recognised as a settlement from the 11th century onwards, there is limited historical or archaeological evidence to give an indication to the layout of Melksham (Dawson 2014). During the medieval period, Melksham’s main industry was associated with the production of cloth, continuing until the closure of the last mill in 1888.

4.20 The available evidence indicates that the environs of Melksham were largely utilised for agriculture, with large areas of ridge and furrow recorded within the study area (Fig. 4). There is also evidence for woodland clearance (assarting) in the medieval period, i.e. at Clears Farm located approximately 1.78km south-east from the Site (Wardell Armstrong 2014). Evidence for further assarting is recorded at Clackers Brook, c. 1km west of the Site (2), and at Blackmore Farm, approximately 920m north-west (11).

17 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

4.21 Earthworks mapped from aerial photography and LiDAR approximately 0.74km south-west from the Site (8) include building platforms, hollow ways, field boundaries, a possible pond, ridge and furrow and plough headlands, likely associated with a medieval rural settlement and its farmland. Further earthworks, perhaps a continuation of the abovementioned field system, are recorded 0.40km south-west of the Site (12). A group of undated cropmarks with a possible rectangular enclosure, which could potentially be associated with the medieval activity, are located 0.62km to the south (14).

4.22 Further evidence for medieval activity was revealed on land at Clackers Brook, 1.02km and 0.99km west from the Site (2-3). The medieval activity at Clackers Brook has been suggested to be peripheral to settlement and comprised evidence for field ditches. Despite finds associated with iron working and production, and a single pottery shard, there is no clear evidence of domestic occupation on land at Clackers Brook. Medieval deposits were also found during the watching brief to the east (1) and ridge and furrow remains were revealed during the survey at the adjacent solar farm (9).

4.23 Due to the location of the Site away from known medieval settlements, it is most likely that during the medieval period it formed part of the agricultural hinterland of Melksham and surrounding villages.

Post-medieval (AD 1539 – 1800) and modern (AD 1801 - present) 4.24 During the post-medieval period, the open arable fields within the study area were subject to a piecemeal enclosure as disparate individual plots were amalgamated into fields under private ownership. New farms were established to work the privately owned landscape. The area’s villages remained relatively small with little growth prior to the modern period. Key developments involved new and improved communication routes, most notably the early 19th-century Kennet and Avon Canal.

4.25 Post-medieval evidence in the study area consists of the following Grade II Listed Buildings: Tanhouse Farmhouse, located approximately 530m south-east of the Site (A), Blackmore House, approximately 970m north-west (B), and The Old Coach House, approximately 990m north-east (C). Tanhouse Farm represents a partially extant 17th-century farmstead (13). Evidence for farm buildings was also revealed on land at Clackers Brook (2).

18 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

4.26 The formal enclosure of Melksham parish did not occur until 1815; it has been suggested that the majority of land was enclosed piecemeal from the 16th century onwards. A survey of 1833 illustrates that of the 7,120 acres of agricultural land in Melksham parish, only 1,217 acres were arable (Pugh and Crittall, 1953). Evidence of agricultural activity with the study area, mapped from aerial photography and LiDAR data, comprises ridge and furrow, some of which is thought to be of post- medieval rather than medieval origin, the majority of which are associated with field boundaries (Fig. 4). Most of the earthwork elements appear to be no longer extant on the 2005 LiDAR, 2008 and 2009 aerial photography.

4.27 Further post-medieval activity comprises post-medieval and modern drains on land at Sandridge Solar farm east of the Site (9); and at Sandridge Park and Country House, a historic parkland located approximately 760m north-east of the Site (10). Despite the construction of a number of post-medieval and modern properties within Sandridge Park, the wooded area, specimen trees and walled kitchen garden have been retained.

4.28 Melksham saw little expansion beyond its medieval core until the arrival of the Berkshire and Wiltshire Canal in 1801, and the introduction of the railway in 1848. These 19th-century developments increased Melksham’s industrial and urban growth (Dawson 2014). The route of the Wiltshire and Berkshire Canal passes to the west of the Site. Authorised in 1795, the canal was opened to traffic in 1801, and closed to traffic in 1910 (Doyle 2015).

4.29 Modern farmsteads, outfarm buildings and pottery have been recorded within the wider landscape, but not within close proximity to the Site (not illustrated).

Development within the Site 4.30 During the post-medieval period, the Site continued to comprise agricultural farmland. The historic map regression allowed the reconstruction of the development within the site from the early 19th century onwards.

4.31 The earliest cartographic evidence consulted for this assessment was Saxton’s map of Wiltshire, dated 1576 (not reproduced). The map illustrated a general view of the county with settlements and major landscape features plotted although it provided no detailed depiction of the Site. Mylsham is recorded as a medium-sized settlement on the eastern bank of the River Avon with Blackmore Forest, an area of woodland to the east and south-east. Lea’s map of Wiltshire (1689, not reproduced)

19 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

develops Saxon’s map to incorporate main roads and hundred boundaries. The Site is illustrated on both maps in an area of open ground, on the fringes of Blackmore Forest.

Photograph 4: Extract from the 1837 Melksham Tithe Map 4.32 The area of the Site had been enclosed by the 1837 Melksham Tithe Map (Photograph 4). The Site appears much as it does today, with all of the boundaries, demarcated by extant hedgerows interspersed with woodland, already established. The Site comprised a pasture field, recorded in the accompanying Tithe Apportionment as ‘Lower Eight Acres’, occupied by Jeremiah Harris and held by Garland Peak, Esquire of Sandridge Lodge.

4.33 The fieldscape within the Site saw little alteration during the 19th and early 20th centuries, as shown on the Ordnance Survey maps of 1886 (not reproduced), 1901 (Photograph 5) and 1924 (not reproduced). The Eight Acre Plantation is visible along the northern boundary of the Site, and the southern edge is interspersed with trees. The wider landscape remained agricultural, interspersed with farmsteads and several woodland plantations.

20 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Photograph 5: Extract from the 1901 Ordnance Survey map

4.34 Subsequent editions of the Ordnance Survey maps dating up to 1975 show no change within the Site apart from the erection of overhead electricity lines in the immediate environs to the east of the Site by 1960-61 (not reproduced). The small woodland copses to the south-east and south-west of the Site were established during the 21st century. During the late 20th century, the wider environs of the Site underwent the loss of some field boundaries; the town of Melksham had been subject to housing development, extending to the north and east of the town.

4.35 A review of post-war aerial photographs and the Site visit did not identify any previously unknown archaeological features.

Historic Landscape Character 4.36 The farmsteads and field systems surrounding the Site are thought to have originated in the medieval period, with piecemeal enclosure undertaken throughout the post-medieval period. It is there therefore likely that those field boundaries at the edges of the Site comprising hedgerows, which are depicted on the 1837 Melksham Tithe map, could be of medieval origin. In view of the early origin, the hedgerows established along the boundaries of the site are considered to meet the archaeology and history criteria of the Hedgerows Regulations 1997 (Appendix C), and are therefore considered to be historically important.

21 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

5. SETTINGS ASSESSMENT

5.1 This section assesses the potential impact of the proposed development upon the significance of designated heritage assets, through the alteration of their setting. The methodology used for this assessment was based on the guidance provided in Historic England’s Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets (2015b), which provides guidance on setting and development management, including assessment of the implications of the development proposals on the setting, and significance, of designated heritage assets. A stepped approach is recommended for the assessment and this is described in more detail in Sections 2.27-2.23, above.

5.2 Within 2km of the Site boundary, there are 17 Listed Buildings, include Grade II* Listed Woolmore Farmhouse, and following Grade II Listed Buildings: Tanhouse Farmhouse (A), Blackmore House (B), the Old Coach House (C), Sandridge Lodge, Sandridge Tower, Clears Farmhouse, a milestone on the south side (30m west of Mitchell Farmhouse), the Grove, Bowerhill Lodge Farmhouse, the Gatepiers to the left of Bowerhill Lodge Farmhouse, Old Loves Farmhouse, 401 and 402 The Spa, 399 and 400, 403 and 404, 409 and 410, 8 Church Lane and the Church of St. Andrew.

5.3 An initial scoping process, carried out as part of Step 1 of the setting assessment methodology, utilised readily-available information, such as modern mapping, terrain mapping and aerial photography, to establish whether any particular heritage asset could be affected by the proposed development through an alteration to its setting. The process took into account the nature of the prevailing topography, distance between the Site and the asset, the presence of intervening vegetation (woods, tree belts, hedgerows etc.), built form screening, the primary aspect and experience of the heritage assets and the nature of the proposed development.

5.4 The exercise concluded that there was no intervisibility between the Site and the majority of the designated assets including thirteen Grade II Listed Buildings, and Grade II* Listed Woolmore Farmhouse (Appendix B). Located at a sufficient distance from the Site suggesting that they have no historical or functional relationship with it, the Listed Buildings are effectively screened by existing intervening built form, vegetation and topography. As the Site is not considered to form part of the setting of these designated heritage assets, and the proposal would not pose a threat to the significance of these assets, these assets were excluded

22 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

from further assessment. This lack of intervisibility and any other perceived relationship was confirmed during the Site visit.

Sandridge Lodge 5.5 The Site has a historical relationship, though ownership, with Grade II Listed Sandridge Lodge, located 1.44km north-east of the Site. An 18th century property subject to 19th century alterations, Sandridge Lodge is recorded for its unusual design. Property of the Marquis of Anglesey in the 17th century, Sandridge Lodge is suggested to have been a former hunting lodge.

5.6 Available mapping and aerial photographs indicated that there is no visibility between the Site and the Listed Building due to intervening built form and vegetation. No views of the Listed Building were observed from Site.

5.7 Due to the visual and physical separation of the Site from the Listed Building by intervening built form and vegetation, the proposal would not affect the significance of the Lodge through the alteration of its setting. Consequently the Site does not form part of the setting that contributes to the understanding and appreciation of the Listed Building, and no further assessment was therefore deemed necessary with regards to Sandridge Lodge.

Blackmore Farmhouse (B) 5.8 A Grade II Listed Blackmore Farmhouse is located approximately 970m north-west of the Site (B). A late 18th-century farmhouse, Blackmore Farmhouse has been subject to 19th-century alterations and developments.

5.9 The initial review of this Listed Building indicated that there was limited visibility between it and the Site, as the Listed Building is located at a sufficient distance from the Site, with no historical or functional relationship. In addition, Blackmore Farmhouse is effectively screened by topography and existing intervening vegetation along the northern boundary of the Site. The Site visit confirmed this assessment.

5.10 It is considered that due to the location of the Listed Building at a significant distance from the Site, combined with the intervening vegetation and local topography, the proposed development will not alter the setting of the Blackmore Farmhouse or affect aspects of the significance, principally derived from the historic and architectural interest of its physical form.

23 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

The Old Coach House (C) 5.11 A Grade II Listed Building, the Old Coach House (formerly listed as Stables) is located approximately 990m north-east of the Site (C) and comprises an early to mid-19th century building, subject to 20th-century amendments and recent renovations. The landscape in which the Old Coach House is located is situated on a gentle south to north facing slope, rising from c. 38m aOD to the west of the Site, to 95m aOD at the Old Coach House, in the north-east.

Photograph 6: View from the eastern corner of the Site towards Sandridge Park (arrow: location of the Old Coach House)

5.12 The initial review of this Listed Building indicated that there was limited visibility between it and the Site, due to its location within Sandridge Park. No views of the Listed Building were observed from the Site as the views towards the Old Coach House were entirely screened by vegetation (Photograph 6).

5.13 As a result of the sufficient distance from the Site combined with the intervening vegetation, the proposed development will not affect the setting of the Old Coach House or any aspects of its significance, principally derived from the historic and architectural interest of its physical form.

5.14 Following the Site visit and study area walkover one designated heritage asset, Grade II Listed Tanhouse Farmhouse (A), was identified as warranting detailed assessment.

24 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Tanhouse Farmhouse (A) Significance 5.15 Grade II Listed Tanhouse Farmhouse (A), an early 17th century farmhouse, has been subject to 20th century extension. The east-facing building is constructed of square panel timber-framing with brick infill, with rear wings of rubblestone, a double Roman tiled roof with coped verges and saddlestone, and brick stacks. The two-storey property is accessible via a door, slightly off centre to the left, with a wooden latticed porch and there is a central 20th century extension.

5.16 The Farmhouse is east-facing and is located approximately 530m south-east of the Site. The building is set within a farm, to the south and west of a number of agricultural buildings, north of Clackers Brook. Accessible via a private road connecting to the Bath Road (A365) in the south, Tanhouse Farmhouse is situated on the edge of a gentle west-east slope, rising from 45m aOD by Tanhouse Farm to 50m aOD near Prater’s Lane (track).

5.17 The significance of the Listed Building is derived primarily from its physical fabric. The evidential and historical values of the Listed Building are embodied within its historic fabric, displaying the architectural and historic interest of the farmhouse, an example of an early 17th century farmhouse. The historic fabric of the farmhouse will not be harmed by the proposed development.

Physical surrounds – ‘what matters and why’ 5.18 The primary aspect of the setting of the farmhouse that contributes to its significance comprises its immediate surroundings, including the garden and farm from which the Listed Building can be best appreciated and its heritage values fully understood. The location within a working farm is also of importance, as its origins can be understood. The building is fronting to the east, towards the farmyard.

5.19 As a rural dwelling, the agricultural fields, including the fields surrounding the farm, are also likely to contribute to its significance, as they maintain historical landscape context within which the farmhouse was constructed. As the views to the north and east are blocked by farm buildings, views towards the west are considered of greater importance in this respect, allowing for uninterrupted appreciation of the immediate agricultural setting. However, as a rural dwelling, the building was not designed to encompass views of a wider landscape.

25 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Photograph 7: View across the Site towards Tanhouse Farm (arrow: location of Tanhouse Farmhouse)

Experience – ‘what matters and why’ 5.20 There is no intervisibility between the asset and the north and eastern corners of the Site, the proposed location of the anaerobic digester plant, due to intervening existing vegetation along the south-eastern corner of the Site. The Listed Building can be glimpsed from the south-western and western parts of the Site (Photograph 7), however, as the heritage significance of the asset cannot be appreciated in these views, these are not considered to contribute to its significance. This limited intervisibility indicates that the southern and western edges of the Site can be intermittently viewed from the surroundings of the farmhouse, however, these views are partially screened by hedges and existing vegetation. The remainder of the Site appears to be comprehensively screened by the adjacent woodland plantation.

Assessment of development effects 5.21 The north-eastern part of the Site, proposed for an anaerobic digester plant, is located 530m north-west of Tanhouse Farmhouse. It is concluded that the elements of setting which contribute to the heritage significance of this farmhouse include:

 The location within its garden and farm, which form the main setting within which the heritage significance of the asset can be appreciated;  Its immediate rural surroundings, including the fields surrounding the farm and the fields directly to the west; and  Its association with Tanhouse Farm, the building is fronting to the east towards the working farm’s farmyard.

26 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

5.22 The proposed development will not impact the Listed Building physically and therefore will not impact upon those key contributors to its significance which comprise its physical fabric. The key elements of the setting that make a contribution to the significance of the asset comprising its farmyard surroundings, its association with farm and its immediate rural environs, including fields to the west, would not be affected.

5.23 Views are not considered integral to the significance of this Listed Building. The visibility of the fields immediately surrounding the farmhouse may contribute to the significance, as this allows for the rural context of the building to be appreciated. The development within the Site would not block any of these views as it is located beyond these fields. As the agricultural surrounding of the cottage will be retained, its rural context will remain unchanged.

5.24 The proposed development would introduce limited change in to the wider surroundings of the Listed Building, with the key elements of the setting which contribute to the significance of the asset entirely unaffected. Moreover, the development would be located within the eastern part of the Site, screened from the farmhouse by the adjacent woodland plantation. The south-western and western areas of the Site, partially visible from the farmhouse, would be laid to grass. Therefore it is concluded that the setting of the Listed Building would be preserved and the significance of the asset would not be affected by the development.

6. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Significance of recorded heritage assets within the site 6.1 No designated heritage assets are recorded within the Site.

6.2 The field boundaries along the Site, comprising hedgerows, are considered to be historically important, under the archaeology and history criteria of the Hedgerows Regulations 1997 (Appendix C).

Summary of previous impacts 6.3 A review of the available cartographic and documentary evidence indicates that the Site has not been subject to any significant modern development. As such, any pre- existing impacts to any potential buried archaeological remains would chiefly result from agricultural practices, including ploughing which may have caused damage to

27 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham, Wiltshire – Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

the upper horizons of any potential buried remains situated beneath the topsoil layer.

Potential buried archaeological remains 6.4 The assessment of available data has indicated limited evidence of prehistoric activity within the wider surroundings of the Site, with findspots and a potential burial to the west and a large enclosure to the south. Romano-British activity within the surroundings of the Site largely comprises findspots, although the Roman date for the enclosure to the south cannot be ruled out. As such although the potential for discoveries of prehistoric and Roman date within the Site cannot be ruled out, it is considered to be low.

6.5 The majority of heritage assets within the surrounds of the Site comprise medieval remains, including settlements and field systems. As the known settlements are located beyond the Site itself, it is possible the Site formed part of a medieval agricultural landscape which is thought to have continued throughout the post- medieval period. Agricultural remains of medieval and later date would constitute heritage assets of limited heritage significance.

Potential development effects Effects on archaeological remains 6.6 Construction effects will primarily arise from the excavation of underground features (comprising a drainage tank and propane tank), which may partially or totally remove any underlying archaeological remains. Within the footprint of the proposed anaerobic digester plant, the potential impacts upon the archaeological resource will likely comprise localised excavations associated with foundations and services (infrastructure associated with the following processes: feedstock, blend, anaerobic digestion and pasteurise), as well as topsoil stripping and resurfacing for the access route and area of hard standing.

6.7 Any adverse impacts upon the buried archaeology resource would be likely to be permanent and irreversible in nature.

Effects on the setting of heritage assets 6.8 This report has assessed the potential effects of the development upon the significance of designated heritage assets within the surrounding landscape, through the alteration of their settings. With regard to the fourteen Grade II Listed Buildings, Grade II* Listed Woolmore Farmhouse, Blackmore House (B) and The Old Coach House (C), it has been established that, due to the effects of intervening

built form, topography and distance, the Site does not comprise part of the settings of any of these designated heritage assets and the proposed development would not affect their significance in any way.

6.9 It has been established that the Site forms part of the wider settings of Grade II Listed Tanhouse Farmhouse (A); however the Site does not lie within parts of the setting that contribute to the significance of the Listed Building. As a result, the proposed development would not affect the Listed Building’s significance in any way.

Effects on historic landscape character 6.10 The construction of residential development would introduce change to the historic landscape character of the Site, which has been used as farmland since at least the medieval period and likely enclosed in the post-medieval period. Such HLC types are widely recorded within the county and, as the Site comprises only a small part of this landscape, any impacts upon the HLC type as a whole would be very minor and localised in nature.

6.11 The field boundaries within the Site are defined by hedgerows, which may be considered historically important in accordance with the Hedgerows Regulations 1997 (Appendix C). It is understood that the hedgerow along the north-eastern boundary of the Site will be subject to minor alteration, in order to create access off the existing track. Important hedgerows are not designated heritage assets and are considered to be of limited heritage significance. The Regulations are simply a notification mechanism, requiring notice to the Local Planning Authority prior to removal of the hedgerow, in entirety or part.

7. CONCLUSIONS

7.1 The effect of the development proposals on the known and potential heritage resource within the Site and its surroundings will be a material consideration in determination of the planning application. This assessment has identified no overriding heritage constraints that would preclude development.

6.12 The known archaeological remains within the Site comprise the extant hedges along the boundaries of the Site. As the banks are overgrown with hedgerows, these may be considered as historically important as defined by the Hedgerows Regulations 1997.

7.2 There is some evidence for prehistoric and Romano-British activity within in the Site’s environs, including findspots, a burial and an enclosure. From the medieval period onwards, the Site is thought to have comprised part of a wider farming landscape, with known settlements located in close proximity, but not within the Site itself.

7.3 As part of this report, an assessment of the setting of designated heritage assets within the wider environs of the Site has been undertaken. The settings assessment concluded that there would be no harm to the significance of the fourteen Listed Buildings within the wider landscape, and three Listed Buildings within the surroundings of the Site. These include heritage assets for which a detailed settings assessment was undertaken; Tanhouse Farmhouse (A). It has been established that the Site forms part of the wider setting of Grade II Listed Building, however the Site does not lie within parts of the setting that setting that contribute to the significance of the Listed Building. As a result, the proposed development would preserve the setting of this Listed Building and would not cause harm to its significance.

7.4 In summary, the proposed development would not result in either substantial, or less than substantial harm to designated heritage assets, as specified in the Framework. The key aspects of setting which contribute to the significance of assets in the Site’s wider landscape would not be harmed and as such the proposed development would be consistent with the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The proposed development would also be in accordance with local and national planning policies relating to the protection of the historic environment

8. REFERENCES

British Geological Survey. 2013. Geology of Britain viewer, 1:50,000 geological mapping, bedrock and superficial - http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyo fbritain/home.html (accessed January 2016)

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. 2015. Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment

Chris Blandford Associates. 2007. West Wiltshire District Council. West Wiltshire District Landscape Character Assessment - http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/ west_wiltshire_landscape_character_assessment_march_2007_-_final_r eport.pdf (accessed January 2016)

Dawson, T. 2014. Land at Semington Road, Berryfield, Melksham, Wiltshire (Thames Valley Archaeological Services, Site Code. SRB14/130)

Department for Communities and Local Government. 2012. National Planning Policy Framework.

Doyle, J. 2015. Land at Woodrow Road, Melksham Heritage Desk-Based Assessment (CA Report no. 15828)

English Heritage. 2011. Understanding Place: Conservation Area Designation, Appraisal and Management.

English Heritage. 2008. Conservation Principles: Policies and Guidance

Historic England. 2015a. The National Heritage List for England - https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/ (accessed January 2016)

Historic England. 2015b. Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2: Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment

Historic England. 2015c. Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets

McMahon, P. 2004. The Archaeology of Wiltshire’s Towns: An extensive Urban Survey: Melksham

Pugh, R. B. and Crittall, E. (eds). (1953). A history of the county of Wiltshire

Skinner, R. 2015. Whaddon Lane, Semington, Wiltshire Heritage Desk-Based Assessment (CA Report no. 15578)

Wardell Armstrong. (2014). Sandridge Solar Power Ltd Cultural Heritage - http://unidoc.wiltshire.gov.uk/UniDoc/Document/File/MTMvMDYxNDAvRlV MLDQ1OTE2MA== (accessed January 2016)

Wiltshire council. 2015. Wiltshire Core Strategy - http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/core- strategy-adoption.pdf (accessed January 2016)

Williams, A. and Martin, G. H. 2002. Domesday Book: A Complete Translation.

Cartographic sources

1576 Saxton, C. Map of Wiltshire 1689 Lea. Map of Wiltshire 1837 Melksham Tithe Map 1886 Ordnance Survey map, 1:2,500 scale 1901 Ordnance Survey map, 1:10,560 scale 1924 Ordnance Survey map, 1:2,500 scale 1960-1961 Ordnance Survey map, 1:10,560 scale 1989 Ordnance Survey map, 1:2,500 scale

Photographic Sources Wiltshire and Swindon Historic Environment Record (WSHER) Aerial Photography Search

Sortie Frame Date number number 76 91 165 1638 19 August 1991 76 91 166 1639 19 August 1991 76 91 167 1640 19 August 1991 2581 160 4679 7 July 1981 2581 161 4680 7 July 1981 2029 220044 9 September 1971 345-12 172 26 June 2001 345-12 173 26 June 2001 345-12 174 26 June 2001

APPENDIX A: GAZETTEER OF DESIGNATED AND RECORDED HERITAGE ASSETS

HE ref. No. Description Designation Period NGR AMIE ref. WSHER ref. Post- Grade II Listed A Tanhouse Farmhouse medieval 393511 163130 1194746 Building Modern Post- Grade II Listed B Blackmore House medieval 392559 164450 1364118 Building Modern Post- Grade II Listed C The Old Coach House medieval 393438 164810 1194747 Building Modern Watching Brief on the Beanacre to St Edith’s Marsh Gas Pipeline (1990): two areas of substantial archaeological Romano- 1 activity, earthworks at Forest Farm and - British 393733 163853 EWI3540 the area between Lower Woodrow Medieval Road and the stream, representing medieval and roman deposits. Evaluation (2004) on Land at Clackers Brook, Snarlton Lane: evidence of field ditches, charcoal and bloomery slag Prehistoric? was recorded. Evidence of a 16th Medieval 2 century small farm building or animal 392094 163673 EWI7047 Post- pen with associated stone surface, medieval ditches, hollows and 19th century pottery was present. The wider environs reveal early human activity. Environmental Impact Assessment (2004) and Archaeological Excavation (2010) on Land at Clackers Brook, Snarlton Lane: found significant early human activity, indicating embankment, settlement, an animal burial with a barbed-and-tanged arrowhead, and an inhumation considered to be Romano- Prehistoric British or earlier. The site is considered Romano- to have been arable. Peripheral British EWI7049 3 - 391908 163732 medieval activity with adjacent ridge Early EWI7050 and furrow. The majority of features medieval dated to the 11th to 13th century with Medieval evidence of iron production and iron working. An intrusive potshard was discovered. Later developments indicate forest clearance and a transition to enclosed landscape. Evidence of industrial activity and later farming is apparent. W of Eight Acre Plantation: a dense pottery scatter including bead rim associated ware, two burnt areas and a Romano- EWI7670 4 pit containing refuse was recorded. - 392702 163847 British MWI4933 Finds included coarse ware sherds, animal bone, charcoal and iron fragments. Pottery fragments discovered north of Romano- 5 - 392673 163800 MWI4934 Snarlton Farm in a pipe trench. British SW of Eight Acre Plantation: coarse ware pottery and animal bone was Romano- EWI7670 6 discovered in a ditch running NW/SE - 392793 163796 British MWI4935 cut by a pipeline. Excavated by A C Powell.

W of Eight Acre Plantation: scatter of Romano- 7 - 392838 163984 MWI4932 sherds, iron fragments and nails. British Settlement earthworks west of Redstocks. On the outskirts of the field system a field boundary appears to truncate a large enclosure of earlier date. Settlement evidence comprises Prehistoric? building platforms, hollow ways, field Romano- MWI3625 8 - 392616 162351 boundaries, a possible pond, ridge and British? 867427 furrow and plough headlands. An Medieval extensive field system extends to the west and south-west. Most elements are no longer extant on 2005 LiDAR - and 2008 aerial photography. Geophysical survey at Sandridge Solar Farm (2013): covering an area of 70ha the surveys detected a series of former Medieval field boundaries some of which are Post- 9 depicted on the Melksham Tithe Map of - 393820 163854 EWI7954 medieval 1840 and 1880 Ordnance Survey map. Modern Extensive ridge and furrow, post- medieval/modern land drains, and soil- filled features were detected. Sandridge Park and Country House: historic parkland shown on 1885 Post- MWI4969 10 Ordnance Survey map. The park - medieval 393253 164745 MWI49202 retains a wooded area, specimen trees, Modern MWI49202 and a walled kitchen garden. Blackmore Farm: farmstead with 11 - Medieval 392554 164424 MWI3630 medieval origins. Settlement earthworks producing pottery fragments. Settlement comprises building platforms, hollow ways, field boundaries, a possible MWI3621 12 - Medieval 392804 163263 pond, ridge and furrow and plough 867423 headlands. Most elements are no longer extant on 2005 LiDAR and 2008 aerial photography. Tanhouse Farm: a partially extent farmstead of loose courtyard plan. Two sides of the loose courtyard are formed by working agricultural buildings with Post- MWI68898 13 - 393519 163128 additional detached elements to the medieval MWI44475 main plan. There has been significant loss (greater than 50%) of traditional buildings. Undated cropmark: possible 14 - Undated 393349 162975 MWI4974 rectangular enclosure. 392724 164870 1579893 Ridge and furrow visible as earthworks 392808 164258 1579866 Post- - and cropmarks on aerial photography - 392781 163808 1579914 medieval and LiDAR. No longer extant. 391969 163688 1579890 392079 163259 1579889

APPENDIX B: GAZETTEER OF NOT ILLUSTRATED INFORMATION

HE ref. Description Designation Period NGR AMIE ref. WSHER ref. Post- Grade II* Woolmore Farmhouse medieval 391630 162493 1021762 Listed Building Modern Post- Grade II Listed 8 Church Lane medieval 391449 164381 1021697 Building Modern Post- Grade II Listed Bowerhill Lodge Farmhouse medieval 391445 163311 1021767 Building Modern Gatepiers to the left of Bowerhill Lodge Grade II Listed Post- 391429 163305 1021768 Farmhouse Building medieval Post- Grade II Listed Sandridge Lodge medieval 394490 164705 1021770 Building Modern Grade II Listed Sandridge Tower Modern 394070 164612 1021771 Building Post- Grade II Listed Old Loves Farmhouse medieval 392180 162168 1194682 Building Modern Grade II Listed Clears Farmhouse Modern 394732 162541 1243400 Building Post- Milestone on south side about 30m west of Grade II Listed medieval 393904 162207 1243486 Mitchell Farmhouse Building Modern Grade II Listed Church of St Andrew Modern 391356 164450 1286098 Building Grade II Listed The Grove Modern 391494 162728 1364120 Building Grade II Listed 401 and 402 The Spa Modern 391421 162827 1021772 Building Grade II Listed 399 and 400 Modern 391389 162846 1194751 Building Grade II Listed 403 and 404 Modern 391429 162816 1194754 Building Grade II Listed 409 and 410 Modern 391501 162681 1194755 Building Outfarm on edge of eighteen acre plantation. Extent 19th century constructed as a singular structure. Isolated location. The farmstead has - Modern 393509 164293 MWI68896 retained all components of its historic form, with minimal apparent alteration. Outfarm north of Little Snarlton Farm: demolished 19th century constructed as a singular structure. Isolated location. All the - Modern 392245 163906 MWI68798 historic buildings and farmsteads have been lost. Outfarm northeast of Little Snarlton Farm: demolished 19th century Outfarm of loose courtyard plan. One side of the loose courtyard MWI68797 is formed by working agricultural buildings with - Modern 392530 163928 additional detached elements to the main plan.

Isolated location. All the historic buildings and farmsteads have been lost. Outfarm east of Snarlton Farm: demolished 19th century Outfarm of loose courtyard plan. One side of the loose courtyard is formed by working agricultural buildings with additional - Modern 393038 163620 MWI68876 detached elements to the main plan. Isolated location. All the historic buildings and farmsteads have been lost.

Outfarm south of Eighteen Acre Plantation: partially extent 19th century Outfarm of regular courtyard. There has been significant loss - Modern 393688 163876 MWI68897 (greater than 50%) of traditional buildings. All the historic buildings and farmsteads have been lost. Outfarm southeast of Tanhouse Farm: One side of the loose courtyard is formed by working agricultural buildings with additional - Modern 394022 162987 MWI68899 detached elements to the main plan. All the historic buildings and farmsteads have been lost. Outfarm on Brown Lane: demolished 19th century Outfarm of loose courtyard plan. One side of the loose courtyard is formed by working agricultural buildings with additional - Modern 393146 163263 MWI68875 detached elements to the main plan. Isolated location. All the historic buildings and farmsteads have been lost. Snarlton Farm: partially extent 19th century - Modern 392339 163644 MWI68800 farmstead. Little Snarlton Farm: 19th century farmstead with loose courtyard. One side of the loose courtyard is formed by working agricultural - Modern 392274 163700 MWI68799 buildings with additional detached elements to the main plan. MWI68795 Manor Farm: farmstead - Modern 392788 164639 MWI62966 Magnetometry Survey at Snarlton Lane: revealed evidence of probable modern or damaged archaeological features/deposits. - Undated 391979 163786 EWI7048 The southernmost area revealed a system of field drains and the corner of an enclosure. Other features included a ditch and pit.

APPENDIX C: THE HEDGEROWS REGULATIONS 1997

The 1997 Hedgerow Regulations were made under section 97 of the Environment Act 1995, and introduced arrangements for Local Planning Authorities to protect ‘important’ hedgerows in the countryside, by controlling their removal through a system of notification. The DEFRA publication ‘The Hedgerows Regulations 1997: A Guide to the Law and Good Practice’ is a useful guide in this respect. The Regulations provide criteria for assessing whether a hedgerow is ‘important’ for the purposes of the Regulations. To qualify as ‘important’ a hedgerow must have existed for 30 years or more and following this must fulfil at least one of the criteria in the Schedule 1 criteria. Those for ‘archaeology and history’ comprise Part II, namely:

1. The hedgerow marks the boundary, or part of the boundary, of at least one historic parish or township; and for this purpose “historic” means existing before 1850.

2. The hedgerow incorporates an archaeological feature which is- (a) included in the schedule of monuments compiled by the Secretary of State under section 1 (schedule of monuments) of the Ancient Monuments and Scheduled Areas Act 1979(g); or (b) recorded at the relevant date in a Sites and Monuments Record [Historic Environment Records have largely replaced Sites and Monuments Records].

3. The hedgerow- (a) is situated wholly or partly within an archaeological site included or recorded as mentioned in paragraph 2 or on land adjacent to and associated with such a site; and (b) is associated with any monument or feature on that site.

4. The hedgerow- (a) marks the boundary of a pre-1600 AD estate or manor recorded at the relevant date in sites and Monuments Record or on a document held at that date at a Record Office; or (b) is visibly related to any building or feature of such an estate or manor.

5. The hedgerow- (a) is recorded in a document held at the relevant date at a Record Office as an integral part of a field system pre-dating the Inclosure acts; or (b) is part of, or visibly related to, any building or other feature associated with such a system, and that system- (i) is substantially complete; or (ii) is of a pattern which is recorded in a document prepared before the relevant date by a local planning authority, within the meaning of the 1990 Act(b), for the purposes of development control within the authority’s area, as a key landscape characteristic

The criterion of point five is the subject of debate and differing interpretation. Some heritage professionals interpret the criterion referring to the individual Inclosure Act for the parish in which a site is located, and numerous Acts were made in the 18th century (including the 1773 Inclosure Act). However, the criterion references the Short Titles Act of 1896, and it is commonly interpreted by LPAs and heritage professionals that it thus refers to the Inclosure Act of 1845, and subsequent Acts up to the Commonable Rights Compensation Act of 1882. This latter interpretation sets a date of 1845 as the benchmark test.

‘Important’ hedgerows are not designated heritage assets (as defined in NPPF Annex 2). The Regulations are essentially a notification mechanism. Thus an applicant needs to notify the LPA prior to the removal, either entirely or in part, of an ‘important’ hedgerow. There is a prescribed form of notice set out in Schedule 4 to the Regulations, although the form an LPA uses does not have to follow this. The requirement is for sufficient information to be given to the LPA for them to consider the proposed removal.

37 N Andover 01264 347630 Cirencester 01285 771022 Cotswold Exeter 01392 826185 Archaeology Milton Keynes 01908 564660 SWINDON w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk SOUTH GLOUCESTERSHIRE e [email protected]

WEST PROJECT TITLE BERKSHIRE Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham BATH AND NE SOMERSET Wiltshire

WILTSHIRE FIGURE TITLE Site location plan SOMERSET 0 1km

FIGURE NO. Reproduced from the digital Ordnance Survey Explorer map with DRAWN BY DJB PROJECT NO. 5737 the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller CHECKED BY LM DATE 28-07-2016 of Her Majesty's Stationery Office c Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109 APPROVED BY ET SCALE@A4 1:25,000 1 POOLE C

Fig. 1

Fig. 6

Fig. 7 Fig. 2

Fig. 3

0 1:5,000 250m

Andover 01264 347630 N Cirencester 01285 771022 Cotswold Exeter 01392 826185 site boundary Archaeology Milton Keynes 01908 564660 w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk study area e [email protected] PROJECT TITLE Grade II Listed Building Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham Wiltshire post-medieval FIGURE TITLE modern Designated recorded heritage assets

DRAWN BY DJB PROJECT NO. 5737 FIGURE NO. Reproduced from the digital Ordnance Survey Explorer map with the permission 1:12,500 CHECKED BY LM DATE 28-07-2016 of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office 0 500m c Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109 APPROVED BY ET SCALE@A4 1:12,500 2 392000 393000 394000 N

164000 site boundary 7 study area prehistoric 1 4 Roman 5 6 2 previous archaeological works earthworks

163000

0 1:10,000 500m

Reproduced from the digital Ordnance Survey Explorer map with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office c Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109

Andover 01264 347630 Cirencester 01285 771022 Cotswold Exeter 01392 826185 Archaeology Milton Keynes 01908 564660 w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham Wiltshire

FIGURE TITLE Prehistoric to Romano-British recorded heritage assets

DRAWN BY DJB/LJH PROJECT NO. 5737 FIGURE NO. CHECKED BY LM DATE 28-07-2016 APPROVED BY ET SCALE@A3 1:10,000 3 392000 393000 394000 N

164000 site boundary study area 1 early medieval medieval

2 post-medieval modern undated historic parkland 3 previous archaeological works ridge and furrow ridge and furrow (medieval and post-medieval) 12 earthworks

163000

14 8

0 1:10,000 500m

Andover 01264 347630 Cirencester 01285 771022 Cotswold Exeter 01392 826185 Archaeology Milton Keynes 01908 564660 w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE Land at Snarlton Farm, Melksham Wiltshire

FIGURE TITLE Early medieval to modern recorded heritage assets

DRAWN BY DJB/LJH PROJECT NO. 5737 FIGURE NO. CHECKED BY LM DATE 28-07-2016 APPROVED BY ET SCALE@A3 1:10,000 4