DOCSLIB.ORG

Name Address Support/Object Comment Response East Ayton PC, S Dawn Naylor It Is Not Proposed to Extend Boundary in This Location

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Name Address Support/Object Comment Response East Ayton PC, S Dawn Naylor It Is Not Proposed to Extend Boundary in This Location Name Address Support/Object Comment Response East Ayton PC, S Dawn Naylor It is not proposed to extend boundary in this location. The two fields south-east of Low Hall & Candler House are classified as "Open Countryside" in the SBC Local Plan, within which category policy E1 severely restricts development. As the land does not contain any West Ayton PC, Supports extensions & proposed further standing structures it does not appear to Margaret S extension, supplied annotated map with satisfy the requirement for CA designation of Walker memorial trees and TPOs posessing special architectural and historic interest, therefore its function as part of the setting of the CA is most significant, which is protected under the Local Plan. Proposed to include memorial trees and TPOs on annotated map E Ayton Lodge is evident on the 1854 O/S map and is considered likely to originate from the eighteenth century at its core, with nineteenth and twentieth century extensions. The overall form of the historic parts of the building E Ayton Lodge does not make a remains, and it retains traditional and positive contribution vernacular construction and details in terms of masonry, dressings, chimneys, window openings, roof forms, which reflect the local vernacular character. Therefore it is considered to make a positive contribution to the CA. Modern alterations such as the conservatory and windows detract from the architectural Conservatory & PVC windows lack quality of the building, but are reversible Objects to architectural quality changes and do not nullify the historic East Ayton Kidger, Julian extension to building's architectural form and historic Lodge Hotel include Hotel interest. Currently the conservatory is included in the CA as it was constructed after designation of the boundary. It would not be good practice to delineate a revised boundary that cut through the building, therefoe the issue is exclusion or Would include modern extensions inclusion. The residual quality of the building which lack architectural quality and its historical and physical relationship to the wider site mitigate towards inclusion. Inclusion would not prejudice sympathetic redevelopment of the parts of the site which currently detract from its quality. No objection to retention of garden and walls within CA Boundary should be amended to See above exclude conservatory Traditional architectural details such as window types, barge boards, roofing materials, render and railings are noted in section 6 of the document as contributing to the character of the CA. Section 7 notes the attrition of Recommendation to extend A4 traditional detailing and materials. Section 8 Direction lacks justification or any recommends extension of the A4 to cover the Supports assessment of why PD rights need to whole of the CA. However, the CAAMP in be removed recommendation is not directly linked to the principle, analysis. The text will be adjusted to provide a reservations & Varley, Graham clearer justification. SBC do not intend to concerns re. proceed with serving an A4 Direction at this extension of A4 time therefore any extension is likely to be Direction in SBC within the NYMNP only. area The document details the GPDO development classes of restricted development whereas the Lack of clarity re the Direction, website details the particular forms of confusion between CAAMP & NPA development restricted. This may lead to website confusion and will be rationalised to clarify the forms of permitted development restricted by the Article 4. Inclusion of SBC Policy Update & make Incorporate policy update into Management administrative boundary between SBC Plan. Strengthen administrative boundary on and NYMNP areas clearer. Map 8. Addition of stone boundary walls at Carr Homeowners will be consulted with a view to Lane/Seamer Road junction within the inclusion of the boundary walls in the CA due Scarborough designated area (entrance to village & to their contribution to the streetscene at the Supports subject Borough setting of Church) gateway of the CA. SBC to resolution of Council, Derek particular issues: Recognition of outbuildings at Low Hall Green Annotate Map 8 to mark outbuildings and and platforms at former Station making platforms as positive. a positive contribution to CA (map 8) Disagrees with proposal to extent Extension of A4 within SBC area is a matter for Article 4 Direction to SBC area until SBC to pursue depending on its assessment of additional survey work undertaken to justification and consideration of resource assess effectiveness of ext A4. implications. Future of railway station site and effect Add specific reference to Station site within of designation: specific reference? Management Plan. Inclusion of management policies for See above railway station site specifically? 3.01: include reference to Tabular Hills Include reference Suggested increase in size of maps and Increase size of histric maps and tighten focus tighter area focus? where this would not lead to loss of interest. 5.12: Explication re petrol station/shop Include reference to petrol forecourt in site & reference to future Appraisal and Management Plan. Consv Officer redevelopment aspirations? Green, Derek SBC CAA boundaries encompass historic extent of village, but "core" not applicable because the Define historic core on map, perhaps designation includes two villages, and the also identification of character areas or focus of economic activity has shifted over identity areas? time. Omit reference to "historic core" from text. Add reference to varying character areas within Appraisal. Include schedule of Non-Designated Buildings that made a positive conbtribution to Heritage Assets re positive buildings & the character and history of the CA are features such as trees & plaque on identified on Map 8. Memorial trees will be Garth End Rd identified on Map 11. The Depot site is not wholly included, only the former Station site. The salt store is not proposed to be included. The former Station, with station buildings, platform and engine shed have all previously been identified as Inclusion of Depot site not appropriate having local heritage value by English Heritage because majority contains little of and the NYMNPA, and their retention and North Yorkshire heritage value incorporation in a redevelopment scheme was County Council, Objects to promoted by the Planning Brief prepared by Sean Wilson, inclusion of the NYMNPA in condultation with NYCC in NYCC Property Highways Depot order "to retain the historic railway links of the Transactions in CA site and provide a degree of focus and Manager established character". The retention of the site's heritage assets Remains intention of NYCC to sell the should strengthen any scheme of site for development redevelopment in terms of attractiveness, place-making and local identity. NYCC wishes for entirely of site to be Maintain boundary currently proposed for excluded, but willing to discuss inclusion inclusion. of station building area only The Cottage, Flynn, Abigail Yedmandale No preference Rd, W Ayton Dismayed that Forge Valley Station May Dene, currently not protected, pleased that it Walker, Alan Beech Lane, S Station & path will be included. will be in future along with tree-lined W Ayton path Mill Lane already fully kerbed. There is a danger of excessive highways improvements eroding rural character, particularly around the Derwent Mill Prince, Mr & Would like kerbs/stones to prevent Mill which retains its picturesque setting. Farm, W S Mrs parking on verges on Mill Lane Natural boulder stones may be appropriate but Ayton welcome consultation over details with the NYMNPA if the landowner contemplates such works. 4 Garth End Fletcher, Mrs S Rd Within the NYMNP, land is not designated for development. Development is guided by the Queries re land designated for policies within the North York Moors Core 4 Castle Rise, Ogilvy, Sue S development within village under a local Strategy and Development Policies available at W Ayton development plan www.northyorkmoors.org.uk. Within SBC area, development is guided by SBC's Local Plan available at www.scarborough.gov.uk. Dowkes, Ian & 5 Castle Rise, S Angela W Ayton All proposed changes will enhance character of village 6 Garth End CA designation would grant planning controls Ward, Stella S Rd, W Ayton Old station and yard need protection, of over the demolition of the station buildings and concern & should be preserved help to ensure their heritage value is recognised in any scheme of redevelopment. Welcomes CA extension Forge Valley Station needs protection, 8 Garth End See above iconic building in state of decay Ward, Peter Road, W S Clarify reference to strap/ribbon pointing within Ayton Stop ribbon pointing on all stone the Appraisal (7.01) and refer to use of lime buildings mortar within Management Plan. New building will be guided by the respective Keep new building to a minimum Monymusk, Local Development Plans/Frameworks. Watson, Peter Beech Lane, S Preserve station building See earlier reference. W Ayton The production of the CAAMP should help to Keep character of area intact encourage sympathetic development. Manor Croft has significant architectural quality Manor Croft, Pleased by extension to include Manor and largely retains its original features Baines, MJ Yedmandale S Croft externally. It also has a 'landmark' quality due Rd, W Ayton to its prominent siting. Monymusk, Significant changes would help to retain Watson, Mrs R Beech Lane, S character & help monitor quality of W Ayton changes 28 Hall
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FOIA2062 Response Please Find Attached to This E-Mail an Excel Spreadsheet Detailing the Current Recipients of Mandatory Charity
    FOIA2062 Response Please find attached to this e-mail an excel spreadsheet detailing the current recipients of mandatory charity relief from Scarborough Borough Council in respect of Business Rates. Relief Award Primary Liable party name Full Property Address Start Date Filey Museum Trustees 8 - 10, Queen Street, Filey, North Yorkshire, YO14 9HB 04/01/1997 Filey Sea Cadets, Southdene Pavilion, Southdene, Filey, North Filey Sea Cadets Yorkshire, YO14 9BB 04/01/1997 Endsleigh Convent, South Crescent Road, Filey, North Institute Of Our Lady Of Mercy Yorkshire, YO14 9JL 04/01/1997 Filey Cancer Fund 31a, Station Road, Filey, North Yorkshire, YO14 9AR 04/01/1997 Yorkshire Wildlife Trust Ltd Car Park, Wharfedale, Filey, North Yorkshire, YO14 0DG 04/01/1997 Village Hall, Filey Road, Flixton, Scarborough, North Yorkshire, Folkton & Flixton Village Hall YO11 3UG 04/01/1997 Muston Village Hall Village Hall, Muston, Filey, North Yorkshire, YO14 0HX 04/01/1997 Jubilee Hall, 133-135, Main Street, Cayton, Scarborough, North Cayton Jubilee Hall Yorkshire, YO11 3TE 04/01/1997 Hall, North Lane, Cayton, Scarborough, North Yorkshire, YO11 Cayton Village Hall 3RZ 04/01/1997 Memorial Hall, Main Street, Seamer, Scarborough, North Seamer & Irton War Memorial Hall Yorkshire, YO12 4QD 04/01/1997 Hall, Moor Lane, Irton, Scarborough, North Yorkshire, YO12 Derwent Valley Scout Group 4RW 04/01/1997 Village Hall, Wilsons Lane, East Ayton, Scarborough, North Ayton Village Hall Yorkshire, YO13 9HY 04/01/1997 Village Hall, Cayley Lane, Brompton-By-Sawdon, Scarborough, Brompton Village Hall Committee North Yorkshire, YO13 9DL 04/01/1997 42nd St Marks Scout Group 120, Coldyhill Lane, Scarborough, North Yorkshire, YO12 6SD 04/01/1997 Burniston & Cloughton V.
    [Show full text]
  • North York Moors Local Plan
    North York Moors Local Plan Infrastructure Assessment This document includes an assessment of the capacity of existing infrastructure serving the North York Moors National Park and any possible need for new or improved infrastructure to meet the needs of planned new development. It has been prepared as part of the evidence base for the North York Moors Local Plan 2016-35. January 2019 2 North York Moors Local Plan – Infrastructure Assessment, February 2019. Contents Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 5 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 6 2. Spatial Portrait ............................................................................................................................ 8 3. Current Infrastructure .................................................................................................................. 9 Roads and Car Parking ........................................................................................................... 9 Buses .................................................................................................................................... 13 Rail ....................................................................................................................................... 14 Rights of Way.......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Local Government Boundary Commission for England Report No.182 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
    Local Government Boundary Commission For England Report No.182 LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND REPORT NO. 182 ** V LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND CHAIRMAN Sir Edmund Compton, GCB,KBE. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN Mr J M Rankin,QC. MEMBERS The Countess Of Albemarle, DBE. Mr T C Benfield. Professor Michael Chisholm. Sir Andrew Vlfheatley.CBE. ** (v' To the Rt Hon Merlyn Rees, MP Secretary of State for the Home Department PROPOSALS FOR THE FUTURE ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE BOROUGH OF SCARBOROUGH IN THE COUNTY OF NORTH YORKSHIRE 1. We, the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, having carried out c_ our initial review of the electoral arrangements for the borough of Scarborough in accordance with the requirements of section 63 of, and Schedule 9 to, the •" Local Government Act 1972, present our proposals for the future electoral arrangements of that borough. 2. In accordance with the procedure prescribed in section 60(1} and (2) of the 1972 Act, notice was given on 21 April 1975 that we were to undertake this review. This was incorporated in a consultation letter addressed to the Scarborough •^ Borough Council, copies of which were circulated to the Parish Councils and v Parish Meetings in the district, the North Yorkshire County Council, the Members of Parliament for the constituencies concerned and the headquarters of the main political parties. Copies were also sent to the editors of the local newspapers circulating in the area and of the local government press* Notices inserted in the local press announced the start of the review and invited comments from members of the public and from any interested bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2010 / Yorkshire and the Humber
    HERITAGE AT RISK 2010 / YORKSHIRE AND THE HUMBER Contents HERITAGE AT RISK 3 Reducing the risks 6 Publications and guidance 9 THE REGISTER 11 Content and assessment criteria 11 Key to the entries 13 East Riding of Yorkshire (UA) 16 Kingston upon Hull, City of (UA) 41 North East Lincolnshire (UA) 41 North Lincolnshire (UA) 42 North Yorkshire 44 South Yorkshire 106 West Yorkshire 117 York (UA) 130 The Heritage at Risk Register helps us to identify the most threatened buildings, archaeological sites and landscapes in this most distinctive of English regions. For the 60% of listed buildings on this year’s Register that could have a sustainable future through commercial or residential reuse, the economic downturn has brought additional challenges to which we must now respond. This year, we undertook a pioneering 15% sample survey of England’s 14,500 listed places of worship to help us understand the condition of the thousands of designated churches, chapels, synagogues, mosques and temples and other faith buildings that are the spiritual focus for our communities. They face many different kinds of challenges and we need to ensure their future. In response to the expansion of asset types and changed Last year we included conservation areas in the Register economic conditions we have developed a new strategy. for the first time. This year, 46 of these, including Haworth, From now on we will focus our resources on types of Holbeck and Rotherham, are known to be at risk, site that make a particular contribution to the region’s but the survey of nearly 800 areas is proving a challenging character.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2015, Yorkshire
    Yorkshire Register 2015 HERITAGE AT RISK 2015 / YORKSHIRE Contents Heritage at Risk III The Register VII Content and criteria VII Criteria for inclusion on the Register IX Reducing the risks XI Key statistics XIV Publications and guidance XV Key to the entries XVII Entries on the Register by local planning XIX authority Cumbria 1 Yorkshire Dales (NP) 1 East Riding of Yorkshire (UA) 1 Kingston upon Hull, City of (UA) 23 North East Lincolnshire (UA) 23 North Lincolnshire (UA) 25 North Yorkshire 27 Craven 27 Hambleton 28 Harrogate 33 North York Moors (NP) 37 Richmondshire 45 Ryedale 48 Scarborough 64 Selby 67 Yorkshire Dales (NP) 71 South Yorkshire 74 Barnsley 74 Doncaster 76 Peak District (NP) 79 Rotherham 80 Sheffield 83 West Yorkshire 86 Bradford 86 Calderdale 91 Kirklees 96 Leeds 101 Wakefield 107 York (UA) 110 II Yorkshire Summary 2015 e have 694 entries on the 2015 Heritage at Risk Register for Yorkshire, making up 12.7% of the national total of 5,478 entries. The Register provides an Wannual snapshot of historic sites known to be at risk from neglect, decay or inappropriate development. Nationally, there are more barrows on the Register than any other type of site. The main risk to their survival is ploughing. The good news is that since 2014 we have reduced the number of barrows at risk by over 130, by working with owners and, in particular, Natural England to improve their management. This picture is repeated in Yorkshire, where the greatest concentration of barrows at risk is in the rich farmland of the Wolds.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage at Risk Register 2020, North East and Yorkshire
    North East & Yorkshire Register 2020 HERITAGE AT RISK 2020 / NORTH EAST AND YORKSHIRE Contents The Register III Wakefield 130 Content and criteria III York (UA) 132 Key statistics V Key to the Entries VI Entries on the Register by local planning VIII authority County Durham (UA) 1 Northumberland (UA) 10 Northumberland (NP) 26 Tees Valley 32 Darlington (UA) 32 Hartlepool (UA) 33 Middlesbrough (UA) 34 North York Moors (NP) 34 Redcar and Cleveland (UA) 34 Stockton-on-Tees (UA) 37 Tyne and Wear 37 Gateshead 37 Newcastle upon Tyne 39 North Tyneside 42 South Tyneside 42 Sunderland 43 East Riding of Yorkshire (UA) 45 Kingston upon Hull, City of (UA) 60 North Yorkshire 61 Craven 61 Hambleton 61 Harrogate 64 North York Moors (NP) 67 Richmondshire 74 Ryedale 77 Scarborough 89 Selby 91 Yorkshire Dales (NP) 95 South Yorkshire 98 Barnsley 98 Doncaster 100 Peak District (NP) 104 Rotherham 105 Sheffield 107 West Yorkshire 111 Bradford 111 Calderdale 115 Kirklees 120 Leeds 124 II HERITAGE AT RISK 2020 / NORTH EAST AND YORKSHIRE THE REGISTER Many structures fall into the ‘not applicable’ category, The Heritage at Risk Register includes historic for example: ruins, walls, gates, headstones or boundary buildings and sites at risk of being lost through stones. neglect, decay or deterioration. Condition is assessed as ‘very bad’, ‘poor’, ‘fair’ or It includes all types of designated heritage assets, ‘good’. The condition of buildings or structures on including Conservation Areas, which are designated the Register is typically very bad or poor, but can be and assessed by Local Planning Authorities. fair or, very occasionally, good.
    [Show full text]
  • East and West Ayton Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan
    East and West Ayton Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan 3 Adopted June 2014 This document has been produced by the North York Moors National Park Authority and Scarborough Borough Council Contents 1. Introduction 2. Location and Context 3. Topography and Landscape Setting 4. Historical Development 5. Conservation Area Boundary 6. Character 7. Issues and Pressures 8. Management Plan Appendices Appendix A Listed Buildings Appendix B Scheduled Ancient Monument Maps Map 1 Context Map Map 2 Extract from 1797 Hutton Buscel Enclosure Map Map 3 1838 Map of the manor of Hutton Buscel Map 4 Plan of the Forge Valley Railway (Maps listed below are found at the end of the document) Map 5 Historic Ordnance Survey Maps Map 6 Boundary Review Map 7 Figure Ground Map 8 Building Uses Map 9 Spatial Analysis East & West Ayton Conservation Area Appraisal & Management Plan 2 1 INTRODUCTION 1.01 A Conservation Area is defined by the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 as an area of special architectural or historic interest, (the character or appearance of which) is desirable to preserve or enhance. Section 69 of the Act requires Local Planning Authorities to identify and designate Conservation Areas within their geographical boundaries and to formulate, in conjunction with the public, proposals for their preservation and enhancement (Sections 71 and 72 of the Act). The Act also places a duty upon Local Planning Authorities to review the extent of the Conservation Areas. 1.02 East Ayton and West Ayton are two villages located on either side of the River Derwent, to the west of Scarborough (see Map 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Raincliffe Woods
    An Archaeological Survey of Forge Valley, Raincliffe and Row Brow Woods Scarborough North Yorkshire ‘thence let me wander mid the pathless wilds of Raincliff, who, with intertwisted leaves, arches the bowers of silence’ (Foster 1770) CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY 2 3. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 4 4. THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY 9 4.1 Prehistoric Remains 10 4.2 Hollow Ways and Tracks 12 4.3 Platforms 21 4.4 Medieval and later Boundaries and Enclosures 23 4.5 Quarries 27 4.6 Water Management 31 4.7 The Forge 31 4.8 The Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries 33 5. SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS 37 6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 40 7. REFERENCES 41 Scarborough Archaeological and Historical Society Report 49 First published March 2018 by the Scarborough Archaeological and Historical Society c/o The Street, 12 Lower Clark Street, Scarborough, YO12 7PW www.sahs.org.uk Copyright © 2018 1. INTRODUCTION This report summarises the results of a survey undertaken by the Scarborough Archaeological and Historical Society (SAHS) between December 2015 and September 2017 in Forge Valley, Raincliffe and Row Brow Woods on the western outskirts of Scarborough. The aim of the survey was to make the first systematic record of archaeological features surviving in the woods as a means to better understand how the area has changed over time. It is hoped also that an improved understanding of the archaeology will help in the future management of the woods and give visitors a greater appreciation of the area’s heritage. The woods form a continuous belt of trees extending for a distance of nearly five miles from East Ayton in the west to the A170 Racecourse Road in the east around the steep west, north and north-east sides of East Ayton, Irton and Seamer Moors (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Cratus Communications FOI Request in Relation to Civil Parishes - Template Response Sheet
    Cratus Communications FOI Request in relation to civil parishes - template response sheet FOI Request in relation to civil parishes Name of local authority a Scarborough Borough Council [delete options as appropriate 1 Are there civil parishes in your local authority area? Yes 2 If yes, is the entirety of your local authority area parished? only part of it 3 For each of parished parts of your local authority area, please provide the following information in relation to questions 3 (a) to (f) in the covering email. [add additional lines if requir [delete options or examples given as appropriate] a b c d e (ii) e (ii) f Name of civil parish Parish council or parish meeting Precepting / non-preceptinStyle Last electionNext election Warding 1 Aislaby Parish Council We do not hold this information Precepting Parish 07/05/2015 02/05/2019 Single 2 Brompton by Sawdon Parish We do not hold this information Precepting Parish 07/05/2015 02/05/2019 Multi Ward 3 Burniston Parish Council Both Parish Council & Parish Meetings Precepting Parish 07/05/2015 02/05/2019 Single 4 Cayton Parish Council Both Parish Council & Parish Meetings Precepting Parish 07/05/2015 02/05/2019 Single 5 Cloughton Parish Council Both Parish Council & Parish Meetings Precepting Parish 07/05/2015 02/05/2019 Single 6 Danby Group Parish Counci We do not hold this information Precepting Parish 07/05/2015 02/05/2019 Single 7 East Ayton Parish Council We do not hold this information Precepting Parish 07/05/2015 02/05/2019 Single 8 Eastfield Parish Council Both Parish Council & Parish
    [Show full text]
  • Vale of Pickering Statement of Significance
    Vale of Pickering Statement of Significance Report prepared for English Heritage (Yorkshire and Humber Region) 1 Contents Introduction 3 Summary Statement of Significance 5 Summary 13 Landscape Description 17 Evidential Value 20 Historical Value 28 Natural Value 45 Aesthetic Value 51 Communal Value 54 At Risk Statement 59 What Next? 64 List of individuals and organisations consulted for the production of the document 65 Directory of organisations with interests in the Vale of Pickering 65 Bibliography 67 List of photographs 68 2 Introduction The Vale of Pickering Historic Environment Management Framework Project was initiated by English Heritage (Yorkshire and Humber Region) in response to a number of factors and issues: The immediate problems raised by the desiccation of the peats at the eastern end of the Vale, at the Early Mesolithic site of Star Carr. The realisation that the exceptional archaeological landscape identified between Rillington and Sherburn cannot adequately be managed through current approaches to designation. The incremental increase in the number of agencies and projects with an interest in the Vale but lacking concerted action or agreement about the qualities that make the Vale of Pickering a unique landscape. The need for an agreed, clear statement on the special character, qualities and attributes of the Vale which can be incorporated into policy documents For English Heritage this Statement of Significance is the first stage in developing an overall strategy for the Vale of Pickering. Once this document has been agreed and endorsed by its partners and co-contributors, the intention is that it will be followed by an Action Plan that will: Illustrate how the special qualities of the Vale can be enhanced through specific projects Seek funding for and propose specific projects and initiatives.
    [Show full text]
  • SAHS Report 51 Forge Survey
    SCARBOROUGH ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL SOCIETY A SURVEY OF THE FORGE, FORGE VALLEY SCARBOROUGH By Trevor Pearson and Martin Bland Scarborough Archaeological and Historical Society Site Report 51 2019 A SURVEY OF THE FORGE, FORGE VALLEY, SCARBOROUGH NORTH YORKSHIRE Trevor Pearson and Martin Bland NGR SE 98449 87104 National Monument Number 1573569 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. SITE LOCATION 2 3. HISTORY OF THE FORGE 4 3.1 Archaeological and historical background 4 3.2 The 18th-century forge 4 3.3 After the forge 7 4. THE 2019 SURVEY 10 5. SUMMARY OF UNDERSTANDING 13 6. CONCLUSIONS 16 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 16 8. REFERENCES 17 9. APPENDICES 19 1. Report on the soil core 19 2. Analysis of iron content from local quarries 19 Scarborough Archaeological and Historical Society. Report 51 First published June 2019 by the Scarborough Archaeological and Historical Society c/o The Street, 12 Lower Clark Street, Scarborough, YO12 7PW www.sahs.org.uk Copyright © 2019 1. Introduction In the spring of 2019 the Scarborough Archaeological and Historical Society (SAHS) undertook a 1:500 scale archaeological survey of the site of Ayton Forge in Forge Valley, near Scarborough (NGR SE 98449 87104). The survey is part of the Society’s on-going research project into the history and development of Forge Valley, Raincliffe and Row Brow Woods which together extend for five miles from Forge Valley in the west along the steep north slope of East Ayton, Seamer and Irton Moors to Racecourse Road (A170) in the east (Figure 1). In 2016-17 the Society completed the first archaeological survey of the woods which preserves a wide range of features from prehistory to the 20th century (SAHS 2018).
    [Show full text]
  • North Yorkshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment Appendix 6: Scarborough-Specific SHMA Analysis November 2011
    AppendixReport 6 GVA 81 Fountain Street Manchester M2 2EE North Yorkshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment Appendix 6: Scarborough-specific SHMA Analysis November 2011 gva.co.uk NYSHP Appendix 6: Scarborough Contents 1. Introduction to the Appendix Document ............................................................. 1 2. Context .................................................................................................................... 4 Part 1: The Current Housing Market.................................................................................... 9 3. Demographic and Economic Context ............................................................... 10 4. The Housing Stock................................................................................................. 34 5. The Active Market................................................................................................. 45 Part 2: Future Housing Market and Need ........................................................................ 71 6. Future Housing Market ......................................................................................... 72 7. Housing Need ....................................................................................................... 96 8. Drawing the Evidence Together – Conclusion ................................................. 130 Prepared By .A. Pollard / M. Spilsbury .. Status Associate / Senior .. Date 15 – 11 – 2011 ................. Reviewed By Richard Laming .............. Status . Director .................
    [Show full text]