Heritage Impact Assessment

HILL HOUSE

SAPISTON

Michael Collins

May 2021

Listed Building Planning Consultant PO Box 383 Eye Suffolk IP23 9AN t. 07809-131768 e. [email protected] Hill House, Sapiston

HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Hill House, Sapiston

INTRODUCTION

001 Heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. Conservation is the process of managing change to a heritage asset in a way that sustains and, where appropriate, enhances its significance. Significance is derived not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence but also from its setting. Being able to properly assess the nature, extent and importance of the significance of a heritage asset is important to understanding the potential impact of any proposal. What matters in assessing whether a proposal might cause harm is the impact on the significance of the heritage asset. Actions to conserve heritage assets need to be proportionate to their significance and to the impact on that significance.

Conservation is achieved by all concerned with a significant place sharing an understanding of its significance, and using that understanding to judge how its heritage values are vulnerable to change; to take the actions and impose the constraints necessary to sustain those values; and to ensure that the place retains its authenticity – those attributes and elements which most truthfully reflect and embody the heritage values attached to it (‘Conservation Principles’; Historic England, 2008).

002 Designated heritage assets are those assets which have been recognised for their particular heritage value and which have been given formal status under law and policy that is intended to sustain those values. Hill House is a building listed under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 for its special architectural or historic interest. The report focuses on this building as a heritage asset that is affected by a proposal which is the subject of an application for listed building consent. The report adopts a narrative format which describes what matters and why in terms of the significance of the affected heritage asset. The report also considers the potential impact of the proposal and the justification for any harm as part of a staged approach to decision-making concerning change that affects a heritage asset.

1

Hill House, Sapiston

ASSESSING HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE

003 An assessment of the significance of a heritage asset should be undertaken as part of a staged approach to decision-making in which assessing significance precedes the design of any proposal. Significance is defined in national planning policy as the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may, inter alia, be architectural or historic. The first is an interest in the design and aesthetics of a place which can arise from conscious design or, equally, from the way in which the heritage asset has fortuitously evolved over time. It is specifically an interest in the art or science of the design, construction, craftsmanship and decoration of buildings. The second is an interest in past lives and events and heritage assets can illustrate or be associated with them.

Hill House. 14.12.1983. II. House. C17. One-and-a-half storeys. Timber-framed and plastered. Thatched roof with ornamental ridge. Two internal chimney- stacks. Gabled porch with thatched roof. C20 casement windows. One gabled dormer on front, one eyebrow dormer on rear. A C19 single-storey lean-to extension along the rear wall in red brick with pantiled roof and another along the east gable wall (NHLE 1225780).

004 The Secretary of State has a duty to compile a list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest as a guide to the planning authorities when carrying out their planning functions. The term special architectural or historic interest of a listed building is used to describe all or part of what is referred to as the heritage asset’s significance. Hill House was entered on the List in the 1980s and was classified as a grade II listed building for being of special interest and warranting every effort to preserve it. The building is a designated heritage asset for the purpose of planning policy.

005 The parish of Sapiston was added to the Euston Hall estate in the mid- eighteenth century at about the time that the Hall was itself being remodelled for Charles FitzRoy, 2nd Duke of Grafton (1683-1757). Charles was the grandson of the Earl of Arlington who had acquired the manor of Euston in 1666. The Earl himself had remodelled the Elizabethan manor house and obtained a licence to impark 2000 acres of land. The remodelling of the Hall for the 2nd Duke was undertaken between 1750 and 1756 but only the north wing and part of the west wing of Matthew Brettingham’s mansion remains standing following a fire in 1902. The Hall continues to be the seat of the Dukes of Grafton.

2

Hill House, Sapiston

Fig.1 Survey of Euston Hall estate (1828)

Fig.2 Detail of plot 67 (1828)

3

Hill House, Sapiston

Fig.3 1st edition OS map (1883; surveyed 1882)

Fig.4 2nd edition OS map (1904; revised 1903)

4

Hill House, Sapiston

006 Euston Hall stands on the east bank of the river Black Bourne. About two miles upstream from the Hall the same river formed the boundary between the parishes of Honington and Sapiston. The crossing point of the river (Sapiston Bridge) was recorded in an early nineteenth century survey of the estate which was undertaken for George FitzRoy, 4th Duke of Grafton (1760-1844). The 1828 survey also noted a pair of cottages which stood at the edge of the village and which were photographed from the vicinity of the river in the early twentieth century (c.1930). The cottage which stood on plot 66 was demolished in the mid-twentieth century but that on plot 67 remains standing.

007 The cottage on plot 67 was shown on the 1882 survey as having been subdivided into a terrace of three dwellings by that date (plot 113). The footprint of the building appeared wider as a result of a new single- storey addition to the rear which had been placed along the length of the building and which had replaced an earlier extension. The early twentieth century photograph recorded the cottage in its converted form, complete with three entrance doors and rear additions. Also shown on the 1882 survey was the new school which had been built on plot 67 in 1841 as part of estate improvements by the 4th Duke.

008 The cottage on plot 67 predominantly housed farm workers and was later known as Hill Cottages. One inhabitant of the cottage in the nineteenth century appears to have been James Borley (c.1810-91) who was documented throughout his lifetime as an agricultural labourer (1841x91). The Borleys were first recorded in Sapiston in the 1730s and a building known as Borley Cottages previously stood in Bardwell Road (c.1844). This building housed James’ brother, Drury, in the mid-nineteenth century and records suggest that it was previously the home of their parents, John and Rose Borley.

009 James Borley married Maria Simpson in 1841 and they had three children who were all born in the 1840s (Maria, Benjamin, and Ellen). Maria (c.1820-99) was the daughter of John and Maria Simpson who had been the subject of a Removal Order to Sapiston in 1830 and who, in 1841, appear to have occupied Hill Cottages. James and Maria resided with them at this date and afterwards remained there in their own right (1851x91). Their eldest daughter, Maria, and her husband, George Gaught, both died in the 1880s and, in 1891, their grandsons, Arthur and Ebenezer, were residing with them at Hill Cottages.

5

Hill House, Sapiston

Fig.5 Pair of cottages (plots 66 and 67; photographed c.1930)

Fig.6 Subdivided cottage (Hill Cottages; photographed c.1930)

6

Hill House, Sapiston

Fig.7 Hill Cottages (photographed 1970)

Fig.8 Hill Cottage (photographed 1972)

7

Hill House, Sapiston

010 Hill House appears to date from the early seventeenth century and comprised a typical three-cell domestic plan form in which a central hall was flanked by a service room to the left (east) and a parlour to the right (west). The hall and parlour were separated by a chimney- stack which was constructed within the hall bay and positioned against the high-end wall. The chimney-stack possessed back-to-back fireplaces and the hall, which would have operated as a kitchen, was provided with one of greater width beneath a timber lintel for cooking purposes. The parlour was heated by a smaller fireplace and would have been used as the main bedroom at that date. The parlour has carved ceiling joists which is indicative of the increasing use of such a room by that date for the purposes of sitting and entertaining. The upper floor of the building would have been used for storage purposes.

011 The building was subsequently converted into a terrace of three dwellings in the early nineteenth century. The subdivision of the building obeyed the cell divisions of the original house and each dwelling was provided with its own entrance door, staircase and fireplace. The back-to-back fireplaces of the earlier chimney-stack served those dwellings that occupied the former hall and parlour, whilst an eighteenth century gable end stack provided the dwelling in the former service cell with its own fireplace. The chambers were divided longitudinally to provide each dwelling with a pair of unheated bedrooms on the upper floor. Openings in the gable walls served the upper rooms of the end dwellings, whilst the central dwelling was provided with a small dormer in both roof-slopes. The service room of each dwelling was housed within the single-storey addition to the rear.

012 Hill Cottages remained part of the Euston Hall estate until the late twentieth century when it was sold by Hugh FitzRoy, 11th Duke of Grafton (1919-2011). The building was photographed in 1970 as a terrace and again in 1972 having then been restored to a single dwelling. The early 1970s alterations included the removal of the three staircases and the replacement of all of the windows and doors. A porch and a pair of dormers were also constructed at this date. The conversion removed much of the early nineteenth century layer from the building and provided the cottage with a lobby-entry plan form which was typical of the mid to late seventeenth century.

8

Hill House, Sapiston

Fig.9 Hill House (photographed 2020)

Fig.10 Front elevation from NNW Fig.11 Rear elevation from SSE

Fig.12 Front elevation from north Fig.13 Rear elevation from south

9

Hill House, Sapiston

SYNOPSIS

013 Hill House has been included in a list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest. In legislation and designation criteria, the term special architectural or historic interest of a listed building is used to describe what, in planning terms, is referred to as the identified heritage asset’s significance. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence but also from its setting, and is defined as the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be architectural or historic. The first is an interest in the design and aesthetics of a place, whilst the second is an interest in past lives and events.

014 Sapiston is located in an area of transition between the central clay belt and the light soils to the north-west of the county. Large estates flourished on the lighter soils across the county and the parish of Sapiston was added to the Euston Hall estate in the mid-eighteenth century. Hill House was entered on the List in 1983 and the timber- framed cottage appears to date from the early seventeenth century. The house possessed a typical three-cell domestic plan form before its conversion into a terrace of three dwellings in the early nineteenth century. The property was sold by the estate in the late twentieth century and the terrace subsequently reverted to a single cottage.

Evidential value derives from the physical remains that have been inherited from the past. Historical value derives from the ways in which past people and aspects of life can be connected through a place to the present. Aesthetic value derives from the ways in which people draw sensory and intellectual stimulation from a place (‘Conservation Principles’; Historic England, 2008).

015 The significance of a place is the sum of its heritage values. Hill House derives evidential value from the physical remains of the timber-framed structure and historical value from the building being illustrative of both vernacular design and the manner in which such buildings were used. Further historical value is derived from the past association of Hill House with Euston Hall and from its role in providing accommodation for estate workers. Hill House also possesses aesthetic value which is derived from its traditional form and appearance. This contributes to local distinctiveness.

10

Hill House, Sapiston

MANAGING CHANGE TO SIGNIFICANT PLACES

016 Planning Practice Guidance (2019) advises that any decisions where listed buildings are a factor must address the statutory considerations of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, as well as applying the relevant policies in the Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

017 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that, where regard is to be had to the Development Plan, decisions shall be made in accordance with the Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In determining an application for planning permission, the order of precedence of statutory duties is to make a decision in accordance with the Plan, so far as it is material; to have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building, its setting, and any features of special interest; and to have regard to any other material consideration. Whilst there is no explicit requirement to consider the Plan in determining an application for listed building consent, any relevant policy will be a material consideration.

018 Section 16(2) of the 1990 Act places a duty upon the local planning authority to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the listed building or its setting.

In considering whether to grant listed building consent for any works, the local planning authority shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses (section 16(2); Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990).

019 Preservation has been interpreted by the courts as meaning to keep safe from harm – that is, not harming the special interest of an individual building, its significance, as opposed to preventing any change. The desirability of preserving a listed building has been determined by the courts to be a consideration which must be regarded as having considerable importance and weight.

020 The Development Plan for West Suffolk Council includes the policies of the Joint Development Management Policies Document (2015). The JDMPD contains a specific policy for proposals for the alteration of a listed building (policy DM15). This policy includes the provision that the level of detail submitted with an application should be proportionate

11

Hill House, Sapiston

to the importance of the building and should be sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on its significance.

Proposals to alter a listed building will be permitted where they: demonstrate a clear understanding of the significance of the building, alongside an assessment of the potential impact of the proposal on that significance; contribute to the preservation of the building; are not detrimental to the building’s character or any architectural, archaeological, artistic or historic features that contribute towards its special interest; are of an appropriate scale, form, and design which respects the existing building; use appropriate materials and methods of construction which respect the character of the building; have regard to the historic internal layout and other internal features of importance; and have regard to the present and future economic viability or function of the listed building. All development proposals should provide a clear justification for the works, especially if these works would harm the listed building, so that the harm can be weighed against any public benefits. The level of detail of any supporting information should be proportionate to the importance of the building, the works proposed, and sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on its significance (policy DM15; Joint Development Management Policies Document 2015).

021 The NPPF (2019) states that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. Conservation is defined as the process of managing change to a heritage asset in a way that sustains and, where appropriate, enhances its significance. Designated heritage assets are those assets which have been recognised for their particular heritage value and which have been given formal status under law and policy that is intended to sustain those values (eg. listed buildings).

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. Any harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset should require clear and convincing justification (paragraphs 193 and 194; National Planning Policy Framework 2019).

022 What matters, when assessing whether proposals cause harm, is the impact on the significance of the heritage asset. Balanced and justifiable decisions depend upon understanding the values of the affected heritage asset and, with it, the ability to understand the impact of a proposal on its significance. An assessment of the affected heritage asset provides a baseline for considering the impact of a proposal on its significance.

12

Hill House, Sapiston

023 Hill House was entered on the list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest in 1983 and comprised a single residence at the date of its listing. The building appears to be of early seventeenth century date and possessed a typical three-cell domestic plan form before its conversion into a terrace of three dwellings in the early nineteenth century. The building was sold by the Euston Hall estate in the late twentieth century and the terrace subsequently reverted to a single cottage. The building is now a designated heritage asset for the purpose of planning policy.

024 The owners of Hill House acquired the property in 2016 and their objective is to replace all of the windows in the main house. An assessment of the significance of the windows and the contribution they make to the overall significance of a building should determine the right course of action. Surviving historic windows are an irreplaceable resource and Historic England encourages the retention of windows that contribute to the significance of listed buildings.

Where historic windows (whether original or later insertions) make a positive contribution to the significance of a listed building they should be retained and repaired where possible. If beyond repair historic windows should be replaced with accurate copies. Where historic windows have already been replaced with windows whose design follows historic patterns, these usually make a positive contribution to the significance of listed buildings. When they do, these replacements should be retained and repaired where possible. If beyond repair they should be replaced with accurate copies (‘Traditional Windows’; Historic England 2017).

025 Planning permission was granted in 1971 for the conversion of the three dwellings into a single residence (ref. 484/71). The drawings which accompanied that application recorded the arrangement of window openings at that date. Those openings in the front wall of the building originated with the subdivision of the building into three dwellings. In 1970 each of these openings housed a small-paned two-light casement as recorded by a photograph of that date. The works of conversion in 1972 included the removal of these windows and the formation of new openings, effectively removing a layer of history from the building. The 1971 drawings included a note which stated remove all windows and insert new Boulton and Paul windows, whilst the 1972 sale particulars for Hill Cottage confirmed that the works had included new windows throughout. The 1983 list entry duly recorded that the building possessed twentieth century casement windows at that date.

13

Hill House, Sapiston

026 Hill House has nineteen window openings in which six types of window treatment can be identified. No existing window pre-dates the 1972 conversion and the distinguishing features of the earliest window type are storm-proof sections, opening and fixed lights, side-hung casements, top-hung fan lights, and small-paned single-glazing. All windows are made of timber and all are provided with a painted finish.

Type Description Total Opening

1 Window of 1972 date which remains unaltered 9 6-7 9-13 18-19

2 Window of 1972 date which has been modified; at least 3 1-3 one of the lights has been replaced with a single-glazed storm-proof light of a second design; top-hung fan light omitted 3 Window of 1972 date has been replaced in its entirety; 2 4-5 replacement window has single-glazed storm-proof lights of a second design; top-hung fan light omitted

4 Window of 1972 date has been replaced in its entirety; 1 8 replacement window has single-glazed storm-proof lights of a second design; top-hung fan light retained

5 Window inserted in opening formed since 1972; window 1 17 has double-glazed storm-proof lights of a third design; top- hung fan light provided

6 Window of 1972 date has been replaced in its entirety; 3 14-16 replacement window has double-glazed storm-proof light of a fourth design; top-hung fan light omitted

027 No historic windows survive in Hill House and the design of the existing windows does not follow historic patterns. It may therefore be stated that the existing windows in Hill House do not make a positive contribution to the significance of the building. The NPPF (2019) states that local planning authorities should take account of the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and this is also reflected in Historic England guidance.

Where historic windows have been replaced with ones whose design does not follow historic patterns, these are unlikely to contribute to the significance of listed buildings. Replacing such windows with new windows of a sympathetic historic pattern, whether single-glazed or incorporating slim- profile double-glazing, may cause no additional harm. It also provides an opportunity to enhance the significance of the building which is the desired outcome under national policy (‘Traditional Windows’; Historic England 2017).

14

Hill House, Sapiston

Fig.14 Existing window openings (nos. 1-19)

Fig.15 Earliest window type together with internal secondary glazing (no. 6)

15

Hill House, Sapiston

Fig.16 Type 1 (no. 6) Fig.17 Type 1 (no. 7)

Fig.18 Type 1 (no. 12) Fig.19 Type 2 (no. 3)

Fig.20 Type 3 (no. 5) Fig.21 Type 4 (no. 8)

Fig.22 Type 5 (no. 17) Fig.23 Type 6 (no. 16)

16

Hill House, Sapiston

028 Historic England also state in HEAN2 that the replacement of unsuitable modern windows with more historically appropriate windows is likely to be an enhancement (‘Making Changes to Heritage Assets’; Historic England 2016). An opportunity therefore exists for considered change and for the enhancement of the aesthetic values of Hill House.

029 The assessment has identified that there are two options which should be considered in this instance. Both options need to take into account the position and size of the existing openings. One option is to consider the replacement of the modern windows with small-paned flush casements as previously existed within the building in 1970. Whilst the reinstatement within the same opening of a window that matches that which was removed is often the right course of action, it is a matter of fact in this instance that the openings that were present in the front elevation of the building in 1970 are no longer in existence.

030 On the basis that the façade in which those casements were housed is not to be recovered (given the change of use which occurred in 1972), an alternative is to consider examples of other window types which remain in similar buildings in the locality.

Where a window that diminishes the significance of the building is to be replaced, the new window should be designed to be in keeping with the period and architectural style of the building. It may be possible to base the design on windows that survive elsewhere in the building or it may be necessary to look for examples in other buildings of the same period and style close by (‘Traditional Windows’; Historic England 2017).

031 An example of an appropriate window style is to be found within the same parish. Triangle House is a former farmhouse of seventeenth century date which appears on the 1828 survey as Triangular Farm. This was Austin’s Farm where the poet Robert Bloomfield (1766-1823) spent time in the late 1770s. A drawing of the house entitled The Farm House at Sapiston was published in 1806 in Views illustrative of the Works of Robert Bloomfield (James Sargant Storer). The 1983 list entry for the grade II listed building makes reference to nineteenth century barred casement windows (NHLE 1066581) which appear in a photograph of the building that was taken in the early twentieth century.

17

Hill House, Sapiston

Fig.24 The Farm House at Sapiston (drawing published 1806)

Fig.25 Triangular Farm (survey of Euston Hall Estate 1828)

18

Hill House, Sapiston

Fig.26 Triangle House (photographed early C20)

Fig.27 Triangle House (photographed 2020)

19

Hill House, Sapiston

032 Houses of considerable age typically possess more than one style of window. A second option for Hill House would be to consider the replacement of the modern windows with a mix of historically appropriate flush casements. A barred casement window could be inserted in the lower floor of the building in each of the three openings in the front (north) wall and in the single opening in the side (west) wall. Small-paned casement windows could be inserted in the single-storey addition to the rear and this style could also be considered for the front and rear dormer additions. Casements with either a central glazing-bar or small-paned to match elsewhere could then be inserted in the remaining openings within the porch addition, to the kitchen (side wall), and to the upper floor in both end gables.

In cases where the significance of a building has been harmed by the installation of replacement windows of non-historic design, consideration may be given to the installation of new slim-profile double-glazed replacement windows where the new windows are of a more sympathetic design and the net impact on significance will be neutral or positive, and no incidental damage to the building fabric will result from the removal of the existing windows (‘Traditional Windows’; Historic England 2017).

033 Two options have been identified for the replacement of the modern casement windows at Hill House. Both options would be capable of incorporating slim-profile double-glazing as an alternative to the aluminium secondary glazing that is presently installed within the timber-framed section of the building. Two of the openings in the front wall of the building would require a minor adjustment to the width of the opening in order to receive a correctly proportioned barred casement window. In this instance such a change can be achieved without harm to the significance of the building as a result of past disruption to the historic fabric of the areas in question that was caused by the conversion works of the early nineteenth century and the early 1970s, and by the structural works of the early 1990s (ref. 93/1586/LB).

034 Both options represent an opportunity to enhance the aesthetic values of Hill House. This is highly desirable in policy terms. The report accompanies an application that seeks listed building consent for the insertion of a mix of historically appropriate flush casement timber windows (the second option). Other works included within the submission are the replacement of external doors, the reinstatement of a pentice board, external redecoration, and the removal of an internal partition wall (masonry) within the much-altered rear addition.

20

Hill House, Sapiston

Fig.28 Front elevation as existing (Tim Moll Architecture)

Fig.29 Front elevation as proposed (Tim Moll Architecture)

21

Hill House, Sapiston

CONCLUSION

035 Local planning authorities should take account of the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets when determining applications. An understanding of the significance of a heritage asset should result in the development of a proposal which avoids harm. What matters in assessing whether a proposal may cause harm is the impact on the significance of the heritage asset.

036 Hill House appears to date from the early seventeenth century and has been included in a list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest. The timber-framed cottage was converted into a terrace of three dwellings in the early nineteenth century but reverted to a single residence following its sale by the Euston Hall estate. The works of conversion in the early 1970s included the replacement of all windows throughout the building. No historic windows survive in Hill House and the design of the existing windows does not follow historic patterns. The application proposes the insertion of a mix of historically appropriate flush casement timber windows. The new windows would incorporate slim-profile double-glazing as an alternative to the secondary glazing that presently exists within the building.

037 There is a requirement in this matter to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the listed building and to have regard to any other material consideration. The modern windows do not make a positive contribution to the significance of the building and therefore an opportunity is presented for enhancement. The replacement of these windows as proposed would enhance the aesthetic value of Hill House without causing harm to the evidential and historical value of the building. This is highly desirable in conservation terms. It may therefore be concluded that the proposal satisfies the statutorily desirable objective that is contained within section 16(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and does not conflict with the heritage-specific policies contained within both the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) and the West Suffolk Joint Development Management Policies Document (2015).

22