PLANNING ACT 2008 INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING (APPLICATIONS: PRESCRIBED FORMS AND PROCEDURE) REGULATIONS 2009 REGULATION 5 (2) (a) PROPOSED PORT TERMINAL AT FORMER TILBURY POWER STATION TILBURY2 TRO30003 VOLUME 6 PART 3 ES APPENDIX 12.B: BUILT HERITAGE ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT REF: 6.2 12.B Built Heritage Assessment In respect of Tilbury2 Land at former RWE Power Station Tilbury Essex On behalf of Port of Tilbury London Ltd CgMs Ref: JCG22584 October 2017 rpsgroup.com/uk | cgms.co.uk CONTENTS CONTENTS Pages Prepared by: 1.0 Introduction 3 Nicola Storey BA (Hons) MA 2.0 Legislative and Planning Policy Framework 2.1 Legislation and National Planning Policy 5 Louise Ryan BA (Hons) MSc 2.2 National Planning Guidance 7 2.3 Local Planning Policy and Guidance 9 3.0 Architectural and Historical Appraisal Authorised by: 3.1 Historical Development: Tilbury 11 3.2 Historical Development: Tilbury Fort 13 Jonathan Smith BA (Hons) MA PGCE PGDip MCIfA IHBC 3.3 Historical Development: Tilbury Power Station 16 3.4 Historic Map Progression 17 4.0 Site Assessment 20 Report Status: 5.0 Proposals and Assessment of Impact Final 5.1 Development Proposals 23 5.2 Identification of Heritage Assets and Assessment Methodology 28 5.3 Assessment of Heritage Assets: Scheduled Monuments 32 RPS CgMs Ref: 5.4 Assessment of Heritage Assets: Conservation Areas 55 JCG22584 5.5 Assessment of Heritage Assets: Listed Buildings 68 5.6 Assessment of Non-Designated Heritage Assets 81 5.7 Cumulative Impacts 82 Issue Date: 6.0 Summary 84 October 2017 Appendices Appendix A: References COPYRIGHT © CgMs Part of the RPS Appendix B: Viewpoint Locations The material presented in this report is confidential. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Port of Tilbury London Ltd and shall not be distributed or made available to any other company or person without the knowledge and written consent of CgMs Part of the RPS Group. © Ordnance Survey maps have been reproduced with the sanction of the controller of HM Stationery Office. Licence No: AL 100014723 rpsgroup.com/uk | cgms.co.uk 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This Built Heritage Assessment has been prepared by CgMs Heritage (part of RPS) on behalf of Port of Tilbury London Ltd (PoTLL), in relation to the proposed redevelopment of Land at the former RWE Power Station. 1.2 The proposed redevelopment is for a new port terminal, known as ‘Tilbury2’. The proposed main uses on the Tilbury2 Site will be a Roll -on/Roll-off (RoRo) terminal and a Construction Materials and Aggregates terminal (the “CMAT”), and associated infrastructure including rail and road facilities and revisions to the existing marine infrastructure. An 'infrastructure corridor' is proposed that will accommodate road and rail links to the existing rail and road network. The CMAT will include stockpiling of construction materials and some processing of aggregates for the production of asphalt and concrete products. 1.3 For clarity, the following terms are used within this report and defined as follows, as set out within the ES Glossary: ‘the Order Limits’ - The extent of land and rights over land that will be Figure 1: Aerial View of the bulk of part of the main Tilbury2 Site, showing its proximity to the Figure 2: The Order Limits. (Source: Atkins) needed temporarily to construct the proposals, and permanently to River Thames, the Anglian Water Recycling Centre to the west and existing Tilbury B Power Station to the east (due to be demolished). The area is principally defined by industrial uses operate, maintain and safeguard the proposals (often referred to as and marshland. (Source: PoTLL) ‘the red line boundary’ or ‘the Site boundary’). ‘the Tilbury2 Site’ - The site of the proposed RoRo and CMAT terminals and associated infrastructure. ‘the Site’ - The Tilbury2 Site; The infrastructure corridor; and Sections of the tidal Thames required for the construction of expanded berthing capacity and associated dredging. 1.4 The proposed volumes of import/export on RoRo units for the terminal exceed the threshold of 250,000 units stated in the Planning Act 2008 for throughput per annum. The Tilbury2 project therefore constitutes a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP). 1.5 The Site does not contain any designated or non-designated built heritage assets. It does, however, lie within the vicinity of a large number of designated and non-designated heritage assets on both the north (Essex) and south (Kent) sides of the River Thames, including Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas. In particular, the Site lies in close proximity to Tilbury Fort, a Scheduled Monument which is considered to be England’s most spectacular surviving example of a late seventeenth century coastal fort. A number of other historic coastal forts also lie within the vicinity of the Site. 1.6 As such, any potential impact caused by the Proposals will stem from Figure 3: Aerial view of the Site and its surroundings. The Port of Tilbury is situated to the west of the Site, surrounding the docks. Industrial and commercial uses largely characterise the land on both effects upon the settings of built heritage assets that lie outside of the sides of the river. Tilbury Fort is visible in aerial views in close proximity to the Site, ‘sandwiched’ between two industrial areas, defined by the existing Port of Tilbury and the Anglian Water Recycling Site boundary. The NPPF defines ‘setting’ as: Centre and Tilbury Power Station site. The red outline indicates the rough location of the main Tilbury2 Site; the extent of which is shown in detail in Figure 2. (Source: Google Maps) ‘The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings rpsgroup.com/uk | cgms.co.uk 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative 1.13 Essentially, this Built Heritage Assessment has been completed in contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to order to assist those involved in considering the application, appreciate that significance or may be neutral.’ specifically with regard to aspects concerning the setting and significance of built heritage assets. 1.7 By virtue of Paragraph 5.12.6 of the National Policy Statement for Ports (NPS) and Paragraph 128 of the National Planning Policy 1.14 The Built Heritage Assessment should be read alongside all Framework (NPPF), applicants are required to describe the documents submitted as part of the DCO, in particular including the significance of any heritage assets affected by the Proposals, full ES and its appendices, General Arrangement Plans, Engineering including any contribution made by their setting to that significance, Section Drawings and Plans, and the Masterplanning Statement and to assess the impacts of the Proposals upon that significance. (document reference 6.2 5A) which provides justification for the various elements of the Proposals, their scale and locations. 1.8 Section 2.0 of this Built Heritage Assessment sets out the relevant legislative framework and planning policy at national and local levels, with special regard to policies that relate to development affecting the setting of heritage assets. 1.9 Section 3.0 provides an assessment of the historic development of the surrounding area and the Site itself, including a historic map appraisal, in order to further understand the historic context in which the Site lies. 1.10 Section 4.0 provides a description of the Site and its surroundings. This is based on a suite of site/study area visits undertaken between September 2016 and May 2017. 1.11 Section 5.0 provides an assessment of the Proposals and their potential impact upon the surrounding built heritage assets. Section 5.2 identifies the designated and non-designated built heritage assets that surround the Site. The Historic Environment Records (HER) for both Essex and Kent have been consulted, in addition to the National Heritage List for England (NHLE) and relevant Local Planning Authority documentation, such as conservation area appraisals. The assessment methodology is also outlined in Section 5.2; of particular importance, the methodology for assessing setting is detailed. 1.12 Sections 5.3 to 5.6 provide an assessment of the significance of the identified built heritage assets, including any contribution of their settings. The potential impacts of the Proposals upon this significance has subsequently been assessed. The assessment of potential impacts is supported by a series of wireline images of the Proposals from viewpoint locations that have been agreed with Historic England. These wirelines illustrate the maximum parameters of the Proposals (‘worst case’ scenario) and thus the potential visual impacts of the development upon the surrounding heritage assets. Ultimately, this report forms Technical Appendix 12.B to Chapter 12 (Archaeology and Cultural Heritage) of the Environment Statement (ES). rpsgroup.com/uk | cgms.co.uk 4 2.0 LEGISLATIVE & PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK 2.1 LEGISLATION & NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY 2.1.1. Section 2.0 outlines the relevant legislation and national and local 2.1.7 Regulation 3 states that: 2.1.12 Paragraph 5.12.5 further states that: “The decision-maker should planning policy context relating to Nationally Significant also consider the impacts on other non-designated heritage 1) “When deciding an application which affects a listed building or its Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) and built heritage assets. assets, as identified either through the development plan making setting, the decision-maker must have regard to the desirability of process (local listing) or through the decision-making process on preserving the listed building or its setting or any features of 2.1.2. The current national policy system identifies, through the National the basis of clear evidence that the assets have a significance special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.