Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
T H A M E S V A L L E Y ARCHAEOLOGICAL S E R V I C E S Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire Archaeological Desk-based Assessment by Richard Tabor Site Code NRR14/164 (SU 2824 7170) Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire Archaeological Desk-based Assessment for Rectory Homes by Richard Tabor Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd Site Code NRR 14/164 September 2014 Summary Site name: Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire Grid reference: SU 2824 7170 Site activity: Archaeological desk-based assessment Project manager: Steve Ford Site supervisor: Richard Tabor Site code: NRR 14/164 Area of site: c. 2.83 ha Summary of results: The assessment has found no recorded heritage assets within the proposal site and few of interest in immediately adjacent areas. However, the site occupies a relatively large parcel of land within the archaeologically rich Kennet Valley. Once a planning consent has been gained, it is considered that it may be necessary to provide further information on the archaeological potential of the site by means of field evaluation. Such a scheme could be carried out by an appropriately worded condition attached to any consent gained This report may be copied for bona fide research or planning purposes without the explicit permission of the copyright holder. All TVAS unpublished fieldwork reports are available on our website: www.tvas.co.uk/reports/reports.asp. Report edited/checked by: Steve Ford 19.09.14 i Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd, 47–49 De Beauvoir Road, Reading RG1 5NR Tel. (0118) 926 0552; Fax (0118) 926 0553; email: [email protected]; website: www.tvas.co.uk Land at Newtown Road, Ramsbury, Wiltshire Archaeological Desk-based Assessment by Richard Tabor Report 14/164 Introduction This report is an assessment of the archaeological potential of approximately 2.8ha of land located between Newtown Road and Whittonditch Road on the eastern side of Ramsbury, Wiltshire (SU 2824 7170; Fig. 1). The project was commissioned by Mr Dan Moore of Rectory Homes, Rectory House, Thame Road, Haddenham, Aylesbury Bucks, HP17 8DA and comprises the first stage of a process to determine the presence/absence, extent, character, quality and date of any archaeological remains which may be affected by redevelopment of the area. Planning consent is to be sought from Wiltshire Council for residential development of a field. This assessment will accompany the application in order to inform the planning process with regard to potential archaeological and heritage implications. This is in accordance with the Department for Communities and Local Government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2012) and the Council’s heritage policies. Site description, location and geology The village of Ramsbury lies in the Kennet Valley near the border with Berkshire. It is c. 9km east of Marlborough and 7km west of Hungerford (Fig. 1). The proposal site is an irregularly polygonal field on a south-facing slope. From the southern end, close to the floor of the valley and to the river Kennet, the ground rises fairly evenly from c. 111m above Ordnance Datum (aOD) to c. 129m aOD at the boundary with Whittonditch Road to the north. The field is enclosed entirely by hedges with wooden fences (Pl. 1), apart from a strip along the north of the eastern side where a fence alone separated it from another field. Newtown Road is immediately beyond the southern hedge and the grounds of larger houses occupy the southern end either side of the western (Pl. 2) and eastern boundaries (Pl. 3). The gardens of houses beyond the north boundary are mainly long and narrow (Pl. 4). One such strip forms part of the site and extends to Whittonditch Road, giving its northernmost limit. The site lies on Seaford Chalk Formation (BGS 2014). At the time of a site visit on 20th August 2014 the entire field was under grass. 1 Planning background and development proposals The Department for Communities and Local Government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2012) sets out the framework within which local planning authorities should consider the importance of conserving, or enhancing, aspects of the historic environment, within the planning process. It requires an applicant for planning consent to provide, as part of any application, sufficient information to enable the local planning authority to assess the significance of any heritage assets which may be affected by the proposal. The Historic Environment is defined (NPPF 2012, 52) 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.’ Paragraphs 128 and 129 state that: ‘128. In determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary. Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation. ‘129. Local planning authorities should identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal (including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset) taking account of the available evidence and any necessary expertise. They should take this assessment into account when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal.’ A ‘heritage asset’ is defined (NPPF 2012, 52) 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 asset includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing).’ ‘Designated heritage asset’ includes (NPPF 2012, 51) any ‘World Heritage Site, Scheduled Monument, Listed Building, Protected Wreck Site, Registered Park and Garden, Registered Battlefield or Conservation Area designated under the relevant legislation.’ ‘Archaeological interest’ is glossed (NPPF 2012, 50) as follows: ‘There will be archaeological interest in a heritage asset if it holds, or potentially may hold, evidence of past human activity worthy of expert investigation at some point. Heritage assets with archaeological interest are the primary source of evidence about the substance and evolution of places, and of the people and cultures that made them.’ Specific guidance on assessing significance and the impact of the proposal is contained in paragraphs 131 to 135: 2 ‘131. In determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of: the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. ‘132. 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. 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. ‘133. Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss, or all of the following apply: the nature of the heritage asset prevents all reasonable uses of the site; and no viable use of the heritage asset itself can be found in the medium term through appropriate marketing that will enable its conservation; and conservation by grant-funding or some form of charitable or public ownership is demonstrably not possible; and the harm or loss is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use. ‘134. Where a development proposal 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, including securing its optimum viable use. ‘135.