Heritage Supporting Statement

137-139 Horninglow Street, Burton on Trent Appeal of Application No. P/2016/00839

J T Leavesley

Project Number: 60532899

March 2017

Heritage Supporting Statement

Quality information

Prepared by Checked by Approved by

Clara Turlington Andy Copp Annette Roe Principal Heritage Consultant Senior Heritage Consultant Regional Director

Revision History

Revision Revision date Details Authorized Name Position

Distribution List

# Hard Copies PDF Required Association / Company Name

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM

Heritage Supporting Statement

Prepared for:

J T Leavesley J T Leavesley Limited Ryknield House, Alrewas, Burton upon Trent, Staffs, DE13 7AB, United Kingdom

Prepared by:

Clara Turlington Principal Heritage Consultant T: 0113 204 5040 M: 07824 597 088 E: [email protected]

AECOM Limited 5th Floor 2 City Walk Leeds LS11 9AR UK

T: +44 (0)113 391 6800 aecom.com

© 2017 AECOM Limited. All Rights Reserved.

This document has been prepared by AECOM Limited (“AECOM”) for sole use of our client (the “Client”) in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed between AECOM and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM

Heritage Supporting Statement

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 6 1.1 Instructions ...... 6 1.2 Site location ...... 6 1.3 Site Details ...... 6 1.4 Background ...... 10 1.5 Scope ...... 11 2. Legislation and Planning Policy ...... 12 2.1 Legislation ...... 12 2.2 Adopted Development Plan Policy ...... 12 2.3 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) ...... 16 2.4 National Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) ...... 17 2.5 Historic England Guidance ...... 18 3. Methodology of Assessment ...... 19 3.1 Significance and Setting ...... 19 4. Historical Background ...... 20 4.1 Horninglow Street and Guild Street Conservation Area ...... 20 4.2 Current condition ...... 27 4.3 Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area Designation Document ...... 28 4.4 Statement of Significance ...... 29 5. The Proposed Development ...... 30 5.1 Previous Planning History ...... 30 5.2 Scheme description ...... 30 6. Assessment of Impact ...... 35 6.1 Listed Buildings ...... 35 6.2 Conservation Area ...... 36 6.3 Policy considerations ...... 37 6.4 Conditions ...... 39 6.5 Summary ...... 39 7. Conclusion ...... 40 8. References ...... 43

Figures

Figure 1. Development Site Location Plan ...... 6 Figure 2. 137-139 Horninglow Street – existing south elevation ...... 7 Figure 3. 137-139 Horninglow Street – north elevation ...... 7 Figure 4. Land to the rear of 137-139 Horninglow Street looking north ...... 8 Figure 5. Existing access boundary treatment of 137-139 Horninglow Street ...... 9 Figure 6. Land to the rear of 137-139 Horninglow Street looking south with Plough Maltings in the background 10 Figure 7. Street view of 137-139 Horninglow Street ...... 10 Figure 8. Plough Maltings ...... 21 Figure 9. The Magistrates Court ...... 22 Figure 10. 167, 168 and 168 Horninglow Street ...... 23 Figure 11. East elevation of 169 Horninglow Street showing façade with maltings to the rear ...... 24 Figure 12. 137-141 Horninglow Street ...... 25 Figure 13. 143-146 Horninglow Street ...... 25 Figure 14. Aerial photograph of Horninglow Street, c.1921. No.137-139 is at the centre circled ...... 26 Figure 15. Horninglow Street looking east, early-mid 20th century ...... 27 Figure 16. Extract from the CADD showing Features of Visual Significance...... 29 Figure 17. Railings of the National Brewing Museum opposite Application Site ...... 31 Figure 18. Proposed Site Plan ...... 31 Figure 19. Proposed Street Elevations ...... 32

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 20. Proposed Ground Floor and Landscaping plan ...... 32 Figure 21. Proposed South Elevation ...... 33 Figure 22. Proposed West Elevation ...... 33 Figure 23. Proposed North Elevation ...... 34 Figure 1. Development Site Location Plan ...... 6 Figure 2. 137-139 Horninglow Street – existing south elevation ...... 7 Figure 3. 137-139 Horninglow Street – north elevation ...... 7 Figure 4. Land to the rear of 137-139 Horninglow Street looking north ...... 8 Figure 5. Existing access boundary treatment of 137-139 Horninglow Street ...... 9 Figure 6. Land to the rear of 137-139 Horninglow Street looking south with Plough Maltings in the background.10 Figure 7. Street view of 137-139 Horninglow Street ...... 10 Figure 8. Plough Maltings ...... 21 Figure 9. The Magistrates Court ...... 22 Figure 10. 167, 168 and 168 Horninglow Street ...... 23 Figure 11. East elevation of 169 Horninglow Street showing façade with maltings to the rear ...... 24 Figure 12. 137-141 Horninglow Street ...... 25 Figure 13. 143-146 Horninglow Street ...... 25 Figure 14. Aerial photograph of Horninglow Street, c.1921...... 26 Figure 15. Horninglow Street looking east, early-mid 20th century ...... 27 Figure 16. Extract from the CADD showing Features of Visual Significance...... 29 Figure 17. Railings of the National Brewing Museum opposite Application Site ...... 32 Figure 18. Proposed Site Plan ...... 32 Figure 19. Proposed Street Elevations ...... 33 Figure 20. Proposed Ground Floor and Landscaping plan ...... 33 Figure 21. Proposed South Elevation ...... 34 Figure 22. Proposed West Elevation ...... 34 Figure 23. Proposed North Elevation ...... 35

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM

Heritage Supporting Statement

1. Introduction

1.1 Instructions

This document has been prepared by Clara Turlington, Principal Heritage Consultant at AECOM. AECOM have been instructed by J T Leavesley (the Client) to prepare a Heritage Supporting Statement to support an appeal against the refusal by East Staffordshire Borough Council of Planning Application no. P/2016/00839: Change of use of land for the siting of 49 storage containers, erection of 1.8 metre high entrance gates and 2.4m high security fencing with associated lighting and CCTV for a temporary period of 3 years and demolition of two single storey front extensions and amendments to the frontages of 137-139 Horninglow Street.

1.2 Site location

The proposed site (the Application Site) is located north of the centre of Burton upon Trent at 137-139 Horninglow Street. It is situated opposite the National Brewing Museum (Figure 1) circa 120m south-east of the junction of Horninglow Street and Hawkins Lane. The Coors Brewery Burton on Trent is located to the north and west of the Application Site.

Figure 1. Development Site Location Plan

1.3 Site Details

No.137-139 Horninglow Street comprises two former residential terraces with an archway (below the second bay) to the rear of the property (Figure 2). It dates from the early 19th century. It is constructed of red brick in Flemish Bond with failing render on no. 137 under a concrete slate roof with two truncated ridge brick chimney stacks and uPVC top hung windows set flush with the frontage. There are two later single storey brick flat roofed extensions projecting to the pavement edge. These buildings have undergone a number of alterations with evidence of straight joints and mismatched brick work indicating alterations in a number of phases. The eastern front extension is built is Flemish Bond red brick to lintel height. The courses below the timber cornice detailing are in stretcher bond. The western extension is built in stretcher bond red brick. Both extensions contain remnants of the original building and materials.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 6/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 2. 137-139 Horninglow Street – existing south elevation

Figure 3. 137-139 Horninglow Street – north elevation

The property has a narrow covered alleyway through the centre of the building which provided access to yards at the rear (Figure 3).

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 7/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

To the rear of the property is an area of land of former industrial use, although most industrial buildings have now been demolished. The majority of this area is composed of concrete and blue engineering brick surfaces which comprise the former internal floors of past industrial buildings on the Application Site (Figure 4). An isolated single storey industrial building of red brick construction is located in the north-east of the Application Site and forms part of the north-east boundary of the Application Site. A red brick wall defines the eastern boundary, and a metal fence forms the northern and western boundaries. A metal gate is located in the south of the Application Site (Figure 5)

Figure 4. Land to the rear of 137-139 Horninglow Street looking north

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 8/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 5. Existing access boundary treatment of 137-139 Horninglow Street

The Application Site is located in the Horninglow Street and Guild Street Conservation Area, and a number of designated heritage assets are located in close vicinity. To the east of the Application Site is the Plough Maltings, a Grade II listed Malthouse (NHLE 1374337) which overlooks the Application Site and is visible through the Site Figure 6).

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 9/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 6. Land to the rear of 137-139 Horninglow Street looking south with Plough Maltings in the background

Figure 7. Street view of 137-139 Horninglow Street

South of Horninglow Street, and adjacent to No.137-139, is a Grade II listed former joiner’s shop (NHLE 1374321) which is presently the location of the National Brewery Centre which documents the history of brewing industry in Burton upon Trent and the Bass brewing family’s involvement.

The Application Site is located with the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area. Its location at the edge of the conservation area means that it is in a prominent and visible location. The property, whilst lacking architectural interest, contributes to the historic and social interest of the area and the setting of the listed buildings within the area. The front extensions and inappropriate alterations and lack of original details detract from the original 19th building.

1.4 Background

Permission was granted for the erection of 12 dwellings and associated works at the Application Site in January 2010. However, this permission was not implemented. The Application Site has been marketed for the past seven years for residential development.

In 2012 a planning application (P2012/1544) was made to East Staffordshire Borough Council for change of use of the land for the siting of 49 storage containers, the erection of 2 metre high palladin fencing, and new 2.3 metre high entrance gates, and associated lighting, for a temporary period of 3 years. This was refused by East Staffordshire Borough Council and then dismissed at appeal APP/B3410/A/13/2204133.

The most recent planning application, P/2016/00839, differs from the previous application in that it now includes proposals and enhancements to the properties 137 – 139 Horninglow Street which would be refurbished and would require the demolition of the two single storey front extensions, the reinstatement of the sympathetic property frontage, and the introduction of a low brick wall topped with metal railings to define the front garden areas. To the rear of the property, a 1.8m high palisade fencing would form a secure parking area for use by the offices. The application was also refused.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 10/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

1.5 Scope

The requirement for assessment and its scope is guided by policy contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), specifically paragraph 128 which seeks an assessment proportionate to the asset’s importance and sufficient to understand the potential impacts of the development and to appraise the nature and extent of any impact upon the setting and significance of the heritage assets.

This Heritage Supporting Statement addresses issues raised by the refusal of the most recent application. It considers the heritage significance and the setting of Horninglow Street Conservation Area and the Grade II listed Plough Maltings, and the impact of the proposed development on these identified heritage assets. It addresses the reason for refusal of decision notice P/2016/00839 which states that ‘The proposed storage containers, and associated fencing and gates, by reason of their scale, siting, design, functional and utilitarian appearance, and materials would result in a form of development which is entirely inappropriate and out of context in this prominent gateway location into the town, while also failing to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Horninglow Street Conservation Area, and damaging the setting of the adjoining Grade II listed Plough Maltings. The development is therefore contrary to East Staffordshire Local Plan Policies SP24, SP25, DP1, DP5 and DP6, the National Planning Policy Framework (particularly Sections 7 and 12 and Paragraph 17), and the guidance found within Sections 1.3,1.7, 3.2, 3.4, 3.8, 3.15 and 3.19 of the East Staffordshire Design Guide.’

The Heritage Supporting Statement addresses the statutory provisions of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. It also focuses on the tests in NPPF, specifically paragraph 134 that requires, in instances where development would cause less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated asset, that the harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including its optimum viable use.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 11/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

2. Legislation and Planning Policy

2.1 Legislation

The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the Act) sets out the principal statutory instruments which must be considered in the determination of any application affecting either listed buildings or conservation areas.

Section 66 of 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 which it possesses. By virtue of Section 1(5) of the Act a listed building includes any object or structure within its curtilage.

Conservation areas are areas of special architectural or historic interest the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance. Section 72 requires that in the exercise of planning duties special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas.

2.2 Adopted Development Plan Policy

East Staffordshire Local Plan

The plan provides an introduction to Profile, Issues and Trends effecting East Staffordshire. It specifically discussed the built environment and highlights that the Borough has a vast wealth of heritage assets which contributes to local distinctiveness and sense of place through cultural significance, historic townscapes and the character and setting of villages. There are 25 Conservation Areas, 59 Scheduled Monuments, nearly 900 Listed buildings, one registered Park and Garden and heritage assets ranging from the brewing industrial archaeology to the historic castle of Tutbury.

Burton upon Trent is firmly identified as a brewing town and the location of Molson Coors Brewing Company, Marstons and a growing number of small and independent micro breweries. The architecture and character of the town and its development have been heavily influenced by the brewing industry which sets Burton upon Trent apart from other towns, particularly within Staffordshire.

Burton upon Trent mainly consists of brick built buildings in the typical Staffordshire style such as red and blue brick with blue and slate tiles. Burton upon Trent has retained much of its cohesive historic character and form. Many of the best examples of Victorian architecture is protected by conservation area status, which contain various different characteristics and distinctiveness.

It acknowledges there are areas within the inner Burton upon Trent urban area characterised by pre-1939 housing stock in poorer condition with pockets of deprivation, economic inactivity, socio-economic problems such as low education attainment, low value and low skilled jobs, crime and anti social behaviour. These older buildings and streets have hard urban form with little soft landscaping, trees and open space. It cites the Inner Burton Initiative (IBI) as an initiative that through a series of physical improvement schemes focussed on the regeneration of the inner wards of the town, including Eton Park, Anglesey, Shobnall, Horninglow, South-West Stretton and Burton and aims to improve visual amenity and sustainability for current residents and commercial ventures by encouraging inward investment and migration to these areas.

The plan also states that there are various regeneration projects underway in other areas Burton upon Trent to improve its image including gateway improvements on Derby Road, redevelopment of the market and the regeneration of the Bargates site, a key entrance to the town centre.

It identified the following as key challenge to the Local Plan

 Ensuring that new development does not have a detrimental impact on people’s quality of life or the quality of the Borough’s built and natural environment.

 Raising the standard of design across the Borough to encourage investment and create a high quality urban environment.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 12/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

 Protecting, conserving and enhancing the Borough’s historic assets A series of policies stem from this broad understanding of the challenges facing the built environment of Burton upon Trent.

Strategic Objective 9 Heritage (Historic Environment – Sustainable Management and Use (SO9)

SO9 is to deliver high quality places that conserve and enhance the historic environment whilst promoting local distinctiveness, place making, significance and sustainable development to support heritage-led regeneration and the sustainable use of heritage assets, particularly Burton upon Trent, the market town of Uttoxeter, rural villages and the wider countryside.

Strategic Policy 24 High Quality Design (SP24)

SP24 states that development proposals must contribute positively to the area in which they are proposed and:

 Help to create a sense of place, building on the urban, suburban and rural local character, respecting local patterns of development and the historic environment, and using heritage assets to their best advantage,

 Provide safe communities, through appropriate use of clearly defined public and private spaces, passive surveillance and active frontages,

 Reinforce character and identity, through local distinctiveness,  Be adaptable in order to enable a change of uses where this is possible. This policy lists twelve criteria. The above points are considered particularly applicable to the application

Strategic Policy 25 Historic Environment (SP25)

This supporting text for this policy states that ‘The Borough’s historic environment and heritage assets contribute to the local distinctiveness and character which is special and diverse. Such heritage assets are vulnerable to change and potential harm, and therefore should be managed proactively and sensitively, where the historic environment and heritage assets should be protected and enhanced in a manner appropriate to their significance. The protection and enhancement of the significance of the historic environment and heritage assets forms part of sustainable development as set out in the NPPF, especially paragraphs 7 (protection and enhancement), 9 (improvements in quality) and 126 (irreplaceable heritage assets’ (paragraph 3.180).

‘Development proposals may provide opportunities to enhance the historic environment either through new innovative and contextual development and design or through sensitive and informed repair which reinforces sense of place. Such development proposals should be encouraged as sustainable development that has economic, environment and social (cultural) benefits for the Borough. Should it be considered that development would not enhance the historic environment or where it may impact upon potential archaeological remains then development proposals should clearly articulate the necessity of harm using the relevant guidance set out by English Heritage. Loss of significance (such as loss of historic fabric which contribute to the setting of the historic environment) which may cause harm should be adequately justified (NPPF paragraphs 132-135)’ (paragraph 3.181).

‘Opportunities to enhance conservation areas are welcomed, whether this is to a building or to the wider setting, such as public realm improvements. Implementation can be through heritage led regeneration or small scale interventions to safeguard the integrity of the conservation area and its character, especially for Conservation Areas at Risk within the Borough. There are important elements of a conservation area, not just the buildings which are contained within in it which should be considered as part of development proposals including spaces, street patterns, views and trees’ (paragraph 3.184).

SP25 policy states that ‘development proposals should protect, conserve and enhance heritage assets and their settings, taking account of their significance, as well as the distinctive character of the Borough’s townscapes and landscapes. Such heritage assets may consist of undesignated and designated assets including conservation areas, listed buildings, scheduled monuments, archaeological sites, registered parks and gardens and historic landscapes which contribute to the Borough’s historic environment and local distinctiveness. This should include the use of high quality design as stipulated in the NPPF and the Borough Council’s Design SPD.’

It continues to state that ‘development proposals that are likely to have negative impacts on the historic environment should demonstrate how harm can be effectively and justifiably mitigated. Development proposals should be informed by the various information sources and evidence base that are available. The towns of

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 13/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Burton-upon-Trent and Uttoxeter, including their historic retail centres should be a focus for heritage-led regeneration and the repair of key heritage assets will be supported. Such regeneration should be informed by relevant historic environment evidence base. This will be delivered through various initiatives such as through new development proposals or regeneration schemes with key partners such as English Heritage and the Heritage Lottery Fund.’

It specifically mentioned the Inner Burton Initiative and states that ‘Inner Burton is a focus for regeneration in order to improve poor quality building stock which consists of Victorian terraced housing. Initiatives should therefore consist of effective repair and refurbishment of Victorian housing stock as part of sustainable development with opportunities to introduce innovative energy efficiency technology, which reflects the local historic character.’

Detailed Policy 1 Design of New Development (DP1)

DP1 follows on from SP24 and sets out the more detailed considerations that an applicant needs to take in to account and the Council will use to assess applications. DP1 states that planning permission will normally be granted for development which responds positively to the context of the surrounding area and in itself exhibits a high quality of design and is compliant with the East Staffordshire Design Guide (or any superseding document). In assessing the design of development proposals, the Borough Council will have regard to the following factors where appropriate to the type of development:

 The layout of the development in terms of its circulation routes and arrangement of buildings and how they relate to such factors in the surrounding area including the pattern of settlements.

 How the design of the development responds to the historic environment context and conserve and enhance heritage assets, including their setting.

 How elements of any open spaces, both hard and soft, in the proposed development relate to each other, the proposed buildings, the characteristics of the site and the surrounding landscape’s character and appearance, including appropriate public realm.

 The density and mix of the development in relation to its context and the uses to which the development will be put.

 The massing of the development in terms of the shape, volume and arrangement of the building or buildings in relation to the context of the development.

 How the height and massing of the proposed development relates to the height of surrounding development and any vistas, views or skylines.

 Materials to be used within the development and how they interrelate with each other, their immediate and overall context and any traditional and vernacular materials used in the area.

 The detailing and construction techniques to be used in the development and how they interrelate with each other, and relate to the immediate and overall context.

 The impact on the amenity of occupiers of nearby residential properties in terms of loss of light, outlook, or privacy.

 The extent to which the design of the development takes into account the safety of users and reduces the potential for crime to occur in accordance ‘Designing Out Crime’ guidance. The policy also includes detail regarding the design and layout of parking guidance.

Detailed Policy 5 Protecting the Historic Environment: All Heritage Assets, Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas and Archaeology (DP5)

The significance of the Borough’s historic environment and heritage assets (designated and undesignated) will be protected and enhanced where new development proposals will be expected to make a positive contribution to the fabric and integrity of existing buildings, conservation areas or other non-designated areas where there is distinctive character, strategic views or a sense of place.

In relation to all heritage assets its states that ‘New development proposals within the historic environment such as within conservation areas or which fixes or adjoins a listed building must respect the context of the character and appearance of such heritage assets in terms of using sound design principles which are stipulated in the Design SPD. The design of new development must be informed by the context of its surroundings and take

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 14/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

account of the local character through the Historic Environment Record and/or other relevant sources of information/evidence base.

The reuse of heritage assets contributes to viable places and should be seen as a positive opportunity. The reuse of a heritage asset should continue in its original function where possible, but where this is not economically viable, a sensitive change of use should be considered which retains the significance of the heritage asset. Development Proposals should articulate how the heritage asset can accommodate the new use without causing significant harm to the context and fabric of the asset.’

In relation to listed buildings it states that development that affects the setting of a listed building will be considered if accompanied with a Statement of Significance which sets out how the proposal would potentially affect the significance of the asset. If harm cannot be avoided, then this must be articulated in the Statement of Significance with clear justification as to why harm is not avoidable and how such harm can be mitigated.

In relation to Conservation Area it states that ‘Development will be permitted in conservation areas, including demolition of existing buildings or structures, where it can be demonstrated that it would protect and enhance the character and appearance, including the setting of the conservation area and is in accordance with the principles set out in the Design SPD as well as using guidance set out in relevant Conservation Area Appraisals. Should a Conservation Area Appraisal be absent, then a Character Statement should be submitted. It will be expected that any new development within or adjacent the conservation area will respect the existing character in terms of scale, form, materials and detailing. Key views into and out of the conservation (some of which may be identified within a Conservation Area Appraisal) will remain uninhibited.’

Detailed Policy 6 Protecting the Historic Environment: Other Heritage Assets (DP6)

DP6 discusses Shopfronts and Advertisements; non-designated heritage assets; Setting, Historic Landscape and townscape character; Registered parks and Gardens and Other Significant Landscapes; and, Canals. Of most relevance to this application are setting and townscape character.

In relation to setting it states that ‘planning permission will be permitted for development proposals that can demonstrate that the integrity and setting of a heritage asset will be protected and enhanced, through the use of high quality design, materials with appropriate scale and massing. This could be in the form of new building or new public realm. The roofscape and skyline of the towns of Burton upon Trent and Uttoxeter reinforce the character of not only the respective towns but the approaches to them. These should be protected with the sensitive location of new development and appropriate massing in order to retain an appropriate skyline.’

In relation to historic landscape and townscape character it states that ‘where Statements of Significance and Environmental Impact Assessments are required the applicant should also assess the impact of new development upon the wider historic landscape character, potential unseen archaeology and local townscape and seek to protect and enhance it where appropriate.’

East Staffordshire Design Guidance

The purpose of this document is to promote high quality design in new development across East Staffordshire. This Guide explains the Council’s approach to urban design in line with national government planning policy. It sets out the correct approach to design, establishing important ground rules and encouraging better practice.

The following sections were specifically mentioned in Decision Notice P/2016/00839 sections 1.3, 1.7, 3.2, 3.4, 3.8, 3.15, and 3.19.

Section 1.3 The Response to Context sets out how new development should respond to the context and setting to create a responsive and appropriate scheme. It includes specific guidance for how to respond to context in respect of larger scale and smaller scale development. The actual amount of development may vary, but a consistent theme will be the creation of new high quality streets and places

Section 1.7 Summary of the Fundamentals of Urban Design brings together the key messages and can be used as a quick guide to the fundamental urban design principles that the Council will expect to be followed.

Chapter 3 discusses qualities in commercial development provides specific guidance for new commercial development. It builds upon messages from Chapter 1. It is applicable to all new commercial development across the Borough. Section 3.2 discusses the Design Challenges set by Commercial Development. Section 3.4 discusses the Location of Buildings and Contribution to the Urban Structure. Section 3.8 discussed materials and

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 15/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

colours. Section 3.15 discusses boundary treatment. Section 3.19 provides a summary of the design quality in commercial development

2.3 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

The NPPF establishes a set of core land-use planning principles that should underpin both plan-making and decision-taking. The conservation of heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of this and future generations is one of these core planning principles as is the requirement to always seek to secure high quality design (paragraph 17).

Chapter 7 of the NPPF sets out the key considerations in relation to requiring good design. It states that planning policies and decisions should aim to ensure that developments such in conjunction with other requirements respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation (para. 58). However, it continues to state that it is proper to seek to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness (para. 60). Planning policies and decisions should address the connections between people and places and the integration of new development into the natural, built and historic environment (para. 61). Permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions (para. 64).

Chapter 12 of the NPPF sets out the key considerations in relation to heritage assets. Where changes are proposed, the NPPF sets out a clear framework to ensure that heritage assets are conserved, and where appropriate enhanced, in a manner that is consistent with their significance.

The NPPF sets out the importance of being able to assess the significance of heritage assets that may be affected by a development. Significance is defined in Annex 2 as being 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 is not only derived from an asset's physical presence, but also from its setting. The setting of a heritage asset is defined in Annex 2 as, ‘the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve.’

Paragraph 128 of the NPPF states that 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. Similarly there is a requirement on local planning authorities, having assessed the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal; to take this into account when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset (paragraph 129).

In determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of the following three points:

• 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 (paragraph 131)

Paragraphs 132 to 134 of the NPPF introduce the concept that heritage assets can be harmed or lost through alteration, destruction or development within their setting. This harm ranges from less than substantial through to substantial. With regard to designated assets, paragraph 132 states that the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be on its conservation. Distinction is drawn between those assets of exceptional interest (e.g. Grade I and Grade II* listed buildings), and those of special interest (e.g. Grade II listed buildings).

In instances where development would cause substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated asset consent should be refused unless that harm or loss is ‘necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss’ (para 133). In instances where development would cause less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated asset the harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including its optimum viable use (paragraph 134).

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 16/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Paragraph 135 states that the effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.

Paragraph 137 of the NPPF states that local planning authorities should look for opportunities for new development within Conservation Areas and within the setting of heritage assets to enhance or better reveal their significance. Proposals that preserve those elements of the setting that make a positive contribution to or better reveal the significance of the asset should be treated favourably.

Paragraph 138 of the NPPF states that not all elements of a conservation area will necessarily contribute towards its significance; it continues to discuss the loss of a building (or other element) within a conservation area and states that harm should be assessed under paragraphs 133 or 134 as appropriate. However, it highlights that it is the relative significance of the element affected and its contribution to the significance to the conservation area as a whole needs to be taken into account.

Any harm or loss of heritage significance requires clear and convincing justification, and should be exceptional with regard to those assets of special interest, while it should be wholly exceptional for those of the highest significance. An essential part of the justification is the consideration of the public benefits that maybe brought about by a proposed development. The NPPF therefore recognises that a balance needs to be struck between the conservation of the significance and setting of a heritage asset and delivering public benefit.

2.4 National Planning Practice Guidance (PPG)

The National Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) is a government produced interactive on-line document that provides further advice and guidance that expands the policy outlined in the NPPF. It expands on terms such as ‘significance’ and why it is important in decision making. Clarifying that being able to properly assess the nature, extent and importance of the significance of the heritage asset, the contribution of its setting, is very important to understanding the potential impact and acceptability of development proposals (Paragraph: 011 Reference ID: 18a-010-20140306 Revision date: 06 03 2014).

The PPG states that in relation to setting that a thorough assessment of setting needs to take in to account, and be proportionate to, the significance of the heritage asset under consideration and the degree to which proposed changes enhance or detract from that significance and the ability to appreciate it (Paragraph: 013 Reference ID: 18a-014-20140306 Revision date: 06 03 2014).

The PPG usefully discusses how to assess if there is substantial harm. It states that what matters in assessing if a proposal causes substantial harm is the impact of the significance of the heritage asset. Ultimately, whether a proposal causes substantial harm will be a judgement for the decision taker. However it acknowledges that substantial harm is a high test so may not arise in many cases. A key consideration when assessing whether there is an adverse impact on a listed building is whether the adverse impact seriously affects a key element of its special architectural or historic interest. It is the degree of harm to the asset’s significance rather than the scale of the development that is to be assessed (Paragraph: 017 Reference ID: 18a-018-20140306 Revision date: 06 03 2014).

How proposals can avoid or minimise harm to the significance of a heritage asset is also covered and it is clear that proposals should be based on a clear understanding of the heritage asset and its setting (Paragraph: 019 Reference ID: 18a-019-20140306 Last updated 06 03 2014).

Public benefits are also discussed. It states that public benefits may follow from many developments and could be anything that delivers economic, social or environmental progress. They should flow from the proposed development and should be of a nature and scale to be of benefit to the public at large and not just a private benefit. However, benefits do not always have to be visible or accessible to the public in order to be of public benefit. Public benefits may include heritage benefits, such as:

• sustaining or enhancing the significance of a heritage asset and the contribution of its setting;

• reducing or removing risks to a heritage asset; and,

• securing the optimum viable use of a heritage asset in support of its long term conservation.

(Paragraph: 020 Reference ID: 18a-020-20140306 Revision date: 06 03 2014).

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 17/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

2.5 Historic England Guidance

Historic England have published a series of Good Practice Advice (GPA) of which those of most relevance to this appraisal are GPA2 Managing Significance in Decision-taking (March 2015a) and GPA3 Setting and Views (March 2015b).

GPA2 emphasises the importance of having a knowledge and understanding of the significance of heritage assets likely to be affected by the development and that the ‘first step for all applicants is to understand the significance of any affected heritage asset and, if relevant the contribution of its setting to its significance’ (para 4). Early knowledge of this information is also useful to a local planning authority in pre-application engagement with an applicant and ultimately in decision making (para 7).

GPA3 provides advice on the setting of heritage assets. Paragraph 4 of the document confirms the extent of setting, as defined in the NPPF, to be the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced and that elements of a setting can make positive or negative contributions to the significance of an asset and affect the ways in which it is experienced. Historic England state that setting does not have a boundary and that setting is often expressed by reference to views, comprising the visual impression of an asset obtained from a variety of viewpoints (para 6). Setting is not an asset or a designation, rather its importance is in what it contributes to the significance of an asset and its appreciation is not dependent upon public access (para 9).

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 18/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

3. Methodology of Assessment

In accordance with best practice guidance and as determined by policy requirements, this Heritage Supporting Statement identifies the significance and the setting of the heritage interest of the assets within the conservation area. The historical narrative informing the baseline has been derived from a review of various resources including historic Ordnance Survey (OS) maps and photographs. Statutory information in relation to the designated assets has been obtained from the National Heritage List for England maintained by Historic England. Details have also been ascertained from the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area Designation Document (East Staffordshire Borough Council, 1990).

A site visit was undertaken on 17th January 2017 to view the Application Site and the surrounding area as well as visiting heritage assets in the wider study area. All observations on the present layout and condition of the Application Site are based on this visit.

3.1 Significance and Setting

An assessment of the significance of assets and their setting has been undertaken in consideration of guidance and good practice issued by Historic England and NPPF. A methodology for the assessment of significance of heritage assets is outlined in Conservation Principles (English Heritage, 2008) whilst Historic England GPA3 (2015) provides the basis of a methodology for the assessment of setting.

Significance is often established by statutory designations such as listed buildings, scheduled monuments and conservation areas. These designations provide a formal framework of significance, but are in themselves too broad to reflect the cultural or historical interest of a particular building or site. More particular advice as to what makes up significance is set out in Conservation Principles (p.30-60), in which is set out a method for thinking systematically and consistently about the heritage values that can be ascribed to a place. Historic England defines the heritage significance of an asset as the sum of its heritage values and includes consideration of factors such as the contribution made by setting and context. This guidance has informed the assessment but the terminology of NPPF in relation to heritage interest i.e. Archaeological, Architectural, Historic and Artistic Interests has been used in this statement.

Historic England (GPA3, 2015) identifies a stepped approach to the assessment of setting, comprising:

• Step 1. Identify which assets may be affected;

• Step 2. Assess whether and to what degree setting makes a contribution to significance;

• Step 3. Assess the effects of development on that significance;

• Step 4. Look to maximise enhancement and avoid or minimise harm; and,

• Step 5. Document and monitor outcomes.

In assessing whether or not the setting of an asset contributes to its significance Historic England identify a number of attributes that may assist (panel within para 21). Likewise in assessing the effect of development Historic England provide a check list of attributes that may affect setting and significance and these are set out in the panel within paragraph 25 under five broad categories comprising:

• The location and siting of the development;

• The form and appearance of development;

• Additional effects (change to skyline etc),

• Permanence; and,

• Consequential effects

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 19/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

4. Historical Background

Burton upon Trent originated as a Saxon fortified settlement and had become a well-established market town by the Middle Ages. In the later 13th century Burton Abbey had been included in a list of English monasteries supplying wool to the Florentine Market. Despite the wealth of the abbey to undertake building campaigns and encourage specialised trades in the town, Burton upon Trent remained a middling town with a relatively undeveloped urban character.

Burton upon Trent’s leading industry in the 16th century had been the woollen textile industry which had been organised on a large scale, although this industry had collapsed by the mid-17th century. Growth in the town stagnated until the River Trent was made navigable to boats in the early 1710s, facilitating the growth of the town as a centre for distribution of goods for other Midlands towns. Small scale brewing had taken place in Burton upon Trent previous to the opening of the Trent to river traffic, but the beneficial effects offered by the river encouraged the steady growth of the towns brewing trade. Breweries originated as small complexes occupying the backplots of medieval burgages.

Textile manufacture had survived in the craft of hat making, which had emerged in the place of woollen textiles at the end of the 17th century. In the 1780s cotton mills were opened and by the beginning of the 19th century the largest source of employment in the town had been in the cotton works, encouraging the town’s population to expand by a quarter from 1789 to 1801.

Despite the closure of the Cotton works in 1841, the growth of Burton upon Trent’s breweries encouraged a continued increase of the town’s population which had tripled from 1801 to 1861, and doubled again by 1878. At the beginning of the 19th century Burton upon Trent’s breweries had been concentrated in the centre of the town, heavily industrialising the area by the mid-century. From the mid-19th century brewing began to significantly alter the townscape.

The success of the brewing industry ultimately led to rapid housing expansion on the fields to the north of the historic core of the town. This began in the mid-19th century; but the main period of expansion occurred in the late-19th century with the construction of streets of terraced houses. There appears to have been little expansion during the early 20th century, perhaps as a result of a decline in the brewing industry. However, housing numbers rapidly increased again in the mid and late 20th century.

The area surrounding Application Site was largely cleared of red brick residential housing in the 1970s. The Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area was designated in 1990. Since its designation a number of buildings have been demolished including the old bus depot and other buildings east of the Magistrates Court.

The First Edition OS map of 1881 is the earliest available mapping showing no. 137-139 Horninglow Street and it is subsequently shown on later OS maps. The Application Site reflects a wider pattern of speculative residential development along Horninglow Street and other areas of Burton upon Trent throughout the 19th century. The OS maps demonstrate that there were a number of other terrace properties on the north side of Horninglow Street. The OS maps also demonstrate that the residential and smaller scale developments that fronted Horninglow Street often included more intense industries at the rear, in the back land development with access through archways. Former activities behind Horninglow Street and at the rear of the Application Site included a timber yard, malthouses and brewing engineering works.

4.1 Horninglow Street and Guild Street Conservation Area

The following provides an overview of the special interest and significance of the conservation area.

Location and Setting

The conservation area is at the junction of Horninglow Street and Guild Street in the centre of Burton upon Trent. To the north and the south of the area are brewery yards and buildings with a busy commercial centre to the east on Horninglow Street. The two streets are busy thoroughfares containing mixed uses, including commercial, public and museum. The main focal points of the area are the Bass Museum and its adjoining buildings, the Magistrates Court and the Plough Maltings. The Magistrates Court’s dome is a notable feature of the skyline as is the accumulator tower of the Plough Maltings.

Architectural Quality and Built Form

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 20/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Horninglow Street and Guild Street were at the centre of the expanding brewing industry during the 18th and 19th centuries. The first expansion beyond the historic core of Burton upon Trent had been on the northern side of Horninglow Street, west of Hawkins Lane, in 1834. The area had been densely developed by successive brewery and residential construction by the mid-19th century. The area was encircled by railways built by brewers from the 1860s. In 1866 a joiner’s shop associated with the brewing industry was built on the south side of Horninglow Street, and subsequently residential red brick terrace development had filled the small area between the joiners shop and Horninglow Street before 1881. The fine 18th and 19th century buildings in the area recall the prosperous trade with the elegant frontages concealing brewhouses, malthouses and bustling yards behind.

The legacy of the brewing industry can still be seen today with the presence of many building associated with the industry such as the National Brewing Museum, Coors and other buildings. It is a conservation area that both celebrates the industry’s successes and commiserates its demise with visible neglect, vacant buildings and inappropriate infilling.

The Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area contains five listed buildings.

The Plough Maltings The Plough Maltings (NHLE 1374337) (Figure 8) is a Grade II listed former maltings. It was built between 1899 and 1902 by Herbert Couchman. It is constructed of red brick under a Welsh slate roof. The former Maltings are a long ten window range of two storeys with three-span roof. The maltings include kilns and the prominent accumulator tower. The main maltings have round-headed cast iron windows with radiating glazing bars on ground floor; pivoted windows with cambered heads on first floor.

Figure 8. Plough Maltings

The significance of the Plough Maltings lie in the historic interest as a notable example of the brewing industry specifically as a structure built to house box drums which turned the grain as it germinated, although the equipment has been removed. The maltings are of architectural interest as the pattern of fenestration reflects the former use of the building with many more windows on the northern side since ventilation, as required for the traditional type of malting floor, was not necessary. The accumulator tower is a feature of the skyline and visible in glimpsed views between buildings as the maltings were constructed to the rear of existing residential plots on the northern side of Horninglow Street. This is typical of the density and close proximity of both industrial and residential development throughout Burton upon Trent during the period.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 21/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

The setting of the Plough Maltings is defined by the urban context and its back land location set back from the principal street frontage behind smaller scale buildings. It lies in an area that is scared by the previous industrial uses. It is mainly experienced in views through gaps between buildings and the street frontages which incorporate a number of buildings and structures in the foreground of these views which illustrate the important developmental approach to the brewing industry in the area. These views are obtainable through the Application Site, between 141 and 143 Horninglow Street, looking north down Hawkins Lane from the north of Guild Street. The removal of a large majority of housing stock in the 1970s and the removal of a building on the site more recently have allowed the views through the Application Site. These views are therefore fortuitous rather than being a designed or anticipated view of the Maltings. The setting contributes to the significance of the listed building as it illustrates previously intense industrial uses of the area and the range of uses that existed within such close proximity to one another.

The Magistrates Court The Magistrates Court (NHLE 1038741) (Figure 9) was built between 1909 and1910 by architect Henry Beck in the English Baroque style. It is constructed of ashlar with a two storeyed centre-piece with a large semi-circular headed window with festooned and voluted keyblock flanked by engaged Ionic columns and with an elaborate cartouche at either side with the Arms of the former County Borough. The egg-and-dart frieze, modillion eaves cornice and elaborately carved parapet is surmounted by leaded drum and cupola that is a notable and prominent part of the skyline. There are single storey wings to right and left, each have a doorway in elaborately moulded surround surmounted by a cartouche and with multi-panelled divided door.

Figure 9. The Magistrates Court

The significance of The Magistrates Court lies in its rich architectural embellishment and Baroque grandeur conveys the solemnity of public administration, and represents a complete departure from the established vernacular of red-brick of the area. This conscious use of alternative materials and imposing architectural response means that this building stands out as a visible and imposing symbol, both real and perceived, of law and order within Burton upon Trent.

Its setting is defined by its location at the T-junction of Horninglow Street and Guild Street and within the heart of the former brewing industry.

167 Horninglow Street 167 Horninglow Street (NHLE 1213881) (Figure 10) is a Grade II listed building that dates from the early-19th century. It is constructed of red brick under a slate roof with three storeys and five bays of vertical sliding timber

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 22/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

sash windows. The central bay has a stuccoed cornice hood doorcase with festoons and radial fanlight. There is a dentilled eaves cornice which continues around central pediment. To the east is the adjoining 168 and 169 Horninglow Street, also listed Grade II.

Figure 10. 167, 168 and 168 Horninglow Street

168 and 169 Horninglow Street including rear range (NHLE 1038742) (Figure 10) are Grade II listed former maltings. They date from the early-19th century, with later-19th century additions. They are constructed of red brick under slate roof with some stone dressings. The formal Horninglow Street frontage is arranged in two parts. The eastern part is of two storeys of three bays of timber vertical sashes with glazing bars. There is a central boarded door with fanlight. The western part (No 168) incorporates a former carriage entrance in a two storey lower wing with segmental-headed archway flanked by windows altered from doorways. The east elevation demonstrates the mill part of the building. The utilitarian and functional appearance of the maltings behind the south elevation is in contrast to the street frontage (Figure 11).

The significance of 167, 168 and 169 Horninglow Street lies in its elegant architecture that illustrates the prosperity of the area, particularly the success of the brewing industries that provides a polite public frontage, in contrast to the industry to the rear.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 23/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 11. East elevation of 169 Horninglow Street showing façade with maltings to the rear

Bass Museum of Brewing (NHLE 1374321) is a Grade II listed building that is dated 1866. The building was a former joiner's shop of Bass's Middle Brewery. It is constructed of red brick under a tiled roof in three storeys. It is a typical 'brewery' building of 12 bays each with arched recess and segmental headed window.

Its significance lies in it being a typical 'brewery' building. The use of blind semi-circular arcading is a typical style that was adopted by mid-19th century by brewery architects in Burton upon Trent. Its historic interest lies its continued use and association with the brewing industry in Burton upon Trent.

The conservation area also contains a number of other brick built buildings that date from a similar period including 137-139 (the Application Site), 141 (Figure 12) and 143-146 Horninglow Street (Figure 13).

137-139 Horninglow Street A description of the buildings is provided in section 1.2 above. However, historical research has demonstrated that the original form of 137-138 Horninglow Street would have included a small front yard with a likely boundary treatment of a small wall or railings or a combination of both. This is visible on early OS maps. The small front yard areas were built on by 1901 presumably to create a small retail frontage/shop front or to provide additional accommodation. The extensions have been successively altered throughout the 20th century and have resulted in the current appearance. The evolution of the archway is also determinable from the historic maps. The OS maps show that the existing alleyway was widened between 1901 and 1923 to allow greater access to the rear of the property (associated with the brewery engineering works to the rear).

The remnant ashlar stone and blue brick work embellish the portals into this widened passage and are incorporated into the southern facades of the two extensions. Corbel springing points at the south portal of the passageway suggest a decorative arch could have originally adored the small pedestrian arch way and could have appeared similar to the arch above the doorway of neighbouring 141 Horninglow Street. This is a typical feature in the Horninglow Street Conservation Area and can be seen at The Malthouse, 167-169 Horninglow Street, and at no. 146 Horninglow Street.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 24/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 12. 137-141 Horninglow Street

Figure 13. 143-146 Horninglow Street

Horninglow Street is visible on an aerial photograph of 1921 (Figure 14). This photograph shows the extent of the development of terrace housing within the area. Large swathes of visible terrace housing were cleared in the late 20th century. Whilst the terraces at nos.137-139 have been heavily altered they, along with the adjoining no.141 and no.143-146 Horninglow Street, are representative of the type of residential properties that developed during

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 25/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

the 19th century in this area of Burton upon Trent. This makes no.137-139 and neighbouring property of no.141 Horninglow Street rare survivors of small scale brewing activity within the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area.

Figure 14. Aerial photograph of Horninglow Street, c.1921. No.137-139 is at the centre circled (http://www.burton-on-trent.org.uk/index.php?s=horninglow)

Nos. 143-146 represents properties that existed side by side with industry, commercial and public uses. No.137- 139 represents one of two remaining former residential structures west of the Plough Maltings and east of Hawkins Lane. All other residential properties in this area have been demolished since 1975; dramatically changing the character and appearance of the area and the setting of the listed buildings.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 26/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 15. Horninglow Street looking east, early-mid 20th century

Similar loss of commercial properties and dwellings east of The Magistrate’s Court, as well as outside of the conservation area south of the Magistrate’s Court (Figure 15), has broken the density of pavement edge historic red brick structures. This places heightened importance upon the remaining small historic red brick former residential structures, including the terrace nos. 137 -146 Horninglow Street. While lacking individual significant architectural interest their group aesthetic value, in providing visual continuity between listed buildings, is part of the setting of the designated assets and the character and appearance of the conservation area. These structures also hold historic interest from which the historical development of the areas built environment may be contextualised. These buildings contribute to the character of the area as they enhancing understanding of the wider social and economic history of the area.

Open Space

Open space is limited within the conservation area. The area is dominated by the busy roads of Horninglow Street and Guild Street and the area is generally experienced as a defensive and hostile environment. There is a lack of soft landscaping and the properties are largely pavement edge, enclosing the area. There is little visual relief from the solidity of the established and strong building line on the north side of Horninglow Street. The scale of development in back land locations, which are typical of this area of Burton upon Trent, means that the eye is often drawn into gaps between buildings to focal points beyond. The accumulator tower of Plough Maltings and the decorative dome of the Magistrates Court draw the eye up to the skyline.

There are few areas of soft landscaping. The area to the west of Nos. 137 -139 Horninglow Street (the Application Site) makes the greatest contribution to the area by providing visual relief from the built up hard edge of development on the north side of Horninglow Street. The new Police Station has been set back from the pavement edge with an area of grassed frontage.

4.2 Current condition

The Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area was designated some 27 years ago. There has been no conservation area appraisal or management plan published for the area. The conservation area is not on the Heritage at Risk Register held by Historic England. However, the conservation area is clearly in a poor state of repair and has suffered from a lack of investment and enhancement over the years; as a result there has been a number of issues that have led to a high proportion of the buildings being neglected and becoming vacant. Also there is a general lack of property maintenance. The area has the general appearance of being run down and

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 27/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

neglected. Insensitive development adjacent to the boundary of the conservation area has negatively affected the setting of the conservation area.

4.3 Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area Designation Document

East Staffordshire Borough Council (formerly a District Council) produced a document that supported the initial designation of the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area in 1990. Whilst this is not called a Conservation Area Appraisal or a Management Plan, it does contain some aspects that describe the character of the area, the reasons for designation and management principles.

The Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area Designation Document 1990 (CADD) states that as well as containing the five listed buildings, the area also contains other impressive red brick structures which are noteworthy of retention and refurbishment as necessary, including the Bass Museum buildings and the Police Station (now demolished). It states that there are no special townscape features which contribute to the character of the area, but the variety of the architectural styles are of important visual significance to the area. There are uninterrupted views into and out of the conservation area of the dominant focal points within the conservation area and features which adjoin it. The area is greatly enhanced and softened by areas of landscaping around the main buildings, and ornamental shrubs and trees providing essential ground cover for the large open areas.

The CADD importantly states that ‘it is to preserve the character of the area and to provide an impetus for more positive action to enhance its appearance that a Conservation Area is needed for this site at Horninglow Street…the boundary is drawn tightly around the major buildings but incudes significant brewery buildings and town houses. featureless, modern buildings are excluded as they have little impact on the character of the area.’

Figure 16 (below) shows the boundary of the conservation area, together with its major physical features which (identified in 1990) make a visual contribution to the character and appearance of the area. The plan shows those buildings that contribute positively to character of the area; walls and fences creating visual enclosure; shrubs and trees contributing to the quality of the area; areas in need of visual improvement; and, viewpoints.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 28/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 16. Extract from the CADD showing Features of Visual Significance

The CADD continues to state that the Local Planning Authority has a responsibility to formulate and publish proposals for the enhancement of designated areas. It suggests some guidance for future enhancement of the area. It states that much can be achieved if there is more positive protection of the attractive features of the area. An improvement in the physical and visual amenities can lead to consequent benefits in the value of the property and the quality of life in the area; as will the activities of altering, repairing, decorating and maintaining buildings. It specifically states that the ‘red brick buildings along the north side of Horninglow Street are in need of refurbishment in some instances’. Presumably this comment relates to Nos.137-139 Horninglow Street. It continues to state that ‘The repair and conversion of empty buildings will be encouraged where they are no longer appropriate for their original use.’

4.4 Statement of Significance

The significance of the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area is largely derived from the development of the brewing industry in Burton upon Trent during the 19th century. The architecture reflects the historical development of the industry and the associated growth of urban areas outlying the historic core of Burton upon Trent. Notable examples of industrial buildings from which architectural interest is drawn includes the Grade II listed 19th century Maltings at no.168-169 Horninglow Street (NHLE 1038742), and the associated Grade II listed no.167 Horninglow Street (NHLE 1213881). Later examples include the former joiner’s shop built in 1866 (NHLE 1374321) and Plough Maltings built 1899-1902 (NHLE 1374337), both of which are Grade II listed and built of red brick in a functional style drawing on classical references. The character of the historic buildings includes formerly domestic-scale properties as well as large-scale industrial buildings side by side with civic and commercial buildings. Residential or smaller scale properties provide the frontage to Horninglow Street with industrial uses historically in the back land areas. This enables an understanding of the development of the conservation area, its past social and economic aspirations and fortunes to be read within the townscape.

Architectural interest in the conservation area is derived from the elaborate Magistrate’s Court (NHLE 1038741) in the English Baroque style, a style commonly used for civic structures of this period. A shift of focus toward civic amenity began in the early 20th century, with the construction of The Magistrate’s Court (NHLE 1038741) and police station between 1909 and 1910, although the area remained dominated by the buildings of brewing industry. The variety of the architectural styles is of important visual significance to the area. There has been some insensitive development during the 20th century, notably the new police station.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 29/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

5. The Proposed Development

5.1 Previous Planning History

Permission was granted for the erection of 12 dwellings and associated works in January 2010. However, this permission was not implemented. The Application Site has been marketed for the past seven years for residential development.

In 2012 a planning application (P2012/1544) was made to East Staffordshire Borough Council for change of use of the land for the siting of 49 storage containers; erection of 2m high paladin fencing, and a new 2.3m high entrance gates and associated lighting for a temporary period of 3 years. This was refused and then dismissed at appeal APP/B3410/A/13/2204133. The Inspector’s Appeal Decision states that the character of the conservation area as broadly being related to the industrial heritage of the area being evident in the townscape buildings. The appeal decision continues to state that the contribution made by the Application Site to the character and appearance of the conservation area is largely neutral but that the proposed development would be harmful to a less than substantial extent due to the development being out of context with the character and appearance of the conservation area. In addition, the inspector highlighted that the listed maltings are currently visible through the appeal Application Site and, as such, the visibility of the containers in the foreground of the building would have been harmful to its setting. The inspector concludes that the harm identified was less than substantial under NPPF 134. However, despite being only for a temporary period the inspector concludes that the harm identified would not be outweighed by any significant public benefits.

The most recent application P/2016/00839 differs from the previous application in that in now includes proposals and enhancements to the properties Nos.137 – 139 Horninglow Street which would be refurbished and include the demolition of two single storey front extensions, reinstatement of the sympathetic property frontage and introduction of a low brick wall topped with decorative metal railings to define the front garden areas. To the rear of the property, 1.8m high palisade fencing will form a secure parking area for use by the offices. The planning officer, in her consideration of the application, specifically states that ‘It should be noted that the proposed demolition of the two single storey front extensions and amendments to the frontages of 137-139 Horninglow Street is considered acceptable, as the extensions are flat roofed and not in keeping with the area, the removal of these elements would improve the appearance of the buildings within the streetscene and Conservation Area and the setting of the adjoining listed building’. However, the officer concludes that despite the temporary nature of the application the impacts on the streetscene, and associated heritage assets are of significant weight to preclude even the temporary use of the land for the purposes applied for. The application was therefore refused.

It is not clear that the Planning Officer undertook the test as set out in NPPF 134 which requires any identified harm to be balanced against the public benefits of the application.

5.2 Scheme description

The proposed development is essentially composed of two elements. This first element is the temporary change of use for a period of three years on land to the rear of Nos. 137-139 Horninglow Street for the placement of storage containers. The second element is the positive enhancement of the historic buildings and the character and appearance of the conservation area.

The containers will be new (used for one shipment only) and coloured dark green. To facilitate the change of use there will be a number of additional changes. The exiting vertical green metal fencing fronting Horninglow Street will be replaced with a red brick wall and new gates. These gates will be designed to replicate the design of the railing forming the boundary to the National Brewing Museum (Figure 17).

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 30/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 17. Railings of the National Brewing Museum opposite Application Site

The gates will be electronically controlled gates with security coded entry. On the northern boundary of the Application Site a 2.4m palisade fence painted in dark green will be erected adjacent to the derelict building for safety purposes. Low Voltage lighting and CCTV is included as part of the scheme.

The containers will be arranged around the perimeter of the Application Site (Figure 18). This ensures that the linear form of development, historically associated with the development of burgage plots in back land areas, is retained.

Figure 18. Proposed Site Plan

To the west the containers will be placed against the existing boundary wall between Nos. 139 and 141 Horninglow Street. These will not protrude over the top of the existing 2.7m red brick wall. To the west the containers will be placed adjacent to an existing 2.4m security fence (Figure 19).

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 31/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 19. Proposed Street Elevations

The second part of the appeal application proposes the refurbishment and enhancement of Nos. 137-139 Horninglow Street. The existing elevation will be significantly altered and enhanced. The later front flat roof extensions will be removed as part of the application to re-establish the original building line of the 19th century terrace. The area to the front would then be landscaped with grass and tree and shrub planting to soften the external appearance and provide a more domestic appearance. The space will be redefined by a low red-brick plinth topped with cast iron railing to match those proposed for the new gateway to the west. The existing western verge will be incorporated into the front garden of no.137. The existing boundary, currently a green fence, will move north to align with the rear wall of the frontage property and rebuilt in red brick with planting in front to soften the appearance (Figure 20).

Figure 20. Proposed Ground Floor and Landscaping plan

The buildings will also undergo a series of other sympathetic alterations. The brick chimneys will be rebuilt; the cement tiles of the roof will be removed clay tiles reinstated. The decorative corbelled eaves will be retained. The

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 32/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

decorative moulded lintels with central key stones and stone cills will be repaired and refurbished. The existing uPVC windows will be replaced with timber vertical sliding sashes with a 50mm recess. The archway will be enhanced by cladding the existing steel lintel with red-brick flat arch. New decorative cast iron metal gates will be installed to the passage way. Two 6 panel timber doors with plain fanlight will be installed. The windows on the ground floor will be replaced with tripartite timber vertical sliding sashes. The existing render will be removed and replaced (Figure 21).

Figure 21. Proposed South Elevation

To the west elevation the brick work will be sympathetically repointed (Figure 22).

Figure 22. Proposed West Elevation

The rear, north elevation (Figure 23), will also be enhanced and sympathetically repaired. This will include the replacement of the uPVC windows with new timber windows; the retention and repair of the decorative brick dentil eaves; replacement of the existing door with timber doors and the careful refurbishment; and, repointing of the brickwork.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 33/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

Figure 23. Proposed North Elevation

Overall the proposals will enhance the property and the streetscene. The alterations are enhancements that are sympathetic to the original character of the property and the conservation area.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 34/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

6. Assessment of Impact

The report has demonstrated that the Application Site is located within the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area which is a designated heritage asset. Through the Application Site the Grade II listed Plough Maltings is visible. This view is appreciable due to large scale clearance of 19th century brick terraces in the 1970s along the frontage of Horninglow Street and is not designed. Nos. 137-139 are not designated heritage assets but have been identified as contributing to the character of the conservation area by illustrating an important part of the social and historic development of this part of Burton upon Trent. In addition they are located in a prominent location within the conservation area and are visible on initial approach into the area from the west. Its current appearance and the inappropriate and insensitive front extensions are negative features of the building and the conservation area, and detract from the 19th century original character and appearance of the properties.

The significance of these assets has been assessed in the previous chapter and the potential impact of the proposed development upon that significance is discussed below.

6.1 Listed Buildings

The listed buildings of The Magistrates Court, Nos. 167 – 169 Horninglow Street and the former joiner's shop of Bass's Middle Brewery, all Grade II, are at a sufficient distance with intervening buildings between them and the Application Site not to have their significance or setting affected by the proposed development. There will therefore be no harm to these heritage assets arising from the development proposals. However, the improvements to the appearance by the removal of the front extensions, sensitive alterations and the incorporation of soft landscaping of Nos. 137-139 Horninglow Street would improve the appearance of the buildings within the streetscene and the conservation area, and the setting of the adjoining listed building. This is a significant public benefit especially in a conservation area that is in need of enhancement.

The Plough Maltings, Grade II, is located east of the Application Site. This report has established that the significance of the Plough Maltings relates to its historic interest as part of the brewing industry of Burton upon Trent. The architectural interest of the building related to the form of the building derives from the functional processes necessary internally to be a malting. The setting of the building behind the principal street frontage is derived from the apparent and purposeful approach within this part of Burton upon Trent, at this time when industrial buildings were, to an extent, hidden behind a smaller scale more polite street frontage. As Figure 14 demonstrates, the Plough Maltings was largely hidden from the streetscene behind an almost continuous frontage of terrace buildings along Horninglow Street. The only visible and readily accessible view would have been north down Hawkins Lane.

The Plough Maltings are now visible through the Application Site adjoining the eastern boundary. This is a view that has occurred as a result of clearance if terrace houses in the 1970s. The notable features of the Maltings are the ridge vents along the northern range of buildings, the rhythm and pattern of the fenestration details, the large expanse of Welsh Slate roof and the accumulator tower. These features are all visible above the eastern wall of the Application Site boundary. The proposed plans street elevations show that the containers would be lower than the existing eastern boundary wall. Therefore, these notable features of the Maltings would still be visible and appreciable above the containers. The bland uniformity of the containers would create a block that is subservient to the Plough Maltings, allowing the architectural detailing of the Maltings to draw the eye and focus attention away from them, particularly the accumulator tower that has been identified as a focal point, diverting attention away from the foreground.

The previous Planning Inspector commented about the entirely functional and utilitarian appearance of the containers and that these would be out of character and appearance with the conservation area. The significance of the conservation area and the Plough Maltings is derived from the functional use of space, and the expansion of the brewing industry. The back lands became a focal point for industry and functional purposes. The frontages of the streets provided the aesthetics and smaller, human scale of development. The containers would be functional and utilitarian in form. However, in an area that was and still retains a mixture of commercial and industrial uses it is not entirely appropriate to state that these are out of context with this industrial aspect and, therefore, the significance of the conservation area.

The Planning Officers report on the planning application states that views of the Plough Maltings from Horninglow Street would be significantly compromised by the containers, and the development they concluded is, therefore, detrimental to the setting of the adjoining listed building. The Planning Officers report cites the Planning Inspector’s decision for a previous application APP/B3410/A/13/2204133 stating that ‘the proposed development

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 35/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

would introduce containers that would be entirely functional and utilitarian in appearance out of context with the character and the appearance of the Conservation Area and harmful to it. The containers would be visible from the street and from the adjoining commercial site and would not be mitigated by any landscaping. The listed maltings are currently visible through the appeal site from the street but with the proposed use of the site the listed building would be viewed with containers sited in the foreground, which would be harmful to its setting.’ The Planning Officer then states that ‘The proposed layout is identical to that of the previous application in terms of the containers’.

Whilst the containers are proposed in the same location there are a number of differences that have not been appropriately considered by the Planning Officer. This includes the alterations to the street frontage. The previous application (P2012/1544) proposed, in addition to the containers, a very functional approach to the southern boundary of the Application Site with unattractive and featureless fencing that would have only compounded the utilitarian appearance of the containers.

This planning application took a different and more considered approach. This has drawn visual references from the context in which the Application Site sits, particularly the use of the distinctive red brick. The southern boundary would be enhanced by removing the existing unattractive blue painted gates and metal fencing and replacing it with a red-brick boundary wall and gates and fencing that draws on those featured on the boundary of the National Brewing Museum. The proposals also provide additional opportunity to soften the landscaping of the Application Site with the inclusion of domestic scale railings, enclosure of the verge to create a softer appearance and the introduction of shrubs and small trees. This would provide a more attractive frontage and approach into the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area as well as providing positive visual interest into the foreground, with materials and visual ques that are ‘in keeping’ with the conservation area. The construction of a solid red-brick wall would limit the opportunity to see into the Application Site, yet the height is sufficiently retrained to ensure that those identified views and the roof line features of the Plough Maltings are retained in the background.

The overall result would be a development that would introduce changes into the Application Site that was previously defined by its industrial nature, and the context is still such that the setting is commercial and industrial in nature. It is accepted that the siting of the containers would cause some harm to setting but in the language of the NPPF it would be less than substantial. If a scale of harm was permitted then this harm would be at the bottom of the less than substantial harm scale due to the mitigation measures and to the imbedded design elements that would combine to create a holistic approach to the Application Site, the conservation area, and to the setting of the Plough Maltings.

The proposal acknowledge that there is a degree of harm to the setting of the Plough Maltings, in that those containers would be seen in the foreground of the Maltings in views obtainable through the Application Site from Horninglow Street. However, this is not considered to affect the significance of the Maltings as their and the conservation area’s significance is built on commercial and industrial scale development in the back land areas. With that in mind the harm is more in terms of visual amenity that is drawn from the opening up of the views afforded to the Maltings by the removal of buildings within the Application Site and the earlier loss of terrace houses in the 1970s. The harm identified is therefore to that view and not to the significance of the Maltings or the conservation area. The Maltings would be still appreciable and experienced from other vantage points within the conservation area and therefore the harm is limited especially as the Malting would still be visible above the containers.

6.2 Conservation Area

The significance of the conservation area is largely derived from the development of the brewing industry in Burton upon Trent during the 19th century. The architecture reflects the historical development of the industry and the associated growth of urban areas outlying the historic core of Burton upon Trent. The character of the historic buildings includes formerly domestic-scale properties as well as large-scale industrial buildings side by side with civic and commercial buildings. Predominantly residential or smaller scale properties provide the frontage to Horninglow Street with industrial uses typically being preserved for back land areas. This enables an understanding of the development of the conservation area and its social and economic aspirations and fortunes to be read within the townscape through the surviving buildings and different architectural styles.

Nos. 137-139 has been identified as representing one of two remaining former residential structures west of the Plough Maltings and east of Hawkins Lane. All other residential properties in this immediate area have been demolished since 1975 which has dramatically changed both the historic character and appearance of the area. While lacking individual significant architectural interest of their own (although there are remnants of decorative

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 36/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

detailing) their group value in providing visual continuity between key listed buildings is essential to the setting of the designated assets within the conservation area. These structures also hold historic interest from which the historical development of the areas built environment may be contextualised. These buildings contribute to the character of the area as they enhance the understanding of the wider social and economic history of the area.

The insensitive alterations and the incremental loss of original and traditional features of these simple Victorian buildings, such as the truncation of the chimneys, the loss of traditional roofing materials, replacement of timber windows and doors, and unsympathetic front extensions, have created a building that detracts from the character and appearance of the conservation area. The building is in a visible and prominent location within the conservation area and as an approach to Burton upon Trent. It would appear that the fortunes of the conservation area have changed little over the past 27 years. The CADD in 1990 highlighted the need to formulate and publish proposals for the enhancement of the area. It suggested ensuring that the continuing activities of altering, repairing, decorating, maintaining buildings should be encouraged specifically stated that the ‘red brick buildings along the north side of Horninglow Street are in need of refurbishment in some instances’. It acknowledged in 1990 that a pragmatic and encouraging approach would be adopted towards the repair and conversion of empty buildings where they are no longer appropriate for their original use.

The application proposes the sensitive repair, alteration, and removal of inappropriate elements of the buildings. The building would be visible and would be notably enhancement by the removal of the front extensions, and the reinstatement of a front garden behind a low boundary wall and cast iron railings. The proposed development, through the informed repair, alteration and enhancement of Nos.137-139 Horninglow Street, is a strong, considered, and a sensitive approach to the original architectural quality of the historic buildings and to its context and the conservation area. The proposal, through adopting this approach, is relevant to the Application Site and the wider context and supports the local distinctiveness of the area. The building lines, boundary treatments, roof design, materials, colours, details and finishes, fenestrations design all respond to the character of the area and the building provide visible and cumulative enhancement that would have a noticeable and positive contribution to the character of the area. It may also encourage and support other sensitive forms of the heritage-led regeneration and the sustainable use of heritage assets within the wider area. The use of the Application Site would give life and vitality to the area that it currently lacks.

6.3 Policy considerations

The terminology and wording of the relevant legislation within the Act and relevant policies within the adopted development plan policy, the NPPF, and the East Stafford Design Guide focus on the encouraging appropriate intervention into the historic environment that will enhance or better reveal the significance of designated heritage assets.

The Act, s66, requires the local planning authority to have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting. S77 of the Act requires special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas. The proposals preserve the Plough Maltings, albeit it affects one view of the building through the application site. The proposals, particularly to the frontage of Horninglow Street, enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area and the Plough Maltings.

It is considered that the proposals are in line with the policies of the adopted development plan policy: East Staffordshire Local Plan. Particularly:

 SO9 which seeks to deliver high quality places that conserve and enhance the historic environment whilst promoting local distinctiveness, place making, significance and sustainable development to support heritage-led regeneration and the sustainable use of heritage assets;

 SP24 by helping to create a sense of place a positive contribution to the area and reinforcing character and identify through local distinctiveness;

 SP25 which encourages development proposals that enhance the historic environment through sensitive and informed design. SP25 states such development proposals should be encouraged as sustainable development that has economic, environment and social (cultural) benefits for the Borough. The proposals are also in accordance with this policy as it provides an opportunity to enhance the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area through small scale interventions that will safeguard the integrity of the historic building, the setting of listed buildings and the conservation area and its character and appearance. The proposal would also address the aims and objective of

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 37/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

the Inner Burton Initiative, a focus for regeneration, by improving poor quality Victorian terraced housing as part of sustainable development which reflects the local historic character.

Under SP25 it allows consideration for the elements of the proposal, the placement of the containers, which have been identified as having less substantial harm at the bottom end of the scale to be considered and effectively and justifiably mitigated.

DP1 states that planning permission will normally be granted for development which responds positively to the context of the surrounding area and in itself exhibits a high quality of design and is compliant with the East Staffordshire Design Guide (or any superseding document). The proposed development is in accordance with the East Staffordshire Design Guidance particularly 1.3.75 which states that ‘In General the Council will support proposals which improve the quality and visual appearance of the buildings, either through their conversion or their upgrading, in line with adopted planning policies. This can help to renew and enhance the built fabric of the Borough and improve its image and identity…this should include any intrinsic qualities of the building and how improvements could respect and enhance these. More generally, works to such buildings should create more visually appropriate frontages, a stronger response to context and high quality architecture.’

DP5 expects new development proposals to make a positive contribution to the fabric and integrity of existing buildings, conservation areas or other non-designated areas.

The proposed development has many positive elements particularly in relation to the alteration to the boundary treatments and the enhancement to Nos.137-139 Horninglow Street that would fulfil the requirements of DP1 and DP5.

The NPPF encourages the conservation of heritage assets appropriate to their significance so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of this and future generations. This is one of the core principles of sustainable development. This encourages the consideration of the long term consequences of proposal above and beyond this generation. The proposals for the containers and therefore the element of the application that presents the limited harm will be temporary and limited to three years. The more significant enhancement elements of the proposals will bring long-term lasting benefits to this and future generations. Therefore this application works towards the aspirations for sustainable development.

The proposals sustain and enhance the significance of the conservation area and would ensure that 137-139 Horninglow Street as historic buildings would be put into uses that would be consistent with their conservation, thus positively contributing to sustainable communities and economic vitality as well as making a positive contribution to the local character and distinctiveness. This adheres to the paragraph 131 of the NPPF.

Paragraph 134 requires proposals resulting in harm to be balanced against the public benefits of the application. The proposals present considerable public benefits that would outweigh the limited, less than substantial harm, identified to Plough Maltings. In addition, paragraph 138 requires a proportionate response and the relative significance of the one element that is affected by development to development affecting one element to

In terms of paragraph 137 of the NPPF the proposals presents the local planning authority with an opportunity to enhance and better reveal the significance of the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area and therefore should be treated favourably.

It is acknowledged that not all elements of a conservation area will necessarily contribute towards its significance. The element of the conservation area that is adversely affected by the proposals, that is the views to the Plough Maltings through the Application Site is a proportionately small element of the experience of the conservation area and the Plough Maltings. The relative significance of the view to the whole conservation area is limited (NPPF para. 138).

The PPG provides further guidance and advice on the decision making process and reiterates proportionality and the necessity to consider the degree to which the proposed changes enhance or detract from the identified significance and the ability to appreciate it (para 013.) This assessment has shown that the proposed development detracts from one identified view of the listed Plough Maltings and that its significance is as an industrial building associated with the brewing industry. The ability to appreciate it would still be possible over the containers through the Application Site. Other views to the Plough Maltings would remain unaffected by the proposals.

The PPG further states that a key consideration when assessing whether there is an adverse impact on a listed building is whether the adverse impact seriously affects a key element of its special architectural or historic interest. It is the degree of harm to the asset’s significance rather than the scale of development that is to be

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 38/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

assessed (PPG para. 017). The proposals will not affect the architectural or historic interest of the Plough Maltings. The significance of the Maltings in not derived from its setting but provides an understanding of the context and the extent of brewing industry in this part of Burton upon Trent at this time. This assessment is based on a clear understanding of the heritage asset and its setting (PPG para. 019). The public benefits arising from this application are at a nature and scale to be of benefit to the public at large. They are not just a private benefit as they have the potential to deliver economic, social and environmental progress within the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area (PPG para. 020).

This assessment has been undertaken using the guidance provided by Historic England GPA2 and GPA3. The proposals demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the significance of the heritage assets, their setting and the contribution made by their setting to the significance of the heritage assets and has assessed the potential impacts and the benefits of the application on that basis.

6.4 Conditions

The application is proposing a number of positive enhancements to the character and the appearance of the conservation area. The details of these are contained within the planning appeals documents. However, these can also be suitably conditioned to ensure that the development is undertaken in accordance with high conservation standards. It is expected that conditions relating to materials, including the provision of samples and details of materials and finishes to be used externally could be submitted to the Local Planning Authority (LPA). These could be discharged once they are satisfied that the details are acceptable to the LPA. It is expected that this would include details appertaining to brickwork, tiles, railings, gates, lighting, joinery details (doors and windows), rain water goods, landscaping and verge details. This would safeguard the character and appearance of the conservation area and the surrounding listed buildings in accordance with the local plan policies.

6.5 Summary

It is AECOM’s opinion that the proposal offers a considerable enhancement to the historic buildings, the conservation area and the setting of the listed buildings and would offer clear benefits that outweigh the impact of the siting of the containers within the back land area. There are suitable mitigation measures in place to ensure that any effects resulting from the placement of the containers have been incorporated into the design and layout. The temporary nature of the planning application means that any harm resulting from the proposal would be temporary and fully reversible at the end of the three year period.

The Planning Officer acknowledged that the proposed demolition of the two front storey extensions and amendments to the frontages were acceptable and that the removal of these elements would improve the appearance of the buildings within the streetscene and the conservation area and the setting of the adjoining listed building. However, it is considered that these improvements and visible enhancements were not given appropriate weighing in consideration of the overall planning balance, specifically NPPF 134, which requires the harm to be outweighed by the public benefits.

In summary, the follow public and heritage benefits resulting from this application are as follows:

 Enhancement of the approach to Horninglow Street Conservation Area;  Addresses a long term aspiration of East Staffordshire Council to refurbish the red brick buildings on the north side of Horninglow Street (identified in the CADD);

 Enhancing the significance of conservation area and the contribution of its setting by reversing years of incremental loss and attrition of traditional features and materials;

 Enhancement of 137-139 Horninglow Street will improve the appearance of the buildings within the streetscene and the conservation area, and the setting of the adjoining Plough Maltings;

 Improvement to the experience of the conservation area and Burton upon Trent more generally by reinstating traditional features and materials;

 Promotes the wider regeneration of the conservation area;  Provides activity and movement to the street scene;  Reinforces local distinctiveness and character;  Reducing the threat of the conservation area being identified as at ‘risk’ by Historic England;

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 39/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

 Securing a viable use of historic buildings within the conservation area and supporting its long term conservation;

 Long term permanent enhancements  Addresses the aims and objective of the Inner Burton Initiative. The short term, temporary, and fully reversible less than substantial harm resulting from the application is limited to:

 The containers being visible in the foreground of the listed Plough Maltings in a view obtainable through the Application Site from Horninglow Street. There are therefore many positive enhancements which would be considered public and heritage benefits arising from the proposal. The proposals would increase the experience of the everyday Victorian terrace and the conservation area and are sufficient enough to overcome and outweigh the limited harm to one view of the Grade II listed Plough Maltings. The long term benefits to the historic buildings, the conservation area and the setting of the listed building as a result of the proposal to the frontage would extend far beyond the life span of the three year temporary permission required for the siting of the containers. The proposals represent an opportunity to address years of attrition, lack of investment and downward decline of the building and the area more generally. Suitably worded conditions can insure that the heritage and the public benefits arising from the positive aspect of the application can be retained in perpetuity subject to being suitably monitored.

The proposals have had due regard to the statutory duties required by the Act under s66 and s72 in that the proposals now presented have considered the harmful impacts of the proposals for the citing of containers to the rear of 137-139 Horninglow Street and have, having engaged with the relevant policies of the adopted development policies of the East Staffordshire Local Plan SO9, SP24, SP25, DP1, DP5 and DP6, NPPF chapter 12, PPG, and the design guide and Historic England guidance, designed a scheme that incorporates sufficient positive elements to address identified concerns from the previous application. The proposals now presented demonstrates that the development, when considered as a whole, offers greater opportunities to enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area and the listed buildings that it does to harm the heritage assets. 7. Conclusion

This Heritage Supporting Statement has been produced to support an appeal against the refusal by East Staffordshire Borough Council of Application no. P/2016/00839: ‘Change of use of land for the siting of 49 storage containers, erection of 1.8 metre high entrance gates and 2.4m high security fencing with associated lighting and CCTV for a temporary period of 3 years and demolition of two single storey front extensions and amendments to the frontages of 137-139 Horninglow Street.’

It addresses heritage issues raised by the refusal of the most recent planning application. It considers the heritage significance and the setting of Horninglow Street Conservation Area, and the Grade II listed Plough Maltings; and the impact of the proposed development on these identified heritage assets. It addresses the reason for refusal of decision notice P/2016/00839.

An assessment of the significance and setting of the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area and Grade II Plough Maltings and other heritage assets has been undertaken, alongside an assessment of the proposals and the potential impacts. The proposal, through the siting of the containers in the back land area behind Nos.137-139 Horninglow Street would result in less than substantial harm to a view of the Plough Maltings and thus to a limited extent, an aspect of its setting. However, through the positive enhancement of Nos.137-139 Horninglow Street the setting of the Plough Maltings and the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area would be enhanced and improved.

The proposals preserve the significance of the Plough Maltings, albeit it affects one view of the building through the application site which is part of the way in which the asset is experienced from within the conservation area. The proposals, particularly to the frontage of Horninglow Street, enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area and the Plough Maltings. In legislative terms the proposed development has had regard to the Act s66 and s77.

It is considered that the proposals are in line with the policies of the adopted development plan policy: East Staffordshire Local Plan, by conserving and enhancing the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area and

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 40/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

supporting the heritage-led regeneration and the sustainable use of heritage assets (SO9). The proposals help create a sense of place by reinforcing character and local distinctiveness (SP24) through sensitive and informed design that respond to the context and significance of the conservation area (SP25).

The proposals are in accordance SP25 as it provides an opportunity to enhance the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area through small scale interventions that will safeguard the integrity of the historic building, the setting of listed buildings, and the conservation area and its character and appearance. The proposal would also address the aims and objective of the Inner Burton Initiative, a focus for regeneration, by improving poor quality Victorian terraced housing as part of sustainable development which reflects the local historic character.

Under SP25 it allows consideration for the elements of the proposal, in this case the placement of the containers, which have been identified as having less substantial harm at the bottom end of the scale to be considered and effectively and justifiably mitigated.

The proposed development has many positive elements particularly in relation to the alteration to the boundary treatments and the enhancement to Nos.137-139 Horninglow Street that would fulfil the requirements of DP1 and DP5.

The proposed development is in accordance with the East Staffordshire Design Guidance particularly 1.3.75 which states that ‘In General the Council will support proposals which improve the quality and visual appearance of the buildings, either through their conversion or their upgrading, in line with adopted planning policies. This can help to renew and enhance the built fabric of the Borough and improve its image and identity…this should include any intrinsic qualities of the building and how improvements could respect and enhance these. More generally, works to such buildings should create more visually appropriate frontages, a stronger response to context and high quality architecture.’

The proposals for the containers and, therefore, the element of the application that presents the limited harm will be temporary and limited to three years. The more significant enhancement elements of the proposals will bring long-term lasting benefits to this and future generations. Therefore this application works towards the aspirations for sustainable development as encouraged by NPPF paragraph 17.

The proposals sustain and enhance the significance of the conservation area and would ensure that 137-139 Horninglow Street, historic buildings, would be put into uses that would be consistent with their conservation thus positively contributing to sustainable communities and economic vitality as well as making a positive contribution to the local character and distinctiveness. This adheres to the paragraph 131 of the NPPF.

The proposals present considerable public benefits that would outweigh the limited, less than substantial harm, identified to Plough Maltings and therefore is consistent with the test as set out in paragraph 134 of the NPPF.

The proposals presents the local planning authority with an opportunity to enhance and better reveal the significance of the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area and therefore should be treated favourably and is, therefore, also in accordance with paragraph 137 of the NPPF.

The element of the conservation area that is adversely affected by the proposals, in this case the view to the Plough Maltings through the Application Site is, proportionately, a small element of the experience of the conservation area. The relative significance of that view to the whole conservation area and the listed building is limited and does not impair the ability to understand or appreciate the heritage asset and therefore is in accordance with paragraph 138 of the NPPF.

This assessment has shown that the proposed development detracts from one identified view of the listed Plough Maltings and that its significance is as an industrial building associated with the brewing industry. The ability to appreciate it would still be possible over the containers through the Application Site. Other views to the listed building would remain unaffected by the proposals. Therefore, this proposal is in accordance with PPG paragraph 013.

The proposals will not affect the architectural or historic interest of the Plough Maltings. The significance of the Maltings in not derived from its setting but provides an understanding of the context and the extent of brewing industry in this part of Burton upon Trent at this time. This assessment is based on a clear understanding of the heritage asset and its setting and, therefore, accords with PPG paragraph 019.

The public benefits arising from this application are at a nature and scale to be of benefit to the public at large. They are not just a private benefit as they have the potential to deliver economic, social and environmental

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 41/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

progress within the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area and are, therefore, in accordance with PPG paragraph 020.

The proposals demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the significance of the heritage assets, their setting and the contribution made by their setting to the significance of the heritage assets and has assessed the potential impacts and the benefits of the application on that basis. This assessment has therefore in accordance with Historic England GPA2 and GPA3.

In conclusion the proposal are in accordance with s66 and s72 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the adopted development plan East Staffordshire Local Plan Policies SO9, SP24, SP25, DP1, DP5 and DP6, the National Planning Policy Framework (particularly Paragraph 17 and Sections 7 and 12), PPG, the guidance contained within Sections 1.3,1.7, 3.2, 3.4, 3.15 and 3.19 of the East Staffordshire Design Guide and Historic England’s guidance.

The Heritage Supporting Statement specifically addresses the test in NPPF 134. It concludes that the identified significant long-term public benefits arising from the enhancement to the historic buildings and the conservation area, and to the setting of the Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area, and Plough Maltings significantly outweigh the limited, less than substantial harm, to the setting of the Plough Maltings from the temporary, short- term placement of the containers.

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 42/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

8. References

Communities and Local Government (2012) National Planning Policy Framework East Staffordshire Borough Council (2015) Local Plan East Staffordshire Borough Council (2008) East Staffordshire Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document East Staffordshire Borough Council (1990) Horninglow and Guild Street Conservation Area Designation Document Historic England (2015a) GPA2 Managing Significance in Decision-taking Historic England (2015b) GPA3 Setting and Views J T Leavesley (2016) Planning Application documents P/2016/00839

Websites (accessed 16th February 2017) http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/staffs/vol9/pp3-5 http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/staffs/vol9/pp5-20 http://www.burton-on-trent.org.uk/ https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-planning-policy-framework https://www.historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1374337 https://www.historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1038741 http://www.nationalbrewerycentre.co.uk/ https://www.historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1374321 https://www.historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1038742

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 43/44

Heritage Supporting Statement

aecom.com

Prepared for: J T Leavesley AECOM 44/44