Land at Goldborough Broadtown Wiltshire Heritage Desk-Based

Land at Goldborough Broadtown Wiltshire

Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

for

Good Energy Generation

CA Project: 4537

CA Report: 13532

September 2013

Land at Goldborough Broad Town Wiltshire

Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

CA Project: 4537

CA Report: 13532

prepared by Rosey Meara, Heritage Consultant

date September 2013

checked by Duncan Coe, Senior Heritage Consultant

date September 2013

approved by Duncan Coe, Senior Heritage Consultant

signed

date September 2013

issue 01

This report is confidential to the client. Cotswold Archaeology accepts no responsibility or liability to any third party to whom this report, or any part of it, is made known. Any such party relies upon this report entirely at their own risk. No part of this report may be reproduced by any means without permission.

© Cotswold Archaeology Cirencester Milton Keynes Andover Building 11 Unit 4 Office 49 Kemble Enterprise Park Cromwell Business Centre Basepoint Business Centre Kemble, Cirencester Howard Way, Newport Pagnell Caxton Close, Andover Gloucestershire, GL7 6BQ MK16 9QS Hampshire, SP10 3FG t. 01285 771022 t. 01908 218320 t. 01264 326549 f. 01285 771033 e. [email protected] © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

CONTENTS

SUMMARY ...... 1

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 2

Outline ...... 2 Location and landscape context ...... 2 Objectives, scope and consultation ...... 2 2. METHODOLOGY ...... 3

3. PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT ...... 6

Planning policy and guidance context ...... 6 National policy: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012) ...... 6 Local Planning Policy ...... 8 4. BASELINE SURVEY ...... 9

Summary of designated heritage assets ...... 9 Summary of non-designated or potential heritage assets ...... 10 Geology, topography and the paleoenvironment ...... 11 Prehistoric (pre AD 43) and Roman (AD 43 – AD 410) ...... 11 Early medieval (AD 410 to 1066) and medieval (AD 1066 to 1539) ...... 11 Post-medieval (1540 – 1800) and Modern (1801 – present) ...... 12 5. SETTINGS ASSESSMENT ...... 14

6 CONCLUSIONS ...... 20

8 REFERENCES ...... 21

APPENDIX A: GAZETTEER OF RECORDED HERITAGE ASSETS AND OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT ...... 22

APPENDIX B: EXTRACT FROM THE HEDGEROWS REGULATIONS 1997 ...... 23

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1 Site location plan Fig. 2 Location of recorded heritage sites and designated heritage assets Fig. 3 Extract from the map of 1757 Fig. 4 Extract from the Clyffe Pypard Parish Tithe map of 1844 Fig. 5 Extract from the First Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1886

Photo Fig. 1 Curved field boundary within proposed development site Photo Fig. 2 Area of slight ridge and furrow earthworks within proposed development site Photo Fig. 3 Area of former buildings within proposed development site Photo Fig. 4 Corrugated tin shed within proposed development site Photo Fig. 5 View towards Cotmarsh from southern area of proposed development site, view to south-west Photo Fig. 6 View south-west from within proposed development site Photo Fig. 7 View towards proposed development site from road adjacent to Wootton Fields Farm (Fig. 2, 3 and 4), view to south-east Photo Fig. 8 View towards proposed development site from Bincknoll Camp (Fig. 2, 1), view to north-west Photo Fig. 9 View towards proposed development site from footpath to south of Bincknoll Camp (Fig. 2, 2), view to north-west

SUMMARY

Project Name: Land at Goldborough, Broad Town Location: Wiltshire NGR: SU 0841 8037

In August 2013 Cotswold Archaeology was commissioned by Good Energy Generation to carry out a Heritage Desk-Based Assessment of land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire. The objective of the assessment was to identify the nature and extent of the recorded heritage resource both within the site and its immediate environs. A solar farm is proposed for the site.

The desk-based assessment has not identified any evidence to indicate that the proposed development site was a focus for prehistoric or Roman activity. The area was most likely marshland prior to enclosure in the medieval/post-medieval periods.

Any remains of buildings associated with the historic Goldborough Farmhouse, recorded within the proposed development site on 18th and 19th-century cartographic sources, and drainage channels visible on 1940s aerial photographs, are considered to be of limited heritage significance. Slight extant ridge and furrow earthworks, most likely of post-medieval origin, are also considered to be of limited heritage significance. Current design plans show that areas of former buildings will not be impacted by the proposed development.

Hedgerows within the proposed development are considered to have statutory protection under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997 (criteria for archaeology and history, reproduced in full in Appendix B) as they are depicted on a source which pre-dates the Enclosure Act for the parish. These hedgerows are considered to be of local heritage significance. Hedgerows will be retained within the proposed development.

The proposed development will not adversely impact designated heritage assets in the vicinity. Specifically, it will not adversely impact the Grade II Listed buildings at Wootton Fields Farm, Lower Ham Farmhouse or at Cotmarsh, or Bincknoll Camp Scheduled Monument.

1 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

1. INTRODUCTION

Outline 1.1 In August 2013 Cotswold Archaeology was commissioned by Good Energy Generation to carry out a Heritage Desk-Based Assessment of land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire (centred on NGR SU 0841 8037, Fig. 1). A solar farm is proposed for the site.

Location and landscape context 1.2 The proposed development site is approximately 22.6ha in area and is located c. 1.5km south of Wootton Bassett. The proposed development site is bounded to the west by residential properties (Goldborough Cottages) and Broadtown Lane, and to the north, east and south by agricultural fields. The proposed development site is situated across agricultural fields, pasture at the time of the site visit. Boundaries are predominantly hedgerow. A small block of woodland is located within the southern area of the proposed development site.

Objectives, scope and consultation 1.3 The assessment focuses upon the cultural heritage resource of the site itself, although the heritage resource of a minimum 1km ‘buffer’ around the site has also been assessed in detail, referred to as the ‘study area’ (Fig. 2).

1.4 The main objectives of the assessment were: • to identify and gather information on designated heritage assets within the site and study area; • to identify and gather information on non-designated heritage assets within the site and the study area; • to assess the above baseline information and offer an analysis of the potential for currently unrecorded heritage assets within the site; and • to provide an assessment of the potential impact of the proposed development upon the significance of Grade II Listed buildings within the study area, and upon Bincknoll Camp c. 2.2km south-east of the proposed development site.

2 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

2. METHODOLOGY

2.1 The methodology employed during this assessment was based upon key professional guidance including the ‘Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment’ (Institute for Archaeologists 2012); The Setting of Heritage Assets: English Heritage Guidance (2011); and the English Heritage ‘Conservation Principles’ (2008).

2.2 A study area was defined (as described in paragraph 1.4 above) in order to better contextualise the identified heritage resource by enabling examination of its wider landscape setting. The baseline data is discussed in Section 4 and a gazetteer of all known and potential heritage assets is provided in Appendix A. All heritage assets have been attributed a unique reference number and their locations are recorded on Fig. 2.

2.3 The baseline survey involved consultation of readily available archaeological and historical information from documentary and cartographic sources. The major repositories of information consulted comprised:

English Heritage National Heritage List • World Heritage Sites • Scheduled Monuments • Listed buildings • Registered Parks and Gardens • Registered Battlefields

Wiltshire and Swindon Historic Environment Record (WHER) • Database of known archaeological sites, findspots, historic buildings and previous archaeological works; • Published and unpublished documentary sources (including development control site reports); • Extensive Urban Survey.

Wiltshire and Swindon Archives • Published documentary sources; and • Historic maps and photographs.

3 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

National Monuments Record (NMR) • AMIE (Archives and Monuments Information, England) data including known archaeological sites, findspots and previous archaeological works; and • Aerial photography collections.

Online sources • Including the British Geological Survey (BGS) Geology of Britain Viewer and Local Plan information.

A site visit was undertaken on 9 September 2013 to identify any visible potential heritage assets not recorded by the baseline sources and to more fully understand the potential constraints, if any, to the proposed development. Designated heritage assets in the vicinity were also visited at this time.

The Setting of Heritage Assets Setting 2.4 The English Heritage volume The Setting of Heritage Assets (2011) defines ‘setting’ as ‘the surroundings in which an asset is experienced. All heritage assets have a setting, irrespective of the form in which they survive and whether they are designated or not. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance, or may be neutral’ (ibid, 5). The guidance notes that ‘the extent and importance of setting is often expressed by reference to visual considerations’ (ibid) but also notes that setting also comprises other elements that contribute to how one experiences a heritage asset, including factors such as noise, dust and vibration; by spatial associations; and by an understanding of historic relationships. Thus setting comprises one element of the overall significance or ‘value’ of a heritage asset.

Heritage Significance (value) 2.5 Heritage significance (value) itself is best defined by English Heritage’s ‘Conservation Principles’ which describes value as a combination of evidential value; historical value; aesthetic value; and communal value (2008). Evidential value derives from those elements of an historic asset that can provide evidence about past human activity, including its physical remains or historic fabric. Historical value can derive from particular aspects of past ways of life, or association with notable families, persons, events or movements – it is the connection between past

4 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

events and society with the present. Aesthetic value derives from the sensory and intellectual stimulation people draw from an historic asset. It may include its physical form, and how it lies within its setting. It may be the result of design, or an unplanned outcome of a process of events. Communal value derives from the meanings that an historic asset has for the people who relate to it, or for whom it figures in their collective experience or memory. It may be commemorative or symbolic, such as meaning for identity or collective memory.

Settings assessment 2.6 The English Heritage document The Setting of Heritage Assets (2011) provides guidance on setting and development management, including assessing the implications of development proposals. A staged approach is recommended for the latter, the first step of which is to identify the heritage assets which may be affected and their settings.

2.7 Step 2 of the English Heritage guidance is to assess whether, how and to what degree these settings make a positive contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s), i.e. ‘what matters and why’. This includes a consideration of the key attributes of the heritage asset itself, then considers: • the physical surroundings of the asset, including its relationship with other heritage assets • the way the asset is appreciated • the asset’s associations and patterns of use.

2.8 The third step is to assess the effect of the proposed development on the significance of assets through the consideration of the key attributes of the proposed development in terms of its: • location and siting • form and appearance • additional effects • permanence

2.9 The fourth step is to maximise enhancement and minimise harm and step five is making and documenting the decision and monitoring outcomes.

5 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

2.10 The current assessment considers stages 1 to 3. Designated heritage assets in the vicinity of the site (within the 1km study area) comprise six Grade II Listed buildings, namely: • Milestone North of Wootton Fields Farm (Fig. 2, 2); • Wootton Fields Farm (Fig. 2, 3); • Barn on roadside south west of Wootton Fields Farm (Fig. 2, 4); • Lower Ham Farmhouse (Fig. 2, 5); • Little Cotmarsh Farmhouse (Fig. 2, 6); and • Great Cotmarsh Farmhouse (Fig. 2, 7).

2.11 The milestone is not considered to be sensitive to potential adverse impacts resulting from the proposed development and was excluded from the assessment. The assessment considered the five other Grade II Listed buildings. A review of designated heritage assets in the wider area identified one which was potentially sensitive to adverse impacts from the proposed development, namely the Scheduled Monument Bincknoll Camp, located c. 2.1km south-east of the proposed development site (Fig. 2, 1) and so this has also been subject to a detailed assessment.

3. PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT

Planning policy and guidance context 3.1 The assessment has been written within the following legislative, planning policy and guidance context: • National Heritage Act 1983 (amended 2002), • Town and Country Planning Act (1990) • Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (1990) • The Setting of Heritage Assets: English Heritage Guidance (2011) • English Heritage Conservation Principles: policies and guidance for the sustainable management of the historic environment (2008) • PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment: Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide (2010) • National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

National policy: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012) 3.1 The National Planning Policy Framework sets out planning policies relating to ‘conserving and enhancing the historic environment’. It defines the historic environment as ‘all aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction

6 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged, and landscaped and planted or managed flora.’ It further classifies a ‘heritage asset’ as ‘a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest.

3.2 Heritage assets include designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing). Policies in the NPPF relate to both the treatment of the assets themselves and their settings, both of which are a material consideration in development management decision making.

3.3 The NPPF states that “The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development” and that there are “three dimensions to sustainable development: economic, social and environmental”. The role the environment will play is described as “contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, use of natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change including moving to a low carbon economy”.

3.4 Within the over-arching roles that the planning system will play, a set of 12 “core land-use planning principles” have been developed to underpin place-shaping and decision making. The 10th principle is: • “conserve 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”

3.5 Further to this, local planning authorities can request that the applicant should describe “the significance of any heritage assets affected by a proposed development, including any contribution made by their setting”. The level of detail required in the assessment should be “proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance”.

3.6 Local planning authorities should take this assessment into account when considering the impact of a proposed development, “to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal”.

7 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

3.7 A key policy within the NPPF is that “when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be.”

3.8 “Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a Grade II Listed building, park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to or loss of designated heritage assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, battlefields, grade I and II* Listed buildings, Grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional.”

3.9 However, where a proposed development will lead to “less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset”, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.

Local Planning Policy 3.2 The Wiltshire and Swindon Structure Plan, adopted April 2006, outlines policy regarding archaeological heritage and includes the following:

• ‘HE2: Features of archaeological or historic interest and their settings should be protected from inappropriate development. Where nationally important archaeological or historic remains, whether Scheduled sites or not, are affected by proposed development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation in situ.’

3.3 Local Planning Policy is also detailed in the North Wiltshire Local Plan (adopted June 2006) ‘Saved’ policies. Relevant policies are HE4-6 and HE8:

‘HE4 Development, demolition or alterations involving listed buildings Development or alteration affecting a listed building will only be permitted where it preserves or enhances the building, its setting and any features of special architectural or historic interest that it possesses. ‘

8 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

‘HE5 Scheduled Ancient Monuments and Nationally important features Permission will not be granted where a proposal would have an adverse effect on a scheduled ancient monument or other nationally important feature of archaeological or historic interest or their setting. There will be a presumption in favour of the physical preservation in situ of nationally important archaeological remains and their settings, whether the site is scheduled or not.’

‘HE6 Locally important archaeological sites Development in defined areas of special archaeological significance, or in other locally important archaeological sites, will only be permitted where: i) Any archaeological remains would be unaffected by the proposals; or ii) Satisfactory measures are taken to ensure the physical preservation of any archaeological remains in situ; or iii) In cases where the significance of any archaeological remains is outweighed by the need for and benefits of the development, satisfactory measures are taken to excavate and record the site and its remains.’

‘HE8 Archaeological evaluation Where any nationally or locally important archaeological site or historic building is likely to be affected, applicants will be requested to submit an archaeological evaluation before planning permission is granted. Where necessary, adequate archaeological investigation and recording will be required before, and / or during, building or other operations, in order to safeguard important evidence which might otherwise be destroyed without record.’

4. BASELINE SURVEY

Summary of designated heritage assets International designations 4.1 No World Heritage Sites, sites included on the Tentative List of Future Nominations for World Heritage Sites (January 2012) are situated within the site or its vicinity.

National designations

9 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

4.2 There are no Scheduled Monuments within the proposed development site or the study area. Bincknoll Camp Scheduled Monument is located c. 2.1km to the south- east (Fig. 2, 1).

4.3 Six Grade II Listed Buildings are located within the study area. These comprise: • Milestone North of Wootton Fields Farm (Fig. 2, 2); • Wootton Fields Farm (Fig. 2, 3); • Barn on roadside south west of Wootton Fields Farm (Fig. 2, 4); • Lower Ham Farmhouse (Fig. 2, 5); • Little Cotmarsh Farmhouse (Fig. 2, 6); and • Great Cotmarsh Farmhouse (Fig. 2, 7).

4.4 No Registered Parks and Gardens or Registered Battlefields are located within the site or the study area.

Local Designations 4.5 No Conservation Areas are located within the study area.

Summary of non-designated or potential heritage assets 4.6 Buildings are recorded within the proposed development site on 18th and 19th- century cartographic sources. No extant historic buildings were visible at the time of the site visit, although these areas were heavily overgrown. There is potential for limited upstanding remains, and for associated below-ground remains.

4.7 Drainage channels are visible within the proposed development site on 1940s aerial photographs. No clear remains of these earthworks were visible at the time of the site visit.

4.8 Ridge and furrow earthworks, most likely of post-medieval origin, are visible within the proposed development site on 1940s aerial photographs and very slight extant earthworks were observed during the site visit.

4.9 Hedgerows within the proposed development are considered to have statutory protection under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997 (criteria for archaeology and history, reproduced in full in Appendix B) as they are depicted on a source which pre-dates the Enclosure Act for the parish.

10 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Geology, topography and the paleoenvironment 4.10 The solid geology of the proposed development site is mapped at Ampthill Clay Formation and Kimmeridge Clay Formation mudstone (BGS 2013). No drift deposits or deposits of potential palaeoenvironmental interest are recorded.

4.11 The proposed development site is located in an area of low-lying ground to the north-west of the Marlborough Downs. Ground level within the proposed development site slopes gently to the south.

Prehistoric (pre AD 43) and Roman (AD 43 – AD 410) 4.12 No prehistoric finds or features are recorded in the vicinity of the proposed development site. Only one Romano-British findspot, comprising pottery located c. 1.7km to the south-west, has been identified (Fig. 2, 8). Bincknoll Camp (Fig. 2, 1) located on a ridge of higher ground c. 2.1km to the south-east is potentially of Iron Age origin, although a medieval origin has also been suggested (discussed further in medieval and the Settings Assessment sections below). Undated cropmarks including a possible settlement as well as a trackway and rectangular enclosure are recorded within the study area (Fig. 2, 10 and 11). Morphologically these would appear to be most likely of medieval or later date (see also medieval below), although an earlier origin cannot be ruled out at this stage. The area of the proposed development site was most likely marshy prior to being drained in the medieval/post- medieval periods (VCH 1970, 23). The placename ‘Cotmarsh’ (c. 600m south-east of the site) supports this theory. This may explain the apparent absence of focused prehistoric/Romano-British activity in the vicinity.

Early medieval (AD 410 to 1066) and medieval (AD 1066 to 1539) 4.13 There is no evidence from within the proposed development site or its immediate vicinity of early medieval activity, although Royal Wootton Bassett c. 2km to the north-west is thought to be of early medieval origin.

4.14 Settlement at Cotmarsh c. 600m to the south-east is thought to be of medieval origin (Fig. 2, 9). Cropmarks to the south of Cotmarsh have been suggested as representing a possible settlement. These are undated, although their rectilinear but slightly irregular form may indicate that they are of medieval origin (Fig. 2, 10). Likewise a cropmarks potentially representing a trackway and rectangular enclosure (Fig. 2, 11) may also be of medieval date, although an earlier/later origin cannot be ruled out at this stage.

11 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

4.15 Ridge and furrow earthworks are visible within the proposed development site on historic aerial photographs (transcribed onto Fig. 5) and very slight ridge and furrow earthworks were visible at the time of the site visit (Photo Fig. 2). The earthworks are spaced with between 5m and 8m between furrows and the majority of are straight in plan (a block in the central area of the proposed development site is curved), without the distinctive reverse ‘S’ shape which is characteristic of medieval agricultural practices. Medieval ridge and furrow is also typically a little wider, c. 8- 10m. Therefore it is considered likely that the ridge and furrow earthworks within the site originated as a result of post-medieval agricultural practices (see also post- medieval below).

4.16 Bincknoll Camp (Fig. 2, 1) is described in the associated HER record as a medieval motte and bailey castle. However, it is considered likely that it is of Iron Age origin although potentially with medieval modification (Faye Glover Wiltshire HER Assistant).

Post-medieval (1540 – 1800) and Modern (1801 – present) 4.17 The proposed development site was historically part of Broad Town, a hamlet of the Parish of Clyffe Pypard (although the manor of Broad Town was located within the neighbouring parish of Broad Hinton). The proposed development site is depicted on a 1753 map of Broad Town (Fig. 3). This depicts the proposed development site situated across fields associated with Goldborough Farm. The buildings of Goldbourough Farm are depicted in the northern area of the proposed development site (Fig. 3, A).

4.18 The parishes of Clyffe Pypard and Broad Hinton (including Broad Town) were enclosed by Act of Parliament in 1822. The proposed development site is not depicted on the accompanying map.

4.19 The proposed development site is next depicted in detail on the 1844 Clyffe Pypard Parish Tithe map (Fig. 4). This also shows the buildings of Goldborough Farm (Fig. 4, A), recorded as House and Garden (the red building within plot 5) and Barn Sheds and yards (within plot 6) in the accompanying Apportionment Register. To the south-west of the farm, an isolated building, recorded as Shed and Yard is also depicted (Fig. 4, B). At the south-western edge of the proposed development site is another building, recorded as House and Garden (Fig. 4, C).

12 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

4.20 By the time of the First Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1886 the house at A (coloured red on the Tithe map) appears to have been demolished (cf. Figs. 4 and 5 A). New buildings are depicted at Goldborough Cottages, immediately west of the site, which formed the new focus for the farm (Fig. 5, D). The house depicted on the Tithe map at C had also been removed by this time.

4.21 At the time of the site visit the plot covering A was heavily overgrown (Photo Fig. 3). No extant buildings were visible, although there is some potential for above ground remains to survive. A corrugated tin barn was visible at C (Photo Fig. 4), also heavily overgrown. No historic fabric was observed at building C.

Earthworks and hedgerows 4.22 As discussed in the medieval section, above, ridge and furrow earthworks are visible within the site on historic aerial photographs and very slight extant earthworks were observed during the site visit (Photo Fig. 2). The predominantly straight form of the earthworks, and the width between furrows (5-8m rather than the 8-10m normally considered typical of medieval ridge and furrow) suggests that they are most likely of post-medieval origin. Drainage channels are visible in the northern area of the site on historical aerial photographs (transcribed onto Fig. 5); although no clear earthworks were visible in this area at the time of the site visit. These drainage channels are most likely associated with the settlement at the historic Goldborough Farm (Figs. 3-5, A) and are potentially of post-medieval date, although an earlier origin cannot be ruled out.

4.23 A curvilinear boundary is located within the northern area of the proposed development site, surrounding the historic Goldborough Farm (Figs. 3-5, A; Photo Fig. 1). The distinctive form of this boundary, when compared with the straighter, more regular boundaries of the adjacent fields, may suggest that it has an earlier origin, potentially associated with the establishment of the farm.

4.24 Hedgerows present within the proposed development site along boundaries depicted on the map of 1753 are considered to have statutory protection under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997 (criteria for archaeology and history, reproduced in full in Appendix B) as they pre-date the Enclosure Act for the parish.

13 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

5. SETTINGS ASSESSMENT 5.1 Heritage assets identified for inclusion in the settings assessment are detailed in paragraph 2.11 above.

Bincknoll Camp (Fig. 2, 1) Stage 1 – the heritage asset and its setting 5.2 Bincknoll Camp Scheduled Monument is located at the edge of a north-west facing ridge c. 2.1km south-east of the proposed development site. Although previously considered to be a medieval motte and bailey castle, it is now considered most likely to have originated as an Iron Age hillfort, potentially modified in the medieval period. The Scheduled Area encompasses a triangular-shaped bank. Further banks are visible to the south. Quarrying is recorded within the monument.

5.3 Hillforts are perhaps one of the best known and visible forms of later prehistoric monuments in Britain. As their name suggests hillforts are generally located in prominent locations, on hills, utilising the natural topography as part of their defences, although low-lying forms are also included in the monument type. When situated on areas of higher ground, they often command extensive views, which may include intervisibility with contemporary monuments, such as other hillforts. Although the main construction phase of hillforts dates to the Iron Age, they are often located on sites of earlier activity, and in many case there is evidence of continued use in the Roman and early medieval periods. Motte and Bailey castles were constructed across England following the Norman Conquest, in some cases based on earlier fortifications, as is potentially the case at Bincknoll Camp. Some of these castles were relatively short lived, as may have been the case at Bincknoll, while others were subsequently rebuilt in stone.

5.4 At the time of the site visit there were distant views or the wider landscape looking north from the proposed development site, and more limited views to the east and south. Views towards the proposed development site were screened at the time of the site visit by woodland immediately west of the Scheduled Monument (Photo Fig. 8). However, views from the footpath to the west of the Scheduled Monument (Photo Fig. 9) demonstrate that views towards the proposed development site are possible form the edge of the ridge, and views towards the proposed development site from the Scheduled Area may be possible in winter.

14 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Stage 2 – significance and the contribution of setting to significance 5.5 Bincknoll Camp derives its significance from its evidential value, that is the physical remains and the information they potentially hold on Iron Age/medieval life (if it indeed proves to be of this date). It’s visible above ground remains also hold illustrative value (a facet of historic value), enabling a perception of prehistoric/medieval life not facilitated where below-ground remains are present only. As a medieval monument it would also be considered to have historic value, linked to its association with the Norman Conquest.

5.6 Bincknoll Camp is located on a north-west facing ridge. Both the visibility of the camp from the wider area, and the views to the wider landscape afforded from the camp, form part of the original function of the monument and contribute to its significance. However, the contribution of views to the north-west are limited by the presence of woodland along the western edge of the monument which impedes views in this direction.

Stage 3 – the impact of the proposed development on the significance of the heritage asset 5.7 The proposed development would potentially be visible in the middle distance in glimpsed views north-west from the Scheduled Area in winter. Views in other directions, including to the north-west, will remain unchanged. The potential presence of a solar farm in views north-west will not reduce an understanding or appreciation of the topographic prominence of the monument or the form of its earthworks.

5.8 The solar farm will be located within the existing agricultural framework. Existing hedgerows will be retained, including mature trees and the historic landscape form will remain intelligible. Solar panels have a limited above ground height (normally <3m) which restricts the noticeable change to the landscape, and it will not alter the skyline. The development will not introduce significant movement or activity. Solar farms are recognised as a highly reversible form of development, with an anticipated lifespan of 25 years. At most, it may be considered that the proposed development would result in a slight detraction from the aesthetic properties of the wider agricultural landscape. In itself this would not comprise a form or degree of change which would harm the overall significance of the Scheduled Monument. In summary, potential limited views of the proposed development in winter would not adversely impact the significance of Bincknoll Camp Scheduled Monument.

15 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Wootton Fields Farm (Fig. 2, 3)and Barn on roadside south west of Wootton Fields Farm (Fig. 2, 4) Stage 1 – the heritage asset and its setting 5.9 Wootton Fields Farm is an early 19th-century two-storey brick farmhouse located c. 300m north-west of the proposed development site. The timber-framed Barn, located to the south-east of the farmhouse is of the same date. The barn appears to have been converted to residential/domestic use. The two buildings are part of Wootton Fields Farm complex, located immediately west of Marlborough Road, which includes further buildings to the north and south of the farmhouse.

5.10 The two Grade II Listed buildings are part of a nucleated group, which face inwards towards an associated yard. The current setting of Wootton Fields Farm and the Barn comprises the other buildings of the farm, located adjacent to Marlborough Road, as well as further 20th-century buildings beyond the farm complex to the east and south and agricultural land.

5.11 Views to the proposed development site from the farmhouse are screened by intervening buildings, as well as by vegetation. At the time of the site visit views towards the proposed development site from Marlborough Road, adjacent to Wootton Fields Farm, were screened by intervening vegetation (Photo Fig. 7). The relatively flat nature of the intervening topography means that minimal vegetation height is required to provide screening. This, combined with the slight southerly aspect of the proposed development site, means that it is considered unlikely that there would be intervisibility in winter.

Stage 2 – significance and the contribution of setting to significance 5.12 The Grade II Listed buildings at Wootton Fields Farm mainly derive their significance from the evidential value of their historic fabric and from their illustrative value as an example of a small rural farmstead. As part of a small rural farmstead they may also be considered to have aesthetic value, although this is not key to their significance. Adjacent agricultural land which enables their origins as rural buildings to be understood may be seen to contribute to their significance. Wider agricultural land, including the proposed development site is not considered to make a key contribution to their significance.

16 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Stage 3 – the impact of the proposed development on the significance of the heritage asset 5.13 The proposed development will not physically impact the Listed buildings at Wootton Fields Farm or alter the relationship between the buildings which make up the historic farmstead. Views to the proposed development site are screened by intervening building and vegetation. Where any limited glimpsed views of the proposed development are possible this would at most result in an alteration to the wider agricultural landscape, which would not in itself adversely impact the significance of the Listed buildings.

Lower Ham Farmhouse (Fig. 2, 5) Stage 1 – the heritage asset and its setting 5.14 Lower Ham Farmhouse is a two-storey brick and timber-framed 17th/18th-century farmhouse located c. 500m west of the proposed development site. The farmhouse has been converted into flats.

5.15 The current setting of the farmhouse comprises adjacent buildings which historically formed a small farmstead, as well as surrounding agricultural land. Views towards the proposed development site are screened by intervening vegetation including a small block of woodland immediately east of the farmstead, and the farm complex was not visible from the proposed development site at the time of the site visit (Photo Fig. 6).

Stage 2 – significance and the contribution of setting to significance 5.16 Lower Ham Farmhouse mainly derives its significance from the evidential value of its historic fabric and from its illustrative value as an example of a rural farmhouse, although this has been reduced by its conversion to flats. As an attractive rural building it may also be considered to have aesthetic value, this is not considered to be key to its significance. Adjacent agricultural land which enables its origins as a farmhouse to be understood may be seen to contribute to its significance. Wider agricultural land, including the proposed development site is not considered to make a key contribution to its significance.

Stage 3 – the impact of the proposed development on the significance of the heritage asset 5.17 The proposed development will not physically impact Lower Ham Farmhouse or its relationship with the buildings which make up the historic farmstead. Views to the

17 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

proposed development site are screened by intervening vegetation. In the event that limited glimpsed views of the proposed development were possible this would at most result in an alteration to the wider agricultural landscape, which would not in itself adversely impact the significance of the Listed building.

Little Cotmarsh Farmhouse (Fig. 2, 6) Stage 1 – the heritage asset and its setting 5.18 Little Cotmarsh Farmhouse is a two-storey 17th-century farmhouse located c. 700m south-east of the proposed development site. The farmhouse is located at the eastern edge of a nucleated group of farm buildings, which face towards an associated farmyard.

5.19 The current immediate setting of Little Cotmarsh Farmhouse comprises the adjacent agricultural buildings which make up the farmstead, located to the east of an unnamed road. The wider setting comprises other buildings within Cotmarsh, as well as surrounding agricultural land.

5.20 Views towards the proposed development site are screened by intervening buildings, including buildings on the west side of the road to the west of Little Cotmarsh Farmhouse, and vegetation. Buildings at Cotmarsh were not visible from the proposed development site, although a small group of recent agricultural buildings to the north-west of Cotmarsh were visible (Photo Fig. 5).

Stage 2 – significance and the contribution of setting to significance 5.21 Little Cotmarsh Farmhouse mainly derives its significance from the evidential value of its historic fabric and from its illustrative value as an example of a rural farmhouse. As an attractive rural building it may also be considered to have aesthetic value, this is not considered to be key to its significance. Associated historic buildings within the farmstead may also be considered to contribute to its significance. Adjacent agricultural land which enables its origins as a farmhouse to be understood may be seen to contribute to its significance. Wider agricultural land, including the proposed development site is not considered to make a key contribution to its significance.

Stage 3 – the impact of the proposed development on the significance of the heritage asset

18 © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Goldborough, Broad Town, Wiltshire: Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

5.22 The proposed development will not physically impact Little Cotmarsh Farmhouse or its relationship with the buildings which make up the historic farmstead. Views to the proposed development site are screened by intervening buildings vegetation. In the event that limited glimpsed views of the proposed development were possible this would at most result in an alteration to the wider agricultural landscape, which would not in itself adversely impact the significance of the Listed building.

Great Cotmarsh Farmhouse (Fig. 2, 7) Stage 1 – the heritage asset and its setting 5.23 Great Cotmarsh Farmhouse is a two-storey 18th-century farmhouse with mid 19th- century additions located c. 630m south-east of the proposed development site. Associated farm buildings are located to the north.

5.24 The current immediate setting of Great Cotmarsh Farmhouse comprises the agricultural buildings to the north and surrounding agricultural land. The wider setting includes other buildings within Cotmarsh,

5.25 Views towards the proposed development site are screened by intervening vegetation. Buildings at Cotmarsh were not visible from the proposed development site at the time of the site visit, although a small group of recent agricultural buildings to the north-west of Cotmarsh were visible (Photo Fig. 5).

Stage 2 – significance and the contribution of setting to significance 5.26 Great Cotmarsh Farmhouse mainly derives its significance from the evidential value of its historic fabric and from its illustrative value as an example of a rural farmhouse. As an attractive rural building it may also be considered to have aesthetic value, this is not considered to be key to its significance. Adjacent agricultural land which enables its origins as a farmhouse to be understood may be seen to contribute to its significance. Wider agricultural land, including the proposed development site is not considered to make a key contribution to its significance.

Stage 3 – the impact of the proposed development on the significance of the heritage asset 5.27 The proposed development will not physically impact Great Cotmarsh Farmhouse. Views to the proposed development site are screened by intervening vegetation. In the event that limited glimpsed views of the proposed development were possible

this would at most result in an alteration to the wider agricultural landscape, which would not in itself adversely impact the significance of the Listed building.

6 CONCLUSIONS

6.1 The desk-based assessment has not identified any evidence to indicate that the proposed development site was a focus for prehistoric or Roman activity. The area was most likely marshland prior to enclosure in the medieval/post-medieval periods.

6.2 Buildings associated with the historic Goldborough Farm are recorded within the proposed development site on 18th and 19th-century cartographic sources. No extant historic buildings were visible at the time of the site visit, although these areas were heavily overgrown. There is potential for limited upstanding remains, and for associated below-ground remains. Any such remains are likely to be of limited heritage significance. Current design plans indicate that these areas of former buildings will not be impacted by the proposed development.

6.3 Drainage channels are visible within the proposed development site on 1940s aerial photographs. No clear remains of these earthworks were visible at the time of the site visit. Below-ground remains of drainage channels are of limited heritage significance.

6.4 Ridge and furrow earthworks, most likely of post-medieval origin, are visible within the proposed development site on 1940s aerial photographs and very slight extant earthworks were observed during the site visit. As very slight remains of post- medieval ridge and furrow, these earthworks are considered to be of limited heritage significance.

6.5 Hedgerows within the proposed development are considered to have statutory protection under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997 (criteria for archaeology and history, reproduced in full in Appendix B) as they are depicted on a source which pre-dates the Enclosure Act for the parish. These hedgerows are considered to be of local historic significance. Hedgerows will be retained within the proposed development.

6.6 The proposed development will not adversely impact designated heritage assets in the vicinity. Specifically, it will not adversely impact the Grade II Listed buildings at

Wootton Fields Farm, Lower Ham Farmhouse or at Cotmarsh, or Bincknoll Camp Scheduled Monument.

8 REFERENCES

British Geological Survey, 2013, Geology of Britain Viewer, 1:50,000 geological mapping, solid and superficial (viewed online September 2013)

English Heritage, 2008, Conservation Principles: Policies and Guidance

English Heritage, 2011, The Setting of Heritage Assets: English Heritage Guidance

Institute for Archaeologists, 2011, Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk Based Assessment

Victoria County History (VCH), 1970, Wiltshire Vol. 9

Cartographic sources 1753 Map of Clyffe Pypard: Broad Town 1844 Clyffe Pypard Parish Tithe map 1886 First Edition Ordnance Survey map, 25” series, sheet 15.13 1900 Second Edition Ordnance Survey map, 25” series, sheet 15.13 1924 Third Edition Ordnance Survey map, 25” series, sheet 15.13

Aerial photographs held at the English Heritage Archives Runs dated 14/04/46; 01/12/52; 10/04/73; 01/07/68; 02/09/82; 09/04/89; 03/05/93; 13/06/67; 25/08/98; 25/07/98

APPENDIX A: GAZETTEER OF RECORDED HERITAGE ASSETS AND OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT

No. Description Period Status NGR WHER Major (all SU) AIME Source NHL 1 Bincknoll Camp Prehistoric Scheduled 10757 1005685 EH Monument 79281 2 Milestone North of Wootton Modern Grade II 07688 1183918 EH Fields Farm Listed 80598 building 3 Wootton Fields Farm Modern Grade II 07748 1363655 EH Listed 80447 building 4 Barn on roadside south west of Modern Grade II 07781 1022692 EH Wootton Fields Farm Listed 80435 building 5 Lower Ham Farmhouse Post-medieval Grade II 07773 1022644 EH Listed 79839 building 6 Little Cotmarsh Farmhouse Post-medieval Grade II 09062 1363670 EH Listed 79812 building 7 Great Cotmarsh Farmhouse Post-medieval Grade II 09062 1363670 EH Listed 79812 building 8 Findspot: Romano-British Roman - 0734 MWI8901 WHER pottery 7927 9 Cotmarsh medieval settlement - 0903 MWI9831 WHER 7970 10 Cropmarks: possible settlement Undated - 0897 MWI8956 WHER 7919 11 Cropmarks: trackway and Undated - 0945 MWI9373 WHER rectangular enclosure 8120 MWI9380

APPENDIX B: EXTRACT FROM THE HEDGEROWS REGULATIONS 1997

Extracted From Statutory Instruments 1997 No. 1160 The Hedgerows Regulations 1997, Schedule 1: Additional criteria for determining ‘Important’ hedgerows;

PART II CRITERIA Archaeology and history

1. The hedgerow marks the boundary, or part of the boundary, of at least one historic parish or township; and for this purpose “historic” means existing before 1850.

2. The hedgerow incorporates an archaeological feature which is- (a) included in the schedule of monuments compiled by the Secretary of State under section 1 (schedule of monuments) of the Ancient Monuments and Scheduled Areas Act 1979(g); or (b) recorded at the relevant date in a sites and Monuments Record.

3. The hedgerow- (a) is situated wholly or partly within an archaeological site included or recorded as mentioned in paragraph 2 or on land adjacent to and associated with such a site; and (b) is associated with any monument or feature on that site.

4. The hedgerow- (a) marks the boundary of a pre-1600 AD estate or manor recorded at the relevant date in a sites and Monuments Record or on a document held at that date at a Record Office; or (b) is visibly related to any building or feature of such an estate or manor.

5. The hedgerow- (a) is recorded in a document held at the relevant date at a Record Office as an integral part of a field system pre-dating the Inclosure acts(a); or (b) is part of, or visibly related to, any building or other feature associated with such a system, and that system- (i) is substantially complete; or (ii) is of a pattern which is recorded in a document prepared before the relevant date by a local planning authority, within the meaning of the 1990 Act(b), for the purposes of development control within the authority’s area, as a key landscape characteristic

23 N Cirencester 01285 771022 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE Land at Goldborough, Broad Town Wiltshire Wiltshire

FIGURE TITLE Site location plan

0 1km

FIGURE NO. Reproduced from the 2013 Ordnance Survey Explorer map with PROJECT NO. 4537 DATE 10-09-2012 the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller DRAWN BY IA REVISION 00 of Her Majesty's Stationery Office c Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109 APPROVED BY LG SCALE@A4 1:25,000 1 007070 0 08080 0 09090 1 10000 N

site 11 study area prehistoric 810810 Roman medieval post-medieval modern undated Grade II Listed Building 2 Scheduled Monument 3 7 cropmarks 3 1 4 6 1 direction of photograph 4

2 5

800800

5 7 9

0 500m

Reproduced from the 2002 Ordnance Survey Explorer map with the permission 8 of Ordnance Survey on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office 8 c Crown copyright Cotswold Archaeology Ltd 100002109

10 Cirencester 01285 771022 1 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk 779090 e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE Land at Goldborough, Broad Town Wiltshire

FIGURE TITLE Location of recorded heritage sites and designated heritage assets

PROJECT NO. 4537 DATE 10-09-2013 FIGURE NO. DRAWN BY IA REVISION 00 SUSU APPROVED BY LG SCALE@A3 1:12,500 2 3

Cirencester 01285 771022 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 3 Extract from the map of 1757 Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE 4 Extract from the Clyffe Pypard Parish Tithe map of 1844 Land at Goldborough, Broad Town Wiltshire

FIGURE TITLE Historic mapping

PROJECT NO. 4537 DATE 10-09-2013 FIGURE NO. DRAWN BY IA REVISION 00 APPROVED BY LG SCALE@A4 1:10,000 (approx.) 3 & 4 5

Cirencester 01285 771022 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 5 Extract from the First Edition Ordnance Survey map of Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk 1886 e [email protected] PROJECT TITLE Land at Goldborough, Broad Town Wiltshire

FIGURE TITLE Historic mapping area of earthworks visible in 1940’s aerial photographs direction of ridge and furrow earthworks PROJECT NO. 4537 DATE 10-09-2013 FIGURE NO. visible in aerial photographs DRAWN BY IA REVISION 00 APPROVED BY LG SCALE@A4 1:10,000 (approx.) 5 1

Cirencester 01285 771022 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 1 Curved field boundary within proposed development site Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk e [email protected]

PROJECT TITLE 2 Area of slight ridge and furrow earthworks within Land at Goldborough, Broad Town Wiltshire proposed development site FIGURE TITLE Photographs

PROJECT NO. 4537 DATE 10-09-2013 PHOTO. NO. DRAWN BY IA REVISION 00 APPROVED BY LG SCALE@A4 N/A 1 & 2 3

Cirencester 01285 771022 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 3 Area of former buildings within proposed development Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk site e [email protected] PROJECT TITLE Land at Goldborough, Broad Town Wiltshire 4 Corrugated tin shed within proposed development site FIGURE TITLE Photographs

PROJECT NO. 4537 DATE 10-09-2013 PHOTO. NO. DRAWN BY IA REVISION 00 APPROVED BY LG SCALE@A4 N/A 3 & 4 5

Cirencester 01285 771022 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 5 View towards Cotmarsh from southern area of proposed Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk development site, view to south-west e [email protected] PROJECT TITLE Land at Goldborough, Broad Town Wiltshire 6 View south-west from within proposed development site FIGURE TITLE Photographs

PROJECT NO. 4537 DATE 10-09-2013 PHOTO. NO. DRAWN BY IA REVISION 00 APPROVED BY LG SCALE@A4 N/A 5 & 6 7

Cirencester 01285 771022 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 7 View towards proposed development site from road Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk adjacent to Wootton Fields Farm (Fig. 2, 3 and 4), view e [email protected] to south- east PROJECT TITLE Land at Goldborough, Broad Town Wiltshire

FIGURE TITLE 8 View towards proposed development site from Bincknoll Photographs Camp (Fig. 2, 1), view to north-west

PROJECT NO. 4537 DATE 10-09-2013 PHOTO. NO. DRAWN BY IA REVISION 00 APPROVED BY LG SCALE@A4 N/A 7 & 8 9

Cirencester 01285 771022 Milton Keynes 01908 218320 Cotswold Andover 01264 326549 9 View towards proposed development site from footpath Archaeology w www.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk to south of Bincknoll Camp (Fig. 2, 2), view to north-west e [email protected] PROJECT TITLE Land at Goldborough, Broad Town Wiltshire

FIGURE TITLE Photograph

PROJECT NO. 4537 DATE 10-09-2013 PHOTO. NO. DRAWN BY IA REVISION 00 APPROVED BY LG SCALE@A4 N/A 9