Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology)

Riverside Business Park Bakewell, Derbyshire

•

Prepared for: - Litton Properties Ltd 1 Broomes Bars Pilsley Bakewell DE45 IPF Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental impact Statement (Archaeology)

Riverside Business Park Environmental Impact Statement

[Impacts likely to affect archaeology]

• Patrick Strange BSc PhD MIET CEng IHBC FSA

July 2007

Forming Part of Consolidated Revised Submission in support of Outline Planning Application NPIDDD/II04/1221, P.4822 dated 19 November 2004 for Mixed Use Development Including Demolitions, Conversion and New Build to Provide Employment and Residential Uses at Riverside Business Park, Buxton Road, Bakewell

And

Application PP-00188428 dated 1 March 2007 for Renewal ofthe Full Planning Permission NPIDDD/0700/281 granted 7 March 2002 for the Creation of an Access Road and Bridge over the River to Riverside Business Park including an Environmental Impact Assessment in • accordance with the Town & Country Planning Acts Environment Impact Assessment Regulations 1999.

Commissioned by:-

Litton Properties Ltd 1 Broome's Barns Pilsley Bakewell DE45 IPF

PREFACE

• The site currently comprises around 225,178 sq ft (20,919 sq m) ofmixed BI, B2 and B8 space on a 1235 acre (5 hectare) site with over 50 tenants on 75 different tenancies,

• The Business Park is situated to the north ofthe A6 Buxton Road and the River Wye, approx Y2 mile west of Bakewell town centre, The Park is contained entirely within the Peak District National Park, the eastern part is included within the Bakewell Conservation Area,

• The outline planning application boundary (edged red) and Litton's total ownership • (edged blue, including the land for the new bridge access) are shown on the Existing Site Plan 'SD04049 (PL)AOOI D',

• The site sits in the valley bottom and is physically and visually well contained by natural and man made features, To the north-east the site is surrounded by the remains of a Mill Race raised on an earth bank which once served Arkwright's original "Lumford Mill" - the Mill Race forms part of a Scheduled Ancient Monument and is therefore subject to the highest level ofprotection. Beyond the Mill Race, to the north, the site is contained physically and visually by a wooded slope.

• To the east, the site is visually screened by existing trees, hedgerows and residential • properties off Holme Lane, It is this area which is part of the Bakewell Conservation Area.

• From the South the site is visually contained by a combination of existing trees, the river, the A6 and a small complex ofbuildings (the former Cintride factory).

• From the west the views into the site are limited by existing trees and hedge rows.

• The buildings have been constructed at various times dating from 1777, the date of Richard Arkwright's 'Lumford Mill'. Other buildings date from the later 18 th and 19th

Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) Centuries, the Second World War and more modern buildings from the 1970's and 1980's.

• There are two access points to the site, one over a listed bridge from the A6 to the south-east ofthe site and another along Holme Lane from the A6I9 road to the east.

• The buildings on the site are many and varied ranging from brand new BI hybrid units to nigh on derelict timber sheds, Nonetheless the complex is the workplace for several hundred people and there is enormous potential as well as many possibilities for much more effective use of the site. These applications and the supporting Environmental Impact Assessment are the first stage in a concerted and focussed • attempt to unlock the potential and realise these possibilities.

•'

"- ('\ ~v(7'Z\! i.''-~l ~7,-j~\"\ ~f~' ( V?:~ «rJ" ~

Location Map

A6 Bakewell

0 I---'~ 1__.-.... "1-'_...... _I" _... (IK~:_"O Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmenlallmpacl Statement (Archaeology) CONTENTS Page

1 Introduction 1.1 Site Location 1.2 Proposed Developments

2 Scoping & Baseline Studies 2.1 Historical Introduction 2 2.2 Recent Investigations ofthe Site 4 2.2.1 Introduction 4 2.2.2 Recent Evaluations 4 2.3 Summary ofArchaeological Context 5 2.4 Evaluation ofthe Archaeological Assets within the Development Site 6 2.4.1 Archaeological Assets Associated with the'Arkwright' Phases 6 2.4.2 Archaeological Assets Associated with the 'Mule Spinning' Phases 7 2.4.3 Archaeological Assets in the Wider Area ofthe Site 7 • 2.5 Potential Assets likely to be found in Further Investigation or likely to be at Risk from Development 11 2.5.1 Potential for Recovery ofAssets from Further Investigation 11 2.5.2 Assets likely to be at Risk from Development 12

3 Impact Prediction 12 3.1 Direct Impacts 12 3.1.1 The Scheduled Ancient Monument 12 3.1.2 The Listed Workshop Building 13 3.4 Impacts on the non-Protected Archaeological Assets 13 3.2 Indirect Impacts 13 3.2.1 The Listed Bridge and Listed Stone Facing to the Tail Race Culverts 13 3.3 Uncertain Impacts 14 • 3.3.1 The Proposed New Access Bridge from the A6 Road 14 4 Mitigation & Enhancement 14 4.1 Introduction 14 4.2 Buildings & Structures to be retained 14 4.2.1 The Listed Workshop Building 14 4.2.2 The Retort House & Chimney 14 4.3.3 The Mule Spinning Shed 15 4.4 The Site ofthe 1771 Mill Building and its Extensions 15 4.5 The 1771 Mill Ponds & Associated Structures 16 4.6 Other Mitigation Measures 16 5 References 16

FIGURES

•

FIGURE 1 Existing Site Plan FIGURE 2 Proposed Developments - MASTERPLAN 12 FIGURE 3 Composite Plan - 1825 Site Plan and Existing Site Plan FIGURE 4 Composite Plan - 1825 Site Plan and Proposed Development Plan FIGURE 5 Composite Plan - 1897 Site Plan and Existing Site Plan FIGURE 6 Composite Plan - 1897 Site Plan and Proposed Development Plan FIGURE 7 Composite Plan - ArchaeologicaIIy Sensitive Areas on the site of • the former Cotton spinning mills FIGURE 8 Schematic Layout ofBuildings erected by DP Battery Co. c.1970 FIGURE 9 Composite Plan - Archaeologically Sensitive Areas affected by later developments ofthe site

APPENDICES

• APPENDIX 1 :- Patrick Strange. Archaeological Desktop Assessment. 2001 APPENDIX 2 :- Patrick Strange. Archaeological Desktop Assessment - Addendum. January 2003 APPENDIX 3 :- Patrick Strange. Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation. March 2004 APPENDIX 4 :- • Katherine Baker. ARCUS Report 1047.2 Archaeological Watching Brief. August 2006 APPENDIX 5 :- Patrick Strange. The Former Gas Works. October 2006

1.1 SITE LOCAnON The development site now known as Riverside Business Park, but formerly Lumford Mill, (SK 20 69, SK 21 69) extends over roughly 5 Ha. offormer riverside meadows lying to the north of the River Wye, mainly in the Parish of Bakewell but also including parts of Hassop and Ashford Parishes. Immediately downstream of the site is Holme Bridge, a medieval bridge and perhaps marking the site of the earlier Lompjorde (Hy3), or 'Ford in a woody valley' (K Cameron, Place Names ojDerbyshire, I, p33). The meadows upstream of the bridge continued to be called Great and Little Lumford, until the former was largely lost to industrial development from the 18 th century. • Topographically the site is constrained to the north by the steep hillside ofWorm Wood, and to the south by the now, in part, straightened course of the River Wye following extensive alterations made to it from 1777 by Richard Arkwright and his successors. Its former character here must have closely resembled that of the river meandering through meadows above Ashford and below Holme Bridge: present day boundaries between parishes are still represented by the historic former course ofthe river. The underlying solid geology is of limestone but here in the valley, alluvium must have covered much of the site before its development which now mainly comprises densely packed single-storey industrial buildings, the older buildings at the east end dating from the late 18th and 19th with those further west mainly ofmid 20th century and later. A late CI8 Listed bridge links the site \\-ith the A6 Bakewell to Buxton Road and an extension • ofthe narrow Holme Lane from the A619 Bakewell to Baslow Road provides an alternative access to the site. (FIGURE I)

1.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS The proposals, the subject ofthe Outline Application Plan and Masterplan Option 12, (FIGURE 2) envisage the demolition of most ofthe extant un-listed buildings on the site, in particular those which formed the extensive development following its acquisition by the DP Battery Co Ltd in 1898 (see FIGURE 8). Additionally the former mule-spinning shed of 1875-1881 and the major surviving pre-1898 building will, with the exception of its east elevation also be demolished. The former 'gas retort' house and its chimney of c.l840 is to be repaired and will be incorporated into the new developments. The principal constraints on

© 2007 Patrick Strange I Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) the proposed development are those due to the Scheduled Ancient Monument comprising the former goyt feeding the water wheels of 1827 and 1852 and the associated culverts forming the tail race, the Listed 'Workshop' building ofc. I800, the Listed approach bridge from the A6 and the Listed stone facing over the tail races. See APPENDIX I, pp 27 - 29 for the Statutory Description of the Scheduled and Listed Archaeological Assets within and contiguous with the proposed development area.

2 SCOPING & BASELINE STUDIES

2.1 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION The first powered (horse driven) cotton spinning mill had been established by Richard • Arkwright in Nottingham in 1769 to exploit his patented 'water frame' and the growing demand for spun cotton thread from the already established hosiery knitting industry in the East Midlands. Site constraints and the limitations ofhorse power encouraged Arkwright and his financial partners in 1771 to lease a site at Cromford near Matlock where the Bonsall Brook flowed into the River Derwent and would provide sufficient water to power a mill of about 1000 spindles as well as other cotton preparation machinery. Over the next two years the 5-storey mill was completed and its machinery brought to successful operation. By 1776 the partners had completed a further 7-storey mill at Cromford and were already seeking out sites which offered sufficient water power and the availability oflocal workers to establish further mills. The River Wye at Lumford, upstream ofBakewell, was one such site, owned by Philip Gell of Hopton a near neighbour of Arkwright, it offered an undeveloped .' level site with adequate water power and the prospect of reasonable communications and labour availibility. The Lease from Gell ofGreat Lumford meadow is dated November 1777 and although there were later to be problems with the Duke ofRutland over alterations to the course of the river, the 4-storey mill and its large mill pond seem to have been quickly completed. The design and layout of the stone-built mill followed exactly that of the 1776 Cromford Mill, the larger site at Lumford however allowing Arkwright to construct a longer but lower mill with comparable accommodation. As at Cromford the water wheel(s) was centrally sited to maximise the efficiency of power transmission throughout the building, at the north end a tower provided privies to each floor whilst at the south end a staircase led up from the main entrance, with, alongside on each floor, an overseers office and store.

© 2007 Patrick Strange 2 Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) Other developments on the site soon followed, a new bridge across the River Wye, a house and stables, two extensions to the mill building and a 'workshop' building, In 1827 improvements to the water power were made with the installation of a new 60kW water wheel supplied by a long head race carried along an embankment from a new weir upstream ofthe original. By this time Richard Arkwright junior was attempting to dispose of the mill but it was not until 1844 following a lease of the site to Simpson Herbert & Co, Cotton Spinners, that the necessary and substantial improvements to the premises were made, including the building of a gas works. Further improvements were made when the lease was acquired some six years later by Messrs Lomas & Tunstall, Cotton Spinners, with the installation of a second iron water wheel and further enlargements to the water courses. In 1868 a disastrous fIre completely destroyed the building of 1777 and its extensions although without affecting the water wheels or the gas works. It is presumed that the site was • cleared, perhaps by infIlling of the original water wheel pit and the former mill ponds. For, by 1875, a new single storey, north-light building was being erected over the northern halfof the original mill site and over the immediate area ofthe former mill pond, power still being supplied by the water wheels which had survived the fIre. Extensions were made to extend the mule shed over the southern halfofthe former site c.l881. Whilst the 1777 mill had been completely destroyed, its east wall foundations served to carry the east wall of the mule shed. In 1898 cotton spinning on the site ceased with the buildings and site being acquired by the DP Battery Co. Ltd. who were amongst the pioneer manufacturers of large electrical batteries. • With the exception of the mule shed, the gas works, and the water power system, it is clear that developments since 1898 have almost totally covered the site of the original mill, its extensions and the mill ponds.

2.2 RECENT INVESTIGATIONS ON THE SITE

2.2.1 INTRODUCTION The earliest investigations ofthe site and its history date from the 1950's (Mackenzie, 1959: Thornhill, 1959) and again from 2001 (Strange, 2001, 2003 & 2004) when its Archaeological Assets were identified. These studies have evaluated the extant structures and placed them in

© 2007 Patrick Strange 3 Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) an archaeological framework as well as postulating the location and purposes ofthose known only from historical records or by inference. Whilst structures from the later phases oftextile production have suffered at the hands ofmodern developments on the site, building activities from the early to mid-20th century have taken place mainly over the more ephemeral archaeological assets, typically the large areas originally forming the mill ponds and associated water works, Some slight indication of what these assets comprised has been suggested by the Archaeological Watching Brief (Baker 2006), commissioned when the northernmost comer of the site was being prepared for a new building. (see FIGURE 2 and APPENDIX 4)

2.2.2 RECENT EVALUATIONS In 2001, a Desktop Evaluation of the potential archaeology was carried out (Strange, 2001), attached here as APPENDIX I, which set out the history of the site down to 1898 as well as • identifying the extant pre-1898 buildings. It proposed also that the foundations, wheel pit and tail race of the original Arkwright Mill were likely to survive below later developments following the 1868 fire and identified one small piece of standing wall which had formed part of the original mill east elevation. It further envisaged a programme of investigation to assess the archaeological potential in advance ofthe then proposed development ofthe site. An Archaeological Field Evaluation was carried out in March 2004 (Strange, 2004, attached as APPENDIX 2) to investigate one of the key archaeological areas likely to be affected by developments to the site of the 1777 mill building. This trial excavation was sited at the southern junction of the main mill range of 1777 and the eastwards extension to the mill of 1785. The excavation confirmed that the east wall of the former mule shed did in fact sit on the foundations of the 1777 mill (destroyed in 1868) but that the footings of the eastwards • extension had been largely robbed out save for one surviving quoin where the later wing had abutted the 1777 building. In 2006 planning permission was granted for the erection of a new building at the northern end of the development site, a part of the site which from documentary and map evidence was shown to have formed part ofthe mill pond ofthe 1777 mill (FIGURE 3). A planning requirement was that an Archaeological Watching Briefbe carried out in advance ofthe site ground works and also included a series of machine cut trenches further west where map evidence had shown that the remains of banks associated with two additional mill ponds may have survived. (See APPENDIX 4, ill.No. 2). The excavations revealed that the ponds had been demarcated by roughly built banks and walls thus confirming the map evidence.

© 2007 Patrick Strange 4 Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) In October 2006, Litton Properties commissioned a building survey of the 1845 gas works building and chimney (APPENDIX 5): however, this did not include the necessary archaeological recording. This must await the start of work in advance of conservation and repair work to the building.

2.3 SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT

From the results of previous studies, attached as APPENDICES 1 to 5, the Archaeological Contexts can be identified :-

• Phase I of the 1777 mill building, now presumed to be largely surviving as wall foundations, water wheel pit, site ofstairs and privies beneath the extant fonner mule • shed structure. • Phase 2 ofthe mill building perhaps surviving as foundations (but see APPENDIX 3) beneath the car parking to the east ofthe extant fonner mule shed structure. • Phase 3 of the mill building, now presumed to be largely surviving as wall foundations beneath the extant fonner mule shed structure. • The banks retaining the original mill pond to the west of the 1777 mill site, the culvert and pond emptying shuttle beneath the present DP Battery Works buildings of the 20th century. • The Listed Workshop Building. • Structures associated with the additional water storage ponds have been in part investigated (see above) but the site of further structures lies beneath DP Battery Works buildings ofthe 20th century. • • It is likely that the site of alterations to the water power arrangements made c.1827 are now part ofthe Scheduled Ancient Monument. • The extant fonner gas works building and associated chimney are to be retained and incorporated into the proposed development. Archaeological investigation of the standing structures remains to be carried out. The site ofthe associated gas holder lies below DP Battery Works buildings ofthe 20th century. • The two phases of the 1875 and c.1881 mule shed survive largely intact and await an archaeological buildings survey.

© 2007 Patrick Strange 5 Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) • The Scheduled Ancient Monument which includes the later water power arrangements and associated culverts. • The Listed Facing to the tail race culverts, the latter being part ofthe SAM above. • The Listed Access Bridge.

FIGURE 3 shows the earliest phases of site development (a Plan of 1836) superimposed on a modem plan showing the fully developed site as existing, whilst FIGURE 4 shows the same plan superimposed on a plan ofthe Development Proposals. FIGURE 5 shows the later phases ofdevelopment as shown on the OS 25" Plan of 1897 (the year before the site was sold) superimposed on a modem plan showing the fully developed site as existing, whilst FIGURE 6 shows the same plan superimposed on a plan of the • Development Proposals.

2.4 EVALUATION OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSETS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT SITE

2.4.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSETS ASSOCIATED WITH THE 'ARKWRIGHT' PHASES (1777-1868). (TABLE 1 & FIGURES 3 & 4) It is convenient to consider the development of the site down to 1868 when a disastrous fire destroyed the 1777 and subsequent extensions to the miU in two phases. Phase I can be proposed as extending from 1777 to c.1827 when the site was still operating much as • Arkwright had first organised it, Phase 2 covering the period from c. I827 when the water . power arrangements were significantly improved with the addition of a new water wheels at the north end of the mill building to 1868, when the original mill was (with the exception of the wheels) totally destroyed by fire. It is not clear whether the original water wheels of 1777 and associated mill pond were retained in use after 1827. The 'Workshop' building ofc.I800 and the gas works buildings survived the fire. The 2001 Archaeological Desktop Assessment (APPENDIX I, FIGURE I) identified the significant Archaeological Assets associated with Phase I of the building. These are identified in FIGURE 7 and should become the baseline proposals for an Archaeological Watching Brief in advance of, or as a part of the development of the Mule Spinning Shed which overlies them..

2.4.2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSETS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MULE SPINNING PHASES (1876-1898). (TABLE 1 & FIGURES 5 & 6) Shortly after the fire of 1868 the site of the original 'Arkwright' mill building was almost totally cleared and a new single-storey 'north-light' mule spinning shed erected in two phases, Phase I of 1875 occupying the northern half of the mill site and utilising the surviving water wheels with minimum alteration An extension of the shed southwards was made in 1881 (phase 2). By the late 1890's ali textile activity on the site had ceased and the existing buildings converted to a factory for the manufacture oflead-acid batteries.

2.4.3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSETS IN THE WIDER AREA OF THE SITE • The Sites & Monuments Records for the site and an area within 1Ian radius of it have been identified (APPENDIX I, pp. 21-23). Whilst there are no recorded sites of Prehistoric or Probable Prehistoric origin within the specified area, there are Romano-British, Medieval and Post-Medieval sites mainly including earthworks and extant buildings. Whilst those sites specifically recorded as within the development area may be considered as potentially at risk as a result ofthe proposed development, none ofthose outside the site will be impacted by it. Additionally, Historic Landscape Character Information held by the Peak District National Park Authority (APPENDIX I, pp. 24-26 ) confirms that other than within the proposed development area, the wider historic landscape will not suffer any impacts. •

© 2007 Patrick Strange 7 • • Archaeological resource Date Description I Cotton Mill Building 1777 4-storey Cotton Mill 49.4m x 9.5m [Phase I] 2 Diversion ofRiver Wye to remove 1777 Improvements to river flow meander 3 Up-stream weir on River Wye 1777 Creation ofhead ofwater to supply 'reservoir' or mill pond 4 'Great Reservoir' 1777 Creation ofmill pond on Great Lurnford meadow. Retaining bank.? 5 New approach bridge to site c.1785 Access to site from Bakewell 6 East wing ofmill c.l785 4-storey extension on east elevation ofmill building 20.5m x 11.7m [Phase 2] 7 North extension to mill c.1790 4-storey extension at north end ofmill 11.6m [Phase 3] 8 Workshop Building c.1800 3-storey 'Workshop' building erected south of main mill 9 Two storage reservoirs on Great c.l825 Increased water storage reservoir alongside main mill pond Lumford

10 Goyt from upstream weir c.l827 Increased water flow taken from new upstream weir

II New wheel pits and water wheels c.l827 Improvements to power source with new iron water wheel and associated tail culverts

12 Gas works ie Retort House & c.1845 Gas supply for 'gassing' ofthread, lighting and supply to Bakewell street lighting. Chimney 13 Iron water wheel 1852 Second iron water wheel added to earlier wheel 14 Mule spinning shed 1875 Following destructive fire to 1777 mill, site cleared. Mule spinning shed 31m x 42m constructed over site ofnorth end and to west of 1777 mill [Phase I] 15 Extension to mule spinning shed c.1881 Mule spinning shed extended southwards by 30m [Phase 2]

00 TABLE 1 - ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES • •

Archaeological Resource Previous interventions or activities Date I Cotton Mill Building (Phases 1, 2 Mill building destroyed by fire 1868. Site cleared to ground level when 1868? & 1875 & 3) new mule shed constructed over site but using original 1777 mill east wall foundations. 2 Diversion ofRiver Wye to remove Meander filled as part ofcreation ofsite of 1777 mill pond. Site now 1777 & 1875 meander covered by later southern extension ofmule shed 3 Up-stream weir on River Wye 1777 weir replaced as part ofimprovements to water supply in 1827. 1827 & 1948 This weir in turn replaced by DP Battery Co

4 'Great Reservoir' The 1777 mill pond may have continued in use until the 1868 fire but 1875 & post was then filled to become in part the site ofthe 1875 mule shed. The 1898 remaining part ofthe site ofthe mill pond after the change ofownership to DP Battery Co was used for sports activities but gradually became encroached upon by new buildings during the 2nd world war as battery production was accelerated. 5 New approach bridge to site Became Listed Structure 1997 6 East wing ofmill (Phase 2) Destroyed by fire in 1868. Site cleared as part ofnew mule shed 1868 & c.1970? development. Site partly built over by W Fernehough? to form new office block. 7 North extension to mill (Phase 3) Destroyed by fire in 1868. Site cleared to ground level when new mule 1868& 1875 shed constructed over site but using original 1777 mill east wall foundations.

TABLE 2 - PREVIOUS INTERVENTIONS TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES • •

Archaeological Resource Previous interventions or activities Date 8 Workshop Building Became Listed Building 1951 9 Two storage reservoirs on See 'Great Reservoir' above Great Lumford

10 Goyt from upstream weir Embankment modified in 1880. Drained following 1880 Reservoirs Act. Now Scheduled Ancient Monument Monument 12010 11 New wheel pits and water Water wheels removed 1955 following destructive 1827,1852 & wheels and associated tail accident to gearing. Replaced by water turbine. Now 1955 culverts Scheduled Ancient Monument. see above. 12 Gas works ie Retort House & Gas Retort House converted to engine house. Retort after 1898 Chimney House & chimney extant. Gas holder demolished 13 Iron water wheel Serious breakdown destroys water wheel main pinions. 1955 Wheels removed 14 Mule spinning shed (Phase 1) Mule shed becomes part ofDP Battery Works Factory. 1898 Extant 15 Extension to mule spinning Do. Do. shed (Phase 2) >.: TABLE 2 (cont.) - PREVIOUS INTERVENTIONS TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES I o Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) 2.5 POTENTIAL ASSETS LIKELY TO BE FOUND IN FURTHER INVESTIGATION OR LIKELY TO BE AT RISK FROM DEVELOPMENT

2.5.1 POTENTIAL FOR RECOVERY OF ASSETS FROM FURTHER INVESTIGATION The development of textile mill buildings during the decade 1771-1780 is now better understood following investigations carried out on Arkwright's first site at Cromford (Strange, forthcoming) where the layout of the first and second mill buildings has been revealed by excavation. It is clear that at Cromford, the earliest mill of 1771 established the scale, the use of water power and the layout necessary to accommodate water frames and workers in these proto- • type factories, and was to determine the form of mills constructed and operated on the 'Arkwright' pattern for the next decade and a half. Expansion in size depended almost entirely on locating level sites with sufficient water power such as that afforded by the site at Lumford. The Lumford mill building follows in layout that established at Cromford, save that the size ofthe new site allowed for a less tall but longer building to be accommodated but with all the necessary components, viz. internal water wheels, staircase and counting house to each floor at the south end, privies on each floor at the north end, and, in the later northward extension a hot water heating system. Necessary and extensive landscape alterations were made to improve the course and flow of the river and to provide a large mill pond to feed the water wheels. Later enlargements ofthe mill required additional power and saw further changes to • the water power with the construction of an external power house to the north of the mill fed by a long goyt from the main upstream weir. Clearance of the mule shed site, envisaged as a part ofthe proposed development will enable a full investigation of the 1771 mill and its later extensions with their footings expected to have survived largely intact. The results should add to the increasing understanding of the development ofthese earliest mills. Whilst the site of the water wheels of the later phase of the mill's development form a part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument, investigations of the gas works and gas holder site of 1845 have the potential to add to our knowledge ofthese early small gas plants which formed part of the thread producing processes. (See Strange 2003 and O'Neil 2006).

© 2007 Patrick Strange II Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) With the exception of the north-western corner of the site, where evaluation trenches have been investigated (Baker 2006), the site ofthe 1777 mill pond and its south-eastern addition lie beneath 20th century buildings (See FIGURE 3), The removal of the latter which forms a part of the Proposed Development together with the removal of the mule shed offers an opportunity to investigate any surviving structures which edged these ponds as well as the site of the shuttle and the associated culvert at the southern end which enabled the ponds to be drained back into the river, In spite of near continuous industrial use since 1898, the mule shed remains remarkably intact although in a very poor condition, It remains a good example of a small north-light spinning shed: its recording and the retention of the fine cast iron columns supporting the roofstructure for re-use will form a part ofthe Development Plans,

• 2.5.2 ASSETS LIKELY TO BE AT RISK FROM DEVELOPMENT Strange 2001, (APPENDIX 1, pp, 27-29 and p36) identified the constraints imposed on potential development by the protected monuments within and contiguous with the site, ie the Scheduled Ancient Monument which includes the water power arrangements from c.l825, the Listed Workshop Building, the Listed Bridge, the Listed Retaining Wall over the tail races and, to the east but not within the Development Application area, the Scheduled and Listed Holme Packhorse Bridge. With exception ofthe Gas Retort House and Chimney, and the protected assets listed above, the Development Proposals will, in the absence of specific conditions imposed at the Planning Stage entail the removal and/or destruction ofall other assets, • 3 IMPACT PREDICITON 3.1 DIRECT IMPACTS 3.1.1 THE SCHEDULED ANCIENT MONMUMENT (APPENDIX 1, p. 27) Discussions with English Heritage in advance ofproposals for the erection ofa new building at the north-west corner of the site (see FIGURE 2) established a 2m separation zone between the toe of the supporting earth embankment of the Scheduled Ancient Monument and any new developments adjoining it. It was not considered that the height and mass ofthe new building would have any adverse impacts on the Scheduled Ancient Monument. Elsewhere alongside the scheduled embankment, the Development Proposal envisages three

© 2007 Pa/rick S/range 12 Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) shorter buildings alongside but outside the 2m zone, one parallel and two at right angles to it. The scale, design and massing ofthese will be the subject ofa full Planning Application and will be subject to scrutiny by English Heritage. The Proposed Development includes a 3-storey building with a footprint very close to that of the original and northwardly extended 1777 mill building. This will abut the Gas Retort House and the former water wheel pit now forming the eastern end ofthe Scheduled Ancient Monument and has the potential for impact upon it.

3.1.2 THE LISTED WORKSHOP BUILDING (APPENDIX 1, p.2S & APPENDIX 2) The southern end of the proposed 3-storey building above, has the potential to affect the setting ofthe Listed Workshop Building.

• 3.1.3 IMPACTS ON THE NON-PROTECTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSETS The Proposed Development ultimately envisages the total clearance of the site with the exception of the Protected Assets and the Retort House & Chimney. FIGURE 8 shows in rather schematic form the extent ofthe buildings erected or in use by the DP Battery Co Ltd prior to its disposal ofthe site in 1970 after over 70 years ad hoc development. Clearance of the remainder of the site will clearly impact on the archaeological assets identified in Section 2.4 above, and include the complete removal of the mule shed, the sole above ground asset not to be retained as a part of the Development Plans. In particular, demolition of the two east end bays ofthe mule shed which overlie the site ofthe 1777 mill and its northern extension (FIGURE 7) may seriously impact upon this asset. Elsewhere over the site, the degree of impact on the identified assets will depend on the form of the • construction and floor structure of the varied building types to be demolished as well as interventions carried out during their period ofuse.

3.2 INDIRECT IMPACTS 3.2.1 THE LISTED BRIDGE AND LISTED STONE FACING TO THE TAIL RACE CULVERTS (APPENDIX 1, p.28) The Proposed Development is not considered to have an Impact on either the Listed Bridge or the Listed Stone Facing to the Tail Races.

© 2007 Patrick Strange 13 Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) 3.3 UNCERTAIN IMPACTS 3.3.1 THE PROPOSED NEW ACCESS BRIDGE FROM THE A6 ROAD The Proposed Development envisages a new road bridge spanning the River Wye to link the Development Site with the A6 Bakewell to Buxton Road. Within the Development Site it is unlikely that the northern approach road to the bridge will have any direct or indirect impact upon archaeological assets,

4 MITIGATION & ENHANCEMENT 4.1 INTRODUCTION For reasons not relevant to this Statement, the Riverside site is to be redeveloped in a phased manner with individual buildings or groups of buildings being demolished only as a • prerequisite to the erection of individual new structures, With the exception of the Scheduled Ancient Monument, the Listed Buildings, the Retort House and Chimney, the east wall ofthe former Mule Shed and the newly constructed building at the north-west comer of the site, the remaining buildings and structures as shown in FIGURE I will ultimately be removed. The complexity of the built-up site is best shown in FIGURE 8, the schematic site plan showing individual buildings prepared by the DP Battery Co, Ltd, c.l970 and FIGURE 9 which shows the impact these buildings and structures have on the archaeological assets,

4.2 BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES TO BE RETAINED 4.2.1 THE LISTED WORKSHOP BUILDING Proposals for the change of use or alteration to the Listed Workshop Building will be • considered by the LPA under Listed Building Legislation as advised in PPGl5 as will any aspects ofthe Proposed Development which will affect its setting. The Proposed Development affords an opportunity for some enhancement of the building (see APPENDIX 2, p.2)

4.2.2 THE RETORT HOUSE & CHIMNEY The submitted survey of the building (Appendix 5, attached) is of limited scope and an Archaeological Watching Briefas defined in Standard & Guidance for Archaeological Field Evaluation (Institute of Field Archaeologists) will be required during conservation work to

© 2007 Patrick Strange 14 Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (ArchaeologY! the structure. Intrusive works to the floor of the building will require an Archaeological Field Evaluation in order to make an assessment ofthe archaeological worth ofthe resource leading to a strategy for its preservation management. The development proposals will also afford an opportunity for enhancement ofthe asset.

4.3.3 THE MULE SPINNING SHED This single-storey building, the largest structure and standing archaeological asset on the Development Site occupies a key area in the Development Proposals. These include the retention of its present east wall which has been shown (APPENDIX 3, p.3) to have utilised the foundations of the east wall of the 1771 mill and its later northern extension. It also includes the sole surviving piece ofstanding 1771 walling. (APPENDIX I, pp.19 & 37). The three remaining walls ofthe mule shed and its north-light roof with supporting cast iron columns offer little opportunity for retention in the development although the columns • themselves could be used appropriately elsewhere in the development. Over the western 4 bays, the floor, the western, and parts of northern and southern walls rest on the fill of the original pond and its retaining structure. (See 4.4 below) Appropriate recording of the standing walls and of the roof structure in advance of demolition will be required forming part ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation.

4.4 THE SITE OF THE 1771 MILL BUILDING AND ITS EXTENSIONS Removal ofthe two eastemmost bays ofthe mule shed, in particular their floor and northern • and southern walls at the junction with the east elevation will uncover the sites of the Archaeologically Sensitive Areas identified in 2.4.1 above (FIGURE 7). The Proposed Development envisages a 3-storey development over the site of the 1771 building and its northern extension but whilst retaining the original mule shed east wall, the new construction is likely to be on piling or some other form offoundation immediately behind the wall. This will potentially impact on the Archaeological Asset, including all those identified in 2.4.1. Some mitigation may well be achievable by preservation in situ and incorporating these assets into the ground floor ofthe new building. An Archaeological Field Evaluation prior to the development will be required potentially leading to proposals for further archaeological investigation within a programme ofresearch.

© 2007 Patrick Strange 15 Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) 4.5 THE 1771 MILL PONDS AND ASSOCIATED STRUCTURES FIGURE 9 illustrates the extent to which removal ofthe remaining buildings and structures will impact on the site of the 1771 mili pond and any structures associated with it. These include the head race channeling water to the mill on its western side and the overflow and control weir allowing for emptying of the pond water back into the river. The latter two archaeological assets, almost certainly involving stone structures at some depth should be the subject of a mitigation strategy for their retention into any new development and will be the subject to an Archaeological Field Evaluation and subsequent Archaeological Investigation. Elsewhere removal ofbuildings and structures is expected to impact on the retaining walls or banks of the 1771 mill pond and the extension immediately to its west. The results of an Archaeological Watching Brief involving geotechnical trial trenches on the westernmost mill pond extension (APPENDIX 4) suggest that simple stone and bank structures were • employed to retain the three ponds. In advance of demolition, further geotechnical trenching may form the subject of an Archaeological Watching Brief with the object ofdetermining the location and structure of these archaeological assets. It is unlikely that mitigation measures can be proposed other than ground make-up to protect them over the wider area of the site.

4.6 OTHER MITIGATION MEASURES Lying on river alluvium alongside the River Wye raises problems of flood alleviation which are to be resolved by raising the levels across the site. The extent of the area to be so protected is not known nor the depth of make-up to be provided but the raised levels over • Archaeological Assets may permit their retention below rafted foundations or particularly less structurally demanding elements ofthe development.

© 2007 Patrick Strange 16 Riverside Works, Bakewell Environmental Impact Statement (Archaeology) REFERENCES Baker 2006 Katherine Baker. ARCUS Project Report 1047.2 Archaeological walching briefat Riverside Business Park. August 2006 Unpublished Report for Litton Properties O'Neill 2006 Final Report ofArchaeological Investigations at Milford Foundry, Milford, Be/per, Derbyshire ARCUS unpublished report 894.2 Mackenzie 1959 The Bakewell Cotton Mill and the Arkwrights. Derbyshire Archaeological Journal. LXXIX, (/959) p.62 Strange 2001 Patrick Strange. Lumford Mill. Archaeological Desktop Assessment. July 200/ Unpublished Report for Litton Properties Strange 2003 Patrick Strange. Lumford Mill. Archaeological Desktop Assessment. Addendum. January 2003 Unpublished Report for Litton Properties • Strange 2003 Patrick Strange. Milford Foundry. Archaeological Desktop Assessment. January 2003 Unpublished Report for Tapton Properties Strange 2004 Patrick Strange. Lumford Mill. Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation. March 2004 Unpublished Report for Litton Properties Strange 2006 Patrick Strange. Notes on Gas Works Drawings Prepared October 2006 Commissioned Survey for Litton Properties by Greenhatch Group, Building Services Unpublished Report for Litton Properties Strange (forthcoming) Patrick Strange. Richard Arkwright and the Mills at Cromford Thornhill 1959 Robert Thornhill. The Arkwright Cotton Mill at Bakewell. Derbyshire Archaeological Journal. LXXIX, (/959) pp. 83-4 •

• Appendix 1

Archaeological Desktop Assessment

• July 2001 Lumford Mill, Bakewell

Archaeological Desktop Assessment for Litton Properties

Patrick Strange

iO 2001

[Front cover]

Patrick Strange. South of Ivy Bank.. Church Street. BrassingtoJl. Matlock. De~sJu", DE4 4HJ Phone: 01629 540 424 E-mail: STRANGEPATRlCKaAOLCQIo,.lFa, 111629 ~26 ,90 LumfordMill. Bakewell: Desktop Asse.\:~mel1t

Lumford Mill (Riverside Works) • Bakewell, Derbyshire July 2001

•

Patrick Strange BSc PhD MIEE CEng IHBC FSA South ofIvy Bank Church Street Brassington Matlock Derbyshire DE4 4HJ Phone: 01629 540 424 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 01629826 390

co 200I Patrick Strange Lllm!ord Mill. Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

SUMMARY

• This document comprises an archaeological desktop assessment ofthe Lumford Mill site, now generally refered to as Riverside Works, Bakewell, Derbyshire at SK 2069 and SK 2169. • • Historical research confirms that the site was developed by Richard Arkwright from 1777 (probably his third water-powered mill) and continued in textile production until the 1890's.

• The study area includes industrial buildings and structures dating from the end of the C18, through the C19 to the present.

• Included within and contiguous with the study site are two Ancient Monuments, three Listed Buildings and a part ofBakewell Conservation Area.

• Data from the Sites and Monuments Record for Derbyshire and the Historic Landscape Character assessment ofthe area also confirms the special nature ofthe setting ofthe site.

•AHistorico-Archaeological Framework for the site is developed

• Removal oflater intrusive buildings as a part ofthe development ofthe site will offer the possibility ofinvestigative recording ofsurviving standing buildings and below-ground structures.

~) 200 I Patrick Strange !.umfordMill. Bakewell: Desktop A...sessmelll

• •

G;:] Grttston. upl.nd.

E2iJ Um.stone plateau

o 10 20 ktn i..' ...J..' -', a

LUMFORD MILL, BAKEWELL, DERBYSHIRE

LOCAnON MAP

'c 2001 Po/rick SlrallJ(e I./lmjord Mill, Bakewell: Desk/op Assessmelll

~._r.' ~.. , ~'.... ". .. '.; -';,...... ~ \ .. .. .'''.'" .... \ ..., · ...4 t ... ; 1" . '. 01:.....- ....r. " I _

•

Lumford Mill c.1830 (From a private collection)

, i • : __ . .,...4"'<~ : ! i Ill; ar..::rJ.I~ - -t - ..... ~~.,.. _.._ L-J>. ~ :;. l: ~--=-.--:I~" ---I --- --I~";'· """"I:::~~ ~ .L:~-=--:'. ~ ~ : !".7:ur- .~ -__- • , .... or - '- ~ :B -- ~:'! "4--"f7~ '~i-' n <=. '-""'r''''''''J• -, :r 'I ~.,....,.. l ., .-N· .. • ,

Lumford Mill 1813 (From the Boulton & Watt Collection)

FRONTISPIECE

Ii 'j 200I Patrick Strange LlImfordMill. Bakewell: Desk/op Asse.~.~mel1l

LUMFORD MILL, BAKEWELL, DERBYSHIRE

Historico-Archaeological Framework ofthe site

1771 Richard Arkwright builds first water-powered cotton spinning mill at Cromford 1776 Arkwright's second mill at Cromford 6th November 1777 Richard Arkwright leases for 50 years, 53a ofland in Bakewell & Longstone from Philip Gell. Lease to become effective 25th March 1778 1777 'the cotton mill was begun' c.1785 House, stables to NE ofmill and new bridge erected. Projecting wing over tail race erected 1786 Lease ofwater rights (42 years) from Duke ofRutland c.1790 Main mill building extended to NE 1798 Richard Arkwright (jnr) purchased freehold ofproperty from Gells c.1800 2-storey workshop? building erected. • 1827 Wren & Hughes water wheel insWled, extensive alterations to water storage arrangements, goyts &c. 1830-6 Various abortive attempts to sell the mill. Horace Mason, joint manager ofCalver Mill buys property on hire-purchase 1839 Horace Mason defaults on payments 1840 Robert Arkwright puts mill for sale at Rutland Arms Hotel, Bakewell. No bids worth considering. Peter Arkwright buys back mill on behalfof his brother for £7,400 1844 Arkwright leases mill to Simpson, Herbert & Co c.I845 Simpson, Herbert & Co "Making substantial improvements -erecting gas works &c" 1847-50 Simpson, Herbert & Co supply town ofBakewell with gas from mill c.1850 Lomas & Tunstall, Cotton Spinners lease mill 1852 Kirkland ofMansfield instan second water wheel 1860 Duke ofDevonshire purchases mill and other property from Godfrey Arkwright 1868 Main mill building destroyed by fire. Workshop building, water wheels • and bridge survive 1875 New single-storey spinning shed erected 1881 Mill occupied by Thomas Somersett, Cotton Doubler c.1881 Single-storey spinning shed extended 1898 DP Battery Company purchase mill buildings from Duke ofDevonshire 1901 Further 8a ofland to W ofsite purchased from Duke ofDevonshire 1939-45 Extensive additions by DP Battery Co especially during 2nd World War 1955 Water wheels replaced after a breakdown by Gilbert Gilkes & Gordon 150hp water turbine. New weir constructed. 1970 Works acquired by W Femehough Ltd

HISTORICO-ARCHAEOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK OF TIlE SITE.".." 1

LIST OF FIGURES " " .3

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS _ ...... •...4

I INTRODUCTION 1.1 SITE LOCATION 5 1.2 SlRUCTURE OF REPORT 5 1.3 SOURCES OF INFORMATION 6 1.3. I Derbyshire Sites & Monvments Record 6 1.3.2 ReClmt Surveys and Evaluations 6 1.3.3 Published, Manuscript and Cartographic SOurces 6 1.3.4 Field Inspection 6 1.3.5 Aerial Photographs 7 1.3.6 Listed Buildings andScheduledAncient Monuments Records 7 1.3.7 GeologicaJ/SoiJ Surveys or other Test-pils 7 2 POLICY STATEMENTS - ARCHAEOLOGY & LISTED BUILDINGS 2.1 THE NATIONAL PLANNING CONTEXT 7 2.1.1 Planning Policy Guidance 16 (PPGI6) 7 • 2.1.2 Planning Policy Guidance 15 (PPGI5) 8 2.2 LOCAL PLANNING & DEVEWPMENT CONTEXT 2.2. 1 Introtluction 8 2.2.2 Peak District National Park Structure Plan (1994) 9 2.2.3 Peak District National Park Local Plan (Modifications Edition August 1999) 10 3 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF TIlE SITE 3.1 mSTORICAL INIRODUCTION 13 4 CULTURAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL 4.1 EVIDENCE 14 4.1. I Sites and Monuments Record Summary 14 4. 1.2 Historic Landscape Character Assessment 15 4.1.3 Recent evaluations 15 4.1.4 Documentary and Cartographic Evidence 16 4.2 INTERPRETATION OF SITE AND SIGNIFICANT SURVIVING BUILDINGS 17 4.2. I Introduction 17 4.2.2 The 1777 Mill 17 4.2.3 The Workshop Building. 17 4.2.4 The Gas Retort-house 18 4.2.5 The mule-spinning shed 18 • 4.2.6 Other surviVing structures 18 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS 5.1 CONCLUSIONS 18 5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE INVESTIGATIONS 19 6 REFERENCES & NOTES , 19 7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 20

APPENDICES A SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORDS 2I B mSTORIC LANDSCAPE CHARACTER INFORMATION 24 C STATUTORILY PROTECTED BUILDINGS 27

FIGURES .30

PHOTOGRAPHS 36

({:l 200I Patrick Strange Page 2 Lumford Mill. Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

FIGURES

PAGE • Frontispiece - Pencil sketch ofLumford Mill c.1830 Survey drawing of 1771 mill made 1813

Figure 1 - DP Battery Company survey 1960 30

Figure 2 - Development ofwater power resources & alterations to river course...... 31

Figure 3 - Development ofwater power resources & alterations to river course .32

Figure 4 - Setting ofLumford Mill 1879 33

Figure 5 - Development ofthe site 34 • Figure 6 - Phasing Plan ofLumford Mill site .35

(g 2001 Patrick Strange Page 3 LumfordMill, Bakewell: Desktop Asse.'ismell1

PHOTOGRAPHS

PAGE

Front cover - Water colour drawing oftwo water-wheels 1905

Photo. 1 - Workshop building 36

Photo.2 - Details ofdoorways 36 • Photo.3 - Bridge over River Wye 36

Photo.4 - Stone arches oftaiI-races 36

Photo.5 _Downstream end ofScheduled goyt, and turbine house 36

Photo.6 - View ofmule-spinning shed and modem extension 37

Photo.7 - Mule-spinning shed. Detail ofdentilled bracketed coping 37

Photo.8 - Mule-spinning shed. Interior 37

Photo.9 - Mule-spinning shed. Detail ofCI columns 37

Photo. 10 - Surviving panel of 1777 stonework showing signs ofbuming 37 • Photo. I1- Gas retort house 38 Photo.12 - 1777 mill from NW following fire in 1868 38

Photo. 13 - 1777 mill from S follwing fire in 1868 38

Back cover - Aerial view showing Scheduled goyt

1.1 SITE LOCAnON

The site under consideration now known as Riverside Works, but formerly Lumford Mill, (SK 2069, SK 21 69) extends over roughly 5 Ha. of former riverside meadows lying to the N of the River Wye, mainly in the Parish of Bakewell but also including parts of Hassop and Ashford Parishes. Immediately downstream ofthe site is Holme Bridge, a medieval bridge and perhaps marking the site of the earlier Lompforde (Hy3), or 'Ford in a woody valley' (K Cameron, Place Names ofDerbyshire, I, pH): the meadows upstream ofthe bridge continued to be called Great and Little Lumford, until the former was largely lost to industrial development in the 20th century. Topographically the site is constrained to the N by the steep hillside ofWorm Wood, and to • the S by the now, in part, straightened course ofthe River Wye following extensive alterations made to it from 1777 by Richard Arkwright and his successors. Its former character here must have closely resembled that of the river meandering through meadows above Ashford and below Holme Bridge: present day boundaries between parishes are still represented by the historic former course ofthe river. The underlying solid geology is of limestone but here in the valley, alluvium must have covered much ofthe site before its development which now mainly comprises densely packed single-storey industrial buildings, the older buildings at the E end dating from the late C18, and CI9 with those further W, mainly ofmid C20 and later date. A late CI8 listed bridge links the site with the A6 Bakewell to Buxton Road and an extension ofthe narrow Holme Lane from the A619 Bakewell to Baslow Road provides an alternative • access to the site. 1.2 STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT This report summarises the historical development of the site and considers the potential for archaeological investigation afforded by its proposed development. Section one introduces the study area and its location, and the principal sources of information used in the compilation ofthe report. Section two summarises national and local government policy statements relevant to the archaeology ofthe development site. Section three outlines the historical development of the site and provides the basis for a stategy offurther investigation in advance ofdevelopment.

<1'" 200/ Patrick Stran~e PaKe 5 LI/mfordMill, Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

Section four reviews the cultural archaeological potential ofthe study area. Section live sets out the conclusions from the study and potential for further investigation. Section six inludes Historical Notes and References made in the text. The Appendices provide details ofthe Sites and Monuments Record, the Historic Landscape Character Infonnation and the Statutorily Protected Monuments and Buildings within and contiguous with the development site.

1.3 SOURCES OF INFORMATION The report has compiled using the following sources: 1.3.1 Derbyshire Sites and Monuments Record and Historic Landscape Character Infonnation Sites and Monuments Record (SMR) data for the development site and adjacent area have been provided by Derbyshire County Council (Appendix A). The Historic Landscape • Character Infonnation (HLCI) is held by the Peak District National Park Archaeology Service. (Appendix B). 1.3.2 Recent Surveys and Evaluations Measured surveys ofthe development site have been undertaken: those identified include one undertaken in 1962 by the then owners ofthe site together with a recent survey carried out in advance ofthe current proposals for the redevelopment ofthe site. No recent surveys ofthe interiors ofbuildings or evaluations ofthe significance ofthe various buildings or structures on the site has been carried out other than for the three listed buildings or structures and the scheduled ancient monument. A recent conference paper by the author of this assessment included a provisional • historico-archaeological framework for the development ofthe site. 1.3.3 Published, Manuscript and Cartographic Sources Searches for relevant published material, manuscript sources and maps have been carried out at the Derbyshire Record Office, The Chatsworth Collection, Binningbam Reference Library and the Local Studies Collection in the Hallward Libr8ry at the University of Nottingham. Material held in various private ownerships has also been used. 1.3.4 Field Inspection The site and buildings, in particular those that are known from previous studies to be ofsome significance have been examined and photographed. The interior of the listed 'workshop'

iC" 2001 Patrick Strange Page 6 LlIm/ordMill. Bakewell: Desktop Assessme/1/

building was not available for inspection, nor the modem office projection to the former mule spinning shed. 1.3.5 Aerial Photographs A number of aerial photograhs were located in a private collection..The only relevant photograph is published on the back cover ofthis assessment and shows the site as developed by the 1980's together with, on the left, the scheduled water course still containing water and the main river in the foreground and to the right. 1.3.6 Listed Buildings and S(heduled Andent Monuments R«ords The listing and scheduling descriptions ofthe three listed buildings and one scheduled ancient monument within the development site are included in the Appendices together with those ofa contiguous scheduled monument. 1.3.7 Geologic:al/soil or other surveys or test-pits A number of test pits to determine water table levels, levels of any contamination and soil • survey for foundations have been carried out at various points over the site but it is understood that these took place only in and around the latest buildings on the site.

2 POLICY STATEMENTS - ARCHAEOLOGYILISTED BUILDINGS 2.1 THE NATIONAL PLANNING CONTEXT Archaeological remains and sites (including standing buildings) which may be of archaeological interest are protected by means of Statutory Instruments and by Peak District National Park Development Plans 2.1.1 Planning Poli(y Guidance 16 (PPGI6) • The Secretary of State's policy on archaeological remains is summarised in the DOE paper Planning Policy Guidance 16: Archaeology and Planning (PPG 16:1990). Its main thrust is that archaeological remains are a finite and non-renewable resOllrce, in consequence of which their appropriate management is therefore essential (Para.6). Furthermore, where nationally important archaeological remains, whether.schedllied or not, and their settings, are affected by proposed development there should be a presumption in favour oftheir physical preservation. Cases involving remains oflesser importance will not always be so clear cut and planning authorities will need to weigh the relative importance of archaeology against other factors including the need for the proposed development (para.8). The Planning Policy Guidance advises that it is important, and easier, for the archaeological implications of any development proposals to be assessed eorly on in the

'D 200I Patrick Strall~e Pa~e 7 J.umjord Mill. Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

planning and development control process (paras.8,19,27). Wherever possible, important remains should be preserved in situ, but otherwise, appropriate and satisfactoryprovision for the excavating andrecording ofthe remtlins should be made (paras.25,27,28). In particular, where early discassions with local planning authorities or the developer's own research indicate that important archaeological remains may exist, it is reasonablefor the planning authority to request the prospective developer to arrange for an archaeological field evaluation to be carried out before any decision on the planning application is taken (para.21). 2.1.2 Planning Policy Guidance 15 (pPGI5) PPGl5 (Planning and the Historic Environment 1994) deals with amongst other matters listed buildings and conservation areas. The Secretary of State aJtaches pncular importance to early discussion with the local planning authority on development proposals • which would afJect historic sites and structures, whether listed buildings, conservation tu'eas.••• or the wider historic landscape. Local pltlltning authorities should expect developers to assess the likely impact oftheir proposals on the special interest ofthe site or structure in questiOft, and to provide such written information as may be required to understand the significance ofa site before an application is determined (Para 2.//). The desirability ofpreserving or enhancing the {conservation] area should also, in the Secretary ofState's view, be a material cOftsideration in the planning authority's handling of development proposals which are outside the conservatiOft area but would affect its setting. (paraA.14).

2.2 WCAL PLANNING BACKGROUND AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN • FRAMEWORK 2.2.1 Introduction In considering any planning application for development, the local planning authority is bound by the policy framework established by Government Guidance, in this instance by PPGI5, by PPGI6 and by the authority'S current Development Plan.' The Peak National Park Authority'S Development Plan consists ofa Structure Plan setting out its general policies and proposals for the use of land in the area taking into account national and regional planning guidance and a Local Plan setting out more detailed policies and proposals and deals with specific areas and sites as necessary.

rei 200/ Patrick Strange Page 8 l,umford Mill, Bakewell: Desktop Assessmellf

The General Strategic Policy for the control of developments within the National Park is set out in Policy GSI ofthe Structure Plan, within which the Board's objectives for conservation and enhancement ofthe built environment ofthe Park are subsumed. To conserve and enhance the traditional, historic and cultllraJ qualities which mtlke up its distinctive character (for example historic buildings, the character of the vilfages, archQJ!oIogical; sites and IIlndscape featllres such as dry-stone wallfield boundaries). All development proposals will be determined by their conformity with the more general Policies set out in the Peak National Park Structure Plan (Final Edition 1994) and more specifically with those ofthe Local Plan (Modifications Edition 1999). 2.2.2 The Peak National Park Stucture Plan (Final Edition 1994) The Peak National Park Structure Plan (1994) sets the strategic framework for land use planning and in particular Land-use Policies for controlling the development ofland, including • spatial conservation policies. In particular those conservation policies relevant to the effects of development on Listed Buildings and Sites ofHistoric, Archaeological or Cultural Importance are set out in Policies CS, C9 and CIO as follows:-

Conservation Policy B CB Evaluating Sites and Felltllres ofSpecial Importance

In all cases involving statutory designation or an international, national or regional interest, and wherever otherwise appropriate, an evaluation of the development proposals' impact on these interests will be required, to specificatio1L~ approved by the Board, before any relevant planning application is determined

Conservation Policy 9 C9 • Listed Building and other Buildings ofHistoric or Vernacular Merit (a) The effective conservation ofall buildings ofhistoric or vernacular merit will be pursued by ensuring that they continue to be usedfor purposes suited to the con~ervation ofthe bUildings themselves and to their location~. Development which adversely affects the particular merits ofsuch a building will not normally be permitted

(b) Other than in exceptional circumstances, development, demolition or other work requiring listed building consent will not be permitted where it does not preserve and, where possible, enhance the listed building'sfeatures ofspecial architectural or historic interest or its setting. Conversion oflisted agricultural buildings to residential use (including holiday accommodation other than a camping barn) will not normally be permitted

«;1 2001 Patrick Strange Page 9 Llimford Mill, Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

Conservation Policy 10 CIO Sites ofHistoric, Archaeological or Cultural Importance

(a) Other than in exceptional circumstances development will not be permittedifit would adversely affect a site orfeature (or its setting) which has statutory designation as a Scheduled Ancient Monument or which is ofinternational, national or regional importance.

(b) In addition, development will not normally be permittedwhere it would result in loss ofordamage to any other site orfeature ofhistoric, archaeological or cultural importance or its setting.

(c) Where development ispermitted, the developer will be required to minimise its impact and, as appropriate, to record, safeguardandenhance the sites orfeatures ofspecial importance. • 2.2.3 Peak District National Park Local Plan (Modifications Edition August 1999) The Peak District National Park Local Plan was adopted in 1999 and includes the local policy framework for the protection, enhancement and preservation of Listed Buildings, Scheduled Ancient Monuments and other buildings or sites ofarchaeological interest and their settings.

2.2.3.1 Historic, Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Structure Plan Policy CIO also requires appropriate recording, safeguarding and enhancement of any features that are affected by development when it is permitted, Policy embedded in Local Plan Policy LC16. The County Sites and Monuments Records provide valuable information supplementing the statutory Schedule of Ancient Monuments and are • referred to when development applications are made.

Policy LC16: Historic and cultural heritage sites andfeatures

(a) When considering development proposals that couldaffect historic andcultural heritage sites andfeatures, thefollowing will be taken into account:

(i) their national andlocal significance by reference to the Schedule ofAncient Monuments andto the County Sites andMonuments Records andother relevant information;

and, (ii) the protection, enhancement andpreservation ofthe sites orfeatures and their settings; continued

,(">200f Patrick Strange Page 10 Lllm.ford Mill, Bakewell: Desktop Assessme1l/

LC16 contin/led

and, (iii) the need.for the development to be on the site in question.

(b) Where development r:ifjecting such a site orfeature is acceptable, the preservation ofany feature ofspecial interest in its original position, and appropriate opportun itiesfor public access and examination will be required wherever practicable, taking into account the importance ofthe site orfeature.

2.2.3.2 Conservation Areas Additionally, Policy C4 ofthe Structure Plan and Policy LC6 of the Local Plan set out the policies for development in a Conservation Area, or for development that affects the setting or important views into or out ofthe area.

• Policy LC6: Conservation ArellS

(a) Applicationsfor development in a Conservation Area, orfor development that affects its selling or important views into or out ofthe area, should assess and clearly demonstrate how the existing character and appearance ofthe Conservation Area will be preserved and, where possible enhanced. Outline applications will not be considered

The following mailers should be taken into account:

(a) (i) form andlayout ofthe area including views into or out ofit and open spaces;

(ii) scale, height, form and massing ofthe development and existing buildings to which it relates;

• (iii) Iacally distinctive design details including traditionalfrontage pallems and vertical or horizontal emphasis;

(iv) the nature and quality ofmaterials

b) Proposalsfor or involVing demolition ofexisting bUildings, walls or other structures which make a positive contribution to the charader or appearance or historic interest ofthe Conservation Area will not be permilled unless there is clear and convincing evidence that:

(i) the condition ofthe building (prOVided that this is not a result ofdeliberate neglect) and the cost ofrepairing and maintaining it in relation to its importance andto the value derivedfrom its continued use, is such that repair is not practical; continued

LC 6 continued

and, (ii) allpossible efforts have been made to contirme thepresent use orfind compatible alternative usesfor the bUilding, includingputting the bUilding on the market and seekingadvicefrom relevant authorities andagencies;

or, (iii) the demolition is to remove an unsightly or otherwise inappropriate modem addition to the building;

(c) Where such demolition is acceptable, a record ofthe building or structure may be required Plansfor re-use of an area where demolition isproposedmust be agreedanda contractfor redevelopment signed before the demolition is carried out.

(d) Where appropriate,jelling lopping or topping oftrees will not be permittedwithout • prior agreement, which may require their replacement. 2.2.3.3 Re-development at Lumford MiD In particular Policy LB6 sets out the Local Plan Policy for redevelopment at Lumford Mill.

Policy LB6: Redevelopment atLum/ordMill

(a) Comprehensive redevelopment, predominantlyfor industrial business use (Use Classes Bi andBl) will be permittedon some 5 hectares at LumfordMill, provided that:

(i) the ListedBUilding(s) andScheduledAncientMonument and their settings are adequately safeguardedin the long term~'

and, (ii) design, layout, landscaping andneighbourliness with adjacent uses are satisfactory.

and, (iii) ifdevelopment results in an increase in existingjIoorspace on the site, a • new access bridge is built across the River Wye. and the old bridge is closedto vehicles.

(b) Acceptable uses on minorparts ofthe site may include affordable housing to meet a local need(close to existing houses), andgener.al market housing or tourist accommodation by conversion ofthe existing mill building.

3.1 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION

The development area under consideration compnses (accompanying Plan 1011) approximately 5 hectares lying to the N ofthe River Wye on the site ofthe former Lumford Mill, a site whose history ofdevelopment begins in November 1777 when Richard Arkwright [eased from Philip Gell ofHopton, 53 acres (2Iha.) ofland in Longstone and Bakewell.(I) Six years earlier Arkwright had, to exploit his inventions, erected at Cromford the world's first successful water-powered cotton spinning mill and in 1776 on the same site, a second mill.") Limitations of space on the site at Cromford, water power and perhaps labour were amongst the main reasons for choosing Lumford for the site of his third mill. The site here was undeveloped and although he and his successors were later to have problems with adjacent landowners over water rights it offered an ideal site for development with the reliable River • Wye providing more than adequate water power.(3) Work at Lumford began almost immediately on a 4-storey stone-built mill some 162ft by 31.2ft (49.4m by 9.5m), a reservoir behind the mill supplying water to a wheel in the centre of

the mill. (W) Other developments on the site soon followed, a new bridge across the River Wye, a house and stables, an enlargement ofthe mill itselfand later, the "workshop" building adjoining the bridge'") In 1786 Richard Arkwright regularised his use ofthe river with a lease from the Duke of Rutland and was subsequently able to make improvements to its course(7) Two years later he purchased the freehold ofthe site from the Gells.(·) In 1827 further major improvements included a new 80hp (60kW) water wheel supplied by a long raised goyt from a new weir.(·) Whether this new work was intended to make the mill more attractive to a potential new owner is not clear, certainly Arkwright was attempting to sell the business in the early 1830's but succeeded only by offering the business on • hire-purchase to Horace Mason, then joint manager at Calver MillYO) Some 3 years later Mason defaulted on his repayments and the business again came to the market, this time by auction at The Rut[and Arms Hotel, Bakewell where in the absence of any bids it was re-purchased by Peter Arkwright on behalfofhis brother."') Successful disposal came in 1844 when the mill was leased to Simpson, Herbert & Co, Cotton

Spinners who made substantial improvements to the premises including the erection of a gas

works which for 4 years or so until 1850 also supplied Bakewell with gas for lighting. (I2XI3) In that year new tenants, Messrs Lomas & Tunstall, Cotton Spinners took over the lease

installing in 1852 a further water wheel together with a small steam engine to assist in times of

drought.(14)(")

By 1857 ownership had passed to Godfrey Arkwright, Jrd son ofRichard Arkwright, and in

1860 by sale to the Duke ofDevonshire with Lomas & Tunstall as tenants still. (16) They were almost certainly operating the mill when, in 1868, a disastrous fire completely destroyed the original mill building, although the water wheels, "workshop" building and gas works escaped.

(17)

In 1875, a new single-storey north-light roofed spinning mill was under construction, probably by a new tenant, John Somersett, Cotton Doubler who was to occupy the site until 1898 when

it was sold to the DP Battery Company.III) Thus ended over 120 fitful years of cotton spinning on the site.

More land was acquired by the company in 1901 (I,) but the site as we see it today is largely • due to expansion ofthe works during the Second World War when the Company was perhaps the leading supplier of submarine batteries. The two water wheels continued to be used for electricity generation until 1955 when a serious failure ofthe largest wheel occurred and they were replaced by a 150hp (112kW) Gilbert, Gilkes & Gordon water turbine~20) In 1970, the whole site was acquired by W Femehough Ltd.

4 CULTURAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL

4.1 EVIDENCE 4.1.1 Sites and Monuments Record Summary Appendix A summarises the current Sites & Monuments Record for the area lying within IkIn • ofthe site and are located in Plan A. 4.1.1.1 Prehistoric and probably Prehistoric There are no recorded sites ofPrehistoric or probably Prehistoric origin within lkm of the proposed development site. 4.1.1.2 Roman and Romano-British Some slight evidence for Roman and/or Romano-British occupation within the area is evidenced by a number of finds made mainly during buildings works within the town of Bakewell during the C19. 4.1.1.3 Medieval In addition to Bakewell Bridge, the Parish Church and a number ofcross fragments within the churchyard, the medieval SMR's include the site at Castle Hill and a number ofstrip Iynchets (\) 2001 Patrick Strange Page 14 LumfordMill. Bakewell: Desktop Assessmellt

and field systems, all lying on the high limestone to the SW ofthe development site. 4.1.1.4 Post-medieval Included in the records for this wide-ranging period are the listed and scheduled buildings and structures within and contiguous with the development site (see Appendix C ofthis report for complete details and descriptions). Others point to the variety of industries of this period in and around the town of Bakewell, com milling, marble turning and polishing, quarrying for limestone and chert, and tanning. The bulk however identitY the principal historic houses and cottages within the town including those erected by Arkwright to attract and provide housing for his mill workers. 4.1.2 Historic Landscape Character assessment The Peak District National Park Archaeology Section have categorised the nature and form of the landscape over and surrounding the proposed development site, Appendix B. • The landscape character ofthe development site prior to I777 is probably best compared with that ofArea G ie Ancient Enclosure, the earliest references being to Great Lurnford and Little Lurnford, presumably meadows, the former lying between the river to the S and the steeply wooded slope ofWorm Wood to the N. Upstream of the site, the river has provided ideal sites for a variety of water-powered industries, the medieval com mill at Ashford, a comb mill, marble works, bobbin mill, lead smelting mill &c: in fact, Arkwright in establishing his mill at Lurnford was able to take advantage of the head of water provided in part by the already existing weir for Bakewell Com Mill. Subsequent alterations to the course of the river and the extensive provision ofweirs, lakes and ponds from 1777 to 1955 upstream ofthe industrial site to provide power at Lumford Mill have created a unique water dominated landscape. The site itself, developed from 1777, now • comprises a densely packed group of buildings, mostly with little architectural or historic interest but also including three Listed Buildings and a Scheduled Ancient Monument. Part of Bakewell Conservation Area is included within the site lUId adjoining to the E is the Listed and

Scheduled Holme Bridge. 4.1.3 Recent Evaluations No recent evaluations of the archaeological potential ofthe site have been carried out apart from some observations made by Robert Thornhill, who as manager of the DP Battery Company observed and recorded foundations whilst excavation work was being carried out in

1(\ 2001 Patrick Strange Page 15 I.umford Mill, Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

the area ofthe site ofthe 1845 gas holder. (22) The company was also responsible in 1960 for a detailed survey ofthe site annotated with the then use ofthe buildings (Figure I). A recent survey ofthe site and structures has been carried out on behalf ofthe developers and is included with this assessment document. The only published history of the development of the site is in Robert Thornhill's, The Arkwright Cotlon Mill at Bakewell, DAJ, LXXIX, (1959) pp.80-87, which together with MH Mackenzie's article The Bakewell Mill and the Arkwrights (ibid pp.6J-79) make extensive use of the principal archive for the early history of the site in the Chatsworth Collections (ARK). 4.1.4 Documentary and Cartographic Evidence The earliest significant map of the area is that labelled "Rough Survey of Bakewell Farms" (ORO 258/61/33), a copy ofwhich is to hand in the Archaeology Section archives, PDNP. This clearly shows that the area upstream ofHolme Bridge towards Ashford was undeveloped • at this time, the meadow immediately upsteam ofthe bridge on the N side of the river being "Great Lumford", the further meadow, on the S side of the river where it took a sweep northwards being "Little Lumford". It is highly probable that the weir and goyt for Bakewell Mill (now the c.1800 Victoria Mill) also existed at this period, certainly it is referred to as "the ancient Weir for conducting the water to the Com Mill immemorially used previous to the

year 1766" (23)

The subsequent alterations to the river course and developments to provide increased water power for the mill from 1777 to 1842 were frequently the source ofdispute with the Dukes of Rutland, the ancient holders of the right to t8.k:e water from the river. Figures 2,3& 4 summarise the major changes which were implemented prior to the installation ofthe second water wheel in 1842, and the setting of the site in 1879: further improvements were again

carried out in 1955 when the water wheels were replaced by a water turbine. (23) • Building developments on the site from 1777 are outlined in the Historical Introduction 3.1.1 above and are based largely on the evidence of plans attached to title deeds (from Thornhill) and the series of 25" as maps dating from 1875. This map and plan evidence is summarised in Figure 5.

((~ 2001 Patrick Strange Page 16 f,umford Mill, Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

4.2 INTERPRETAnON OF THE SITE AND SIGNIFICANT SURVIVING BUILDINGS 4.2.1 Introdudion (Figure 6 provides the Phasing Plan for the pre-I900 buildings) The historical development ofthe site can still be largely read in the surviving C18 and early C19 buildings and structures on the site, their significance being recognised by Statutory protection. The "workshop" building, adjoining river bridge and the masonry revetment along the downstream side ofthe site ofthe 1777 mill building are Listed Grade II, the water supply arrangements to the C19 water wheels as Scheduled Ancient Monuments. Still largely unaltered apart from the addition of the post-war projecting office wing is the c.1875 mule-spinning shed, the front wall and part of the south wall of which utilises the foundations ofthe 1777 mill building. Amongst the later buildings, the gas retort house of 1845 and the former house and stables in the mill yard also survive much altered. • 4.2.2 The 1777 Mill The earliest known plan ofthe site is that attached to the 1786 document regularising the use ofthe water rights owned by the Duke of Rutland and shows the extent of the original mill together with the new extension over the tail-race. A further plan of 1836 shows the mill extended to the NW and also relates is position to the surviving workshop building.'2j) This evidence together with the Boulton & Watt drawing (see Frontispiece), the surviving piece of standing stonework ('A' in Figure 6, Photo. 10) and the structures (albeit altered) which carried the two later water wheels all confirm that the E wall ofthe mill is marked by the front wall ofthe present office building. From !Jte surviving piece ofstonework and the photographs taken after the fire in 1868 (photos. 12 & 13) it is clear that the 4-storey mill was ofsandstone construction with flat-headed segmental arched windows in much the same style as those used in the 1776 Cromford Mill. The two projections at the N end and seen on the B & W drawing were almost certainly a lavatory tower (yV side) and (E side), a chimney associated with a heating system for the mill. As at Cromford the first water wheel was situated in the centre of the mill with a feed from a mill pool on its W side, the tail race feeding back into a new cut to the river below the Bakewell com mill weir. This water wheel almost certainly went out ofuse in 1827 when the Wren and Hughes wheel was installed and extensive alteration were made to the water management system including the present goyt. 4.2.3 The Workshop Building (Photo. 1) With exception ofa short panel of stonework of 1777 date (see below), the oldest surviving building on the site is the c.1800 workshop building adjoining the river bridge. Of 3 storeys in t.' 200/ Patrick Strange Page 17 rumford Mill, Bakewell: Desktop Asse.\~~ment

Wicksop sandstone with a later Welsh slate roof the original building comprised 6 bays, symmetrically spaced on the river side but on the mill side less so resulting from the two large adjoining doorways with exagerated segmental arches and keystones at the E end (photo.2). The two further bays to the W were added later. The workshop attribution is only tentative: an Inventory of 1844 suggests that the building housed the smiths', joiners' and turners' workshops with power taken from the main mill building. 4.2.4 The gas retort house and chimney (Photo. 11) Following the lease of the site to Simpson, Herbert & Co in 1844, improvents to the milI included the erection of a gas work and associated gas-holder. Although much damaged by later alterations the building still survives in sandstone with a clerestory rooflight, and with its (probably) original chimney. The OP survey (Figure 1) indicates that in 1960 it housed a diesel generator. • 4.2.5 The mule-spinning shed (Photos. 6,7,8, & 9) Following the catastrophic fire in 1868, the 1777 mill was totally demolished (except where it adjoined, 'A' above, the water wheels which survived the fire), and was replaced by Thomas Somersett, Cotton Doublers c.1881, by the large north-light mule-spinning shed 16 bays by 6 bays divided by decorated cast-iron columns. Of sandstone construction, the E front has tall windows beneath an ogee string course with above, blind square-headed arches and above again a dentilled coping course. Its E and S walls are built almost certainly carried on the original foundations of the 1777 mill. 4.2.6 Othersurviving structures (Photos. 3,4 & 5) Other surviving structures on the site include the 3-arch river bridge ofc.1785, the stonework ofthe exit arches ofthe tail-races from the two phases of water power and the much altered (in 1955) stonework which carried the 1827 and 1852 water wheels, and later in 1955 the water turbine.

5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION 5.1 CONCLUSIONS The historical evaluation ofthe site prior to its acquisition by OP Battery Company in 1898 and the results offield work have demonstrated that the foundations, wheel-pit and tail race of the original Arkwright Mill of 1777 are likely to survive below ground, later developments

!() 2001 Patrick Strange Page 18 J.lImford Mill, Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

following the fire of 1868 having been constructed over the site and in part using the 1777 foundations. Other later structures, the bridge, workshop building, mule-spinning shed and later water power arrangements all survive largely unaltered. Just one small piece of standing stonework survives from the 1777 mill. The provisional proposals for the re-development ofthe site (Drawing 10/2) suggest that the mule-spinning shed (in a very dilapidated condition) will be demolished except for a section of its front wall together with the modern office extension. Retention ofthe gas retort house and chimney is not currently envisaged. There are no proposals to alter any the of the statutorily protected buildings or structures.

5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FIELD INVESTIGATIONS PRIOR TO RE-DEVELOPMENT Demolitions envisaged in Drawing 1012 offer the opportunity for a programme of evaluation • by measured survey of both the standing mule-spinning shed, the retort house and by excavation ofparts ofthe site ofthe 1777 mill. This will enable the nature ofits below-ground construction to be assessed as well as offering the potential for investigating the mill's original power arrangements.

6 REFERENCES & NOTES (I) Arkwright MSS in Chatsworth CollectionARKl44 (2) RS Fitton, The Arkwrights Spinners ofFortune (Manchester 1989). Chapter 3. (3) MH Mackenzie, The Bakewell Cotton Mill and the Arkwrights. Derbyshire Archaeological Journal. LXXIX, (1959) p.62 (4) White Watson, Observations on Bakewell: beginning on the 31st ofMay 1774. (ibid), • Xl, (1889) p.160 (5) Boulton & Watt Collection, Birmingham Reference Library, Folio 1334 (6) The dating ofthe various buildings, although only tentative depend largely on the few available plans attached to leases. Later information from 25" OS. Robert Thornhill had also used 1799 Rutland Map, 1824 Enclosure Map ofBakewell, 1847 Tithe Award Map ofBakewell in the preparation ofhis 1786 & 1836 plans. (see Figures 2 & 3) (7) Lease for 42 years ofwater rights from Duke ofRutland, 1786 ARKl63 (8) ARKl44-7 (9) R Thornhill, The Arkwright Cotton Mill at Bakewell. DAJ, LXXIX, (1959) p.83-4

(10) ARK/64-5,68,72a,73-4 (II) ARK/80 (12) Under Bakewell heading. Bagshaw's Directory ofDerbyshire 1846 (13) (ibid.) (14) Under Bakewell heading. Kelly's Directory ofDerbyshire 1855 (15) Thornhill (op.cit.) p.84 (16) ARK/86-9,93 (17) Thomhill MSS D307, DRO Box P Bundle 7 (18) 25" OSMap 1879 edition (19) Conveyance attached to Title Deeds of Lumford Mill (20) Conversion ofan Old Hydro-Plant. Electrical Times. 3rdJanuary 1957. MSS in private hands. • (21) A Century ofPower. DP Battery Company. N.d. (22) Thornhill MSS D307 DRO Box P Bundle 6 (23) Thornhill (op.cit) p.83 (24) MSS in private collection

7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This assessment has been made possible by the generous provision and access to documents held by individuals and others. Dr Andrew Myers provided Sites & Monuments Records held by Derbyshire County Council, Sarah Whiteley, Peak District National Park Archaeology Service provided the Historic Landscape Character information and Mr Peter White provided generous access to the Chatsworth Collections. Other private owners also allowed material in • their possession to be examined.

APPENDIX A• SITES AND MONUMENTS RECORDS

See Plan A for the location plan. Only those sites which lie within a lIan radius ofLumford Mill are listed below.

SMR NGR Description No. SK

Prehistoric and Probably Prehistoric There are IlO recorded lites ofPrehistoric or Probably PreIIistoric origin within lkm oftbe development site

Roman & Romano-Britisb 816 21616850 Roman Cinerary Urn 30201 21696865 Possible Roman potsherds 815 21696865 Roman PotteJy (see also SMR 30201)

Medieval 820 22116878 Castle Hill - Motte and Bailey (SAM 99) 822 21576845 Late C8th cross (not in situ) 823 21556847 All Saints Church, Norman and later • 831 207685 Strip Lyncbets 821 21556845 C101lith cross shaft (SAM 70,77) 828 207692 Strip Lyncbets 827 21956865 Bakewell Bridge (SAM 16) 825 21556847 All Saint's Church (see also SMR 823) 831 206686 Field System

Post Medieval 826 21546898 Holme Bridge (SAM 17) 866 21546911 Holme Hall dated 1626 (includes walls, Court Ho., Gazebo &c) 856 21616862 Bagshaw Hall c.1684 (includes walls) 870 21816853 Bakewell Pudding Shop 835 212682 Pinfold 836 216688 Victoria Mill 837 212691 Lumford Mill' 7315 213692 Holme Bank Chert Quarry 839 do. do. 842 21756830 Tannery 843 220686 Bakewell, Mamie Mill 845 216689 Progress Works 846 216686 Arkwright's Square • 855 21656870 Bagshaw Ha1I, Laundry 857 21616862 Bagshaw Hall, Garden Wall 858 2169 House, Baslow Road 859 21776861 Bath Street, Cookery Centre 860 21806862 Bath Street, Coulsden Cottage 861 21786858 Bath Street, Bath House 862 21906858 Bridge Street, Market Hall 863 21476852 Church Lane, Cunningham Lane (Old House Museum) 865 2169 Holme Cottage 868 2169 Holme Hall, Court House (see also SMR 866) 869 2169 Holme Hall, Coach House and Stables (see also SMR 866) 872 21456840 South Church Street, No. 1 873 214S6840 South Church Street, No.3 874 21456840 South Church Street, No.4 875 214S6840 South Church Street, No. 5 876 21886850 Water Street, Wye Cottage/Granby Cottage

877 21676847 South Church Stn:et, SI. John's Hospital 886 21106895 Endcliffe Wood Chert Mines 31316 21406892 Quarry and Buildings, The Rock, Bakewell 889 21256858 Lime Kiln, 550m North East ofBank Top 847 221700 BirchiJI Tileyard (Site of) 7638 20556951 -21526899 Lumford Mill: Water Management System (SAM 12010)

Undated Records 880 215688 Bakewell. Enclosure (AP Mark) 883 20656817 Bakewell, Enclosure (AP Mark)

•

( 200 I Pamde Slrwlj(t' Puge 23 L/lmford Mill. Bakewell: Desktop Assessmel1t

APPENDIX B- HISTORIC LANDSCAPE CHARACTER INFORMATION

Historic Landscape Character information is held by the Peak District National Park Authority and provides a historical framework for identifiable landscape features. These are identified in PlanB.

Area A Parldand This area was enclosed prior to the Senior survey in the early (pink) 17th century. With the building ofAshford Hall c.I7SS then: was a major restructuring ofthe landscape and rerouting ofthe road Current field boundaries date to between 1824 and 1880. Parldand was laid out around Ashford Hall, possibly at the time ofbuilding the house, but the grounds were also landscaped in 1819. AreaB Managed Part ofunenclosed Churchdale 00 Senior's map. Churchdale was (brown) PlantationsIWoodland divided into several large enclosures before 1752 and further subdivided before 1824. The 1824 map shows some woodland and some fields in this area. with further cbanRes bv 1880. AreaC Managed Land enclosed prior to the early 17th century. Woodland is PlantationsIWoodiand alreadY Dresent in this area bv 1813. AreaD Post-1650 Encl- Open strip fields in 1796, on Map ofBakewell Manor. The land (blue) Parliamentary Enclosure was enclosed and allotted as shown on the Bakewell Enclosure Award Map of 1810, although the earliest map to show all the field • boundaries, as opposed to the allotment boundaries, is the Bakewell Tithe Mao of 1847. AreaE Ulban Part ofthe open Allotted as shown on the Enclosure Map of1810. with field (red fields ofBakewell in boundaries, as opposed to allotment boundaries, being shown on 1796. the Tithe Map of 1847. Housing developments in this area after 1880. AreaF Ancient Enclosure - Most ofthis area was enclosed prior to 1796, although a small (green) Fossilised Strip System section still formed part ofthe open strip fields at that lime. Some ofthe current field boundaries appear to have fossilised the shape ofthe medieval striPS AreaG Ancient Enclosure - Land enclosed prior to the early 17th century Senior map. The (pale Irregular Fields (not on enclosures shown on Senior's map had been sub-divided and green) stripfields) modified (with the building ofa new road) prior to the Holme Estate MaD 1813. AreaH Industrial Colton mill and (purple) associated dams shown on the Holme estate map of 1813.

Areal Managed This area appears to have been allotted following Parliamentary • (brown) PlantalionsIWoodiand Enclosure in 1810. It is shown as an area ofwoodland on the Tithe MaD of 1847. Area] Enclosure ofunknown Enclosure ofunknown date· with irregular fields (pale date - with irregular fields blue) AreaK Post-1650 Encl- Regular: Land enclosed prior to 1796. The map ofthat date shows this (pale blue Piecemeal/Award, no area divided into several fields. Marked as 'Shuts Closes' on the details 1810 enclosure map. Considerable boundary loss between 1847 and 1880 led to the enclosures in this area becoming significantly larJter. AreaL Ulban Bakewell town only The rest was either open strips and irregular fields prior to 1810, (red) formed a small part ofthis or 'Parliamentary Enclosure' fields and irregular fields after 1810. area on the above maos The smead ofurl:lan develonment has occurred since 1880. AreaM Enclosure ofunknown Land enclosed prior to 1796. Modifications to the road system, (pale date· with irregularfields together with building ofhouses have occurred since that date. blue)

lb) 200J Patrick Strange Page U LlIm(ord Mill, Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

AreaN Urban Land enclosed (red) prior to 17%. Extensively built on since 1880. Area 0 Post-1650 Encl- The land by the river is shown on the 1796 Map ofBakewell (blue) Parliamentary Enclosure Manor as common meadowland, divided in straight-sided strips. Award The land to the east away from the river is marked as 'The Old Pasture'. Both areas were enclosed and allotted as shown on the Bakewell Enclosure Map of1810. Field boundaries, as opposed to allotment boundaries, are first shown on the Bakewell Tithe Man of 1847. AreaP Post-1650 Encl - Regular: Land enclosed prior to 1796. However, there was considerable (pale PiecemeaVAward, no modification and rebuilding offield boundaries in this area after blue) details 1810 and before 1847. Funher boundary loss has occurred since thaI time. Recreational This area included part ofEdge Common and some enclosed :=Q land in 1796. Cunentlv a llolf course. AreaR Managed The south-eastern end of this area formed part of'The Combs (brown) PlantationsIWoodiand Common on the map ofBakewell Manor of 1796. The middle section is marked on the 1796 map as 'Wicksop Plantation', while the north section was 'Bakewell Edge Common'. The two commons were alloted as shown on the Bakewell Enclosure Map of 1810, and the parts included in this block are shown as woodland on the Bakewell Tithe Man of1847. Area S Enclosure ofunknown Land enclosed prior to 1796; no earlier map evidence. The fields • (pale date - with irregular fields shown on the 1796 map were sub-divided after 1810 and before blue) 1847. Some boundaries have been removed since 1880.

•

«:\ :ZOOJ Patrick Strange •

• ...... - ., ...... , ...... ) .. .. G ...... - ...... ::: - .. ::: ., - .. - ...... - ,-

_..:=~.:.~ 2'tI Zt1 Itt ... 1M .• _t ..= .. __•••_..;;,;"• ••_• __._. __••_._ •._ •. __...... III ...... "'" _... •'" ...... LumfordMill, Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

APPENDIX C- STATUTORll..Y PROTECTED BUILDINGS & MONUMENTS WITHIN THE PROPOSED DEVEWPMENT AREA

(1) SCHEDULE OF ANCIENT MONUMENTS WITHIN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE

SCHEDULE ENlRY COPY - FILE REFERENCE AA 322011A MONUMENT Lumfon! Mill, Bakewell PARISH: ASHFORD IN THE WATER COUNTY : DERBYSHIRE BAKEWELL HASSOP DISTRICT: DERBYSHIRE DALES NATIONAL MONUMENT NO: 12010 NATIONAL GRID REFERENCE(S): SK20556951 - SK21526899

DESCRIPTION OF THE MONUMENT

The monument includes the water management earthworks and structures associated with Sir Richard Arkwright's thin! mill. It was his first designed to use river water and be<:ame his most ambitious water-harnessing scheme. The surviving features comprise a submerged weir, a millstream, millpond and millrace (all retained by an earthern embankment), a high retaining dam wall, a water outlet tunnel and a tailrace. The original lease on the site was obtained by Arkwright in 1777 who went on 10 build the first mill and millpond The original millpond lay behind the mill buildings and comprised three weits, an embankment • and a new river channel. The millpond was contained behind a high dam wall which incorporated a millwbeel of undershot type. By the 1820's the pond and water wheel were no longer adequate and were modified by an embankment 0.8km long with an enlarged water wheel of high-brcast type. The embankments were further modified and strengthened in 1880 on the line of the original embankments. Together with the enlarged millpond, millrace, dam wall, tailrace and river bridge, the hydraulic system ofpost-l820 survives intact. The mill buildings were destroyed by fire and successive modern buildings now cover the original mill site. The tunnel is included in the scheduling as a subterranean feature. The ground SUIfilce which overlies it, including the car park, is excluded from the scheduling. The turbine house and its modem machinery sited at the south end ofthe dam wall, and the tilting sluice towards the western end ofthe Mill Pond are also excluded from the scheduling.

ASSESSMENT OF IMPORTANCE

The mounument, comprising the water management systCm associated with Sir Richard Arkwright's third mill and his fust designed to harness river power, survives as an almost complete and well-preserved series of earthworks and structures. The diversity ofweirs, bridges, embankment and dam wall are important examples of 19th century industrial engineering. Documentation provides a full picture ofArkwright's original and modified plans for the mill, its operation and productivity. (NB The scheduled site includes a 2 metre boundary around the archaeological features, considered to be • essential for the monument's support and preservation.) (2) SCHEDULE OF ANCIENT MONUMENTS CONTIGUOUS WITH THE PROPOSED DEVEWPMENT SITE

MONUMENT: Holme Bridge, Bakewell PARISH: BAKEWELL COUNTY: DERBYSHIRE DISTRICT: DERBYSHIRE DALES NATIONAL MONUMENT NO. : 17 NATIONAL GRID REFERENCE: SK 216689

DESCRIPTION OF THE MONUMENT

A narrow packhorse bridge of5 round arches with large culwaler. Parapet carried round cutwaters 10 form triangular recesses for pedestrians. Block ofstone on southern parapet may have been the base for a small statue. Modem plaque nearby says bridge rebuilt in 1664.

r(l 200I Patrick Sirange Page 27 I.umford Mill, Bakewell: Desktop Asse.~.'iJ7lellt

(3) LISTED BUILDINGS WITHIN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE

DOE Serial No. 831-1/3/54 Street: - BUXTON ROAD(North Side) Building: - Lumford Mill (Original building only) Date ofLisling :- 13.3.51 Grade: - II

DESCRIPTION

Pan ofcotton mill now offices. Late CI8 or very early C19. BY Richard Arkwright for his son Richard. Deeply coursed dressed sandstone. Welsh slate roof. EXTERIOR: 3 storeys, 8-window range. Large quoins. C20 wooden casements North side: ground-tloor and fust-f1oor sill bands extend 5 bays; broad windows to ground-floor bays I and 2 have flat-headed segmental arches with keystones. First-floor windows ofsame bays have cambered arches with keystones. Rest ofground and fust floor altered except window to ground-floor bay 5. Second floor: projecting sills to square-headed windows beneath eaves. Bays 7 and 8 have old masonry to lower W'dlls. South side (facing river): small one-storey projection with stone slate roof. Upper floor windows as bays I and 2 ofnorth side. Left return: matching windows to first and second floors; band across gable with round-framed recess (concealed by ivy); end stack. INTERIOR: not inspected. mSTORY: Richard Arkwright leased the site in Im and, after resolving difficulties over the water rights, built the mill for his son Richard. BY 1821 it employed 3SO people under the management ofRichard and Peter • Arkwright Various later CI9 owners. Main mill buildings rebuilt after a fire in 1868. (11Ie Industrial Archaeology ofthe British Isles: Harris H: The Industrial Archaeology ofthe Peak District: 1971-: 105-106).

DOE Serial No. 831-114/55 Street :- BUXTON ROAD (North side) Building: - Bridge over River Wye at Lumford Mill Date ofListing :- 5.12.97 Grade: - II

DESCRIPTION

Bridge. Early-mid C19. Deeply-coursed sandstone. 3 segmental arches, the central arch larger. Rock-faced voussoirs with drafted margins; keystones. Deeply-coursed parapet with ashlar copings; square end piers with pyramidal caps. Included for group value.

DOE Serial No. 831-1/4/56 Street: - BUXTON ROAD Building: - Facing to mill stream at Lumford Mill Date ofListing :- 5.12.97 Grade: - II

DESCRIPTION

Facing to bridge. Probably late C 18. Dressed and ashlar sandstone. An obtuse angled wall with 2 segmenlal arches having raised keystones. Band beneath parapet of3 courses ofashlar. Spans the tail race ofLumford Mill (qv); the waters pass beneath the mill yard to emerge at this bridge. Associated with the SCheduled Ancient Monument, Delbyshire Number 12010.

(4) LISTED BUILDINGS CONTIGUOUS WITII TIlE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE

Date ofUsting :• 13.3.51 Gmde: - [

DESCRIPTION

Pack-horse bridge. 1664. Ashlar gritstone. Narrow bridge with 5 segmental arches and cutwaters which rise as pedestrian retreats; offset band beneath parapet ofdeeply-coursed blocks with singJe-<:hamfered copin&,; cross-base at apex ofdownstream cutwater. Noth approach with stone bollards and mi[ing. South end with approach walls oflater date above 2 rounds arches. Scheduled Ancient Monument: Derbyshire County number [7. (The Buildin&, ofEngland; Pcvsner; Derbyshire; Hannondsworth 1986: 79)

•

If) 2001 Patrick Strange Page 29 • •

"\) • , ------~ tv - .. -.-. ..- .... • • <::> .. · -. • ,, <::> - • • Illl - -- • • \ , 1MIlrw.....-. -~ (. .., h* Inn"'.Q..lL -'" • I _. _. .. ,...-. • I I -•• " l 1-- ';n. I •• ----, - -~- '" ~- - -'tl !tl -• De '- • •-- jQ- • I - .. '.

- , " ...... , 1 • '. • •j •, .0 .,j .', 1 , • , • -• • , • • • •, • • • .., ., .. • ,. • • • •• .... • T , • • •• • :- • ~ ::: • • :: - • • • ·I ~ • I • ·I 0 • ~ • J • ~ I • • .:::: • • • • I {gt - • - • ~ I • • • • I • • .. _-. 1 ,I "!€- ...J- ,,~_ 1 • .... - ...! \ -- -• ...... ~ --- ...... - t ,. ------. --. - i ...- ....- - .Q .. • ., ... :...- • ;-. ",. .-. - Figure 1 J-,·· ... 1 1lli • c;:" '"....'" DP Battery Co survey 1960 :: <::> -'"

• 1.II"'.ford MiJI. Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

•

1786

•

. ..,;;: ~'''''' .<...... -:"..; "':...... -'!:----===----- Figure 2 Development ofwater power sources and alterations to river course 1813 (sources: 1786 - Thornhill 1813 - Chatsworth)

(~., 200f Patrick Strange Page 3/ Lumjord Mill. Bakewell: Desktop Assessmell/

• 1825

•

\,...., + Figure 3 Development ofwater power sources and alterations to river course 1836 (sources: 1825 - Chatsworth 1836 - Thornhill)

,c· 200I Patrick StraflKe • •

. -- --.,.~... - "y---'= - -. . _. - -- " -.. " •• .--; . • •• -_. -- -- ." . • •••• - '._'" '~- .. ' .. --'---:-~'-~ •• - ...... - . . ---.- -

II'

• • •• ..' ------.. • -... -t---.-- .. -. JO -'-" . - - . . . .; - • • ~.-- •. .c.'- It I .. •I ,.. .. "--'-.-. - .. - ---- ~-_ .. --" .- , • ~ --- / •• _. J . -- '-. • .. • • ,'f --. • I ~- -- - .. ., .- ".. "- - .. ~\ ._ • • "1:.tl • • • • ,. • L/~/,fIi~

~II;;:=~'7~'~-;~;----I _~'rul7 •.

,It ~ • ~ II. ... Figure 4 • Setting of Lumford Mil11879 (25"OS) I.um!ord Mill, Bakewell: J)esk/op Assessmellf

...... -. .. " ......

1786 (fhornhill) 1836 (fhornhill) •

--_._ .. _~

1879 (25" OS) 1897 (25" OS) • _.-"'_ ..... --.. 1922 (25" OS)

• Figure 5 ., -. Development ofthe site

(" 200I Patrick Strange Page 3-1 - 1777 Co.I :tqo -~ & .. c.1785 e' .~ .. - c.1800 ~i ~ Site of1827, 1852 1';... water wheels. 1845 1955 water turbine 1 I • 1875

o • - Gas-holder ,Figure 1

Lumford Mill, Bakewell

Location-of If. ~ I 1 1 I Evaluation o 10 20 30 40 50 ./" trench metres I C 200I Patrick Strange I ( IlImford \/ilI, Hake",,1/ I '<'\~/"I' 1\\1'\\/1/('111

Photograph I- Workshop building Photograph 2 - Details ofdoorways •

Photograph 3 - Bridge over River Wye Photograph 4 - Stone arches oftail-races •

Photograph 5 - Down tream end ofScheduled Goy! (right). and turbine house (centre) (See also back cover)

Listed and Scheduled Buildings and Structures

t .'(111 I I'alll' k \Irall):<' ll/m(ordMill. Bakelt ell 11e,klll/' I ''<'\\l/IllI/

Photograph 6 - View ofmule-spinning shed Photograph 7 - Mule-spinning shed. Detail and modem extension oI' bracketed coping •

Photograph 8 - Mule-spinning shed. Interior. Photograph 9 - Mule-spinning shed. Detail ofCI Columns

•

Photograph 10 - Surviving panel of 1777 stonework showing signs ofbuming

I Jl11,'l IlIm(orti"',,", Hakl!IIt'II II,o,A/"I' I", "111,'/11

Photograph II - Gas retort house •

Photograph 12 - 1777 mill from NW following fire in 1868 •

Photograph 13 - \777 mill from S following lire in 1868

_~(J(I J !'alrn k \trllllgt' •

• [Rear cover] • Appendix 2

Addendum to Archaeological Desktop Assessment.

• January 2003 Lumford Mill, Bakewell

Archaeological Desktop Assessment for Litton Properties

Patrick Strange

02001

1 [Front cover]

I"Jtnck lmnge. South of h) Bank. Chun:h tree\. BrJssinglon. Matlock. Dcrb)'shln: DE4 4HJ Phone' 01629 Wl424 E-mail STRANGEPATRICK,ti\AOL.COM Fax 01629 K26 WO Lumford Mill, Bakewell: Desktop Assessment

Lumford Mill (Riverside Works) • Bakewell, Derbyshire July 2001

Addendum - January 2003 •

Patrick Strange BSc PhD MIEE CEng IHBC FSA South ofIvy Bank Church Street Brassington Matlock Derbyshire DE4 4HJ Phone: 01629 S40 424 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 01629 826 390

The Listed Building

Introduction

With the exception ofa short panel ofstonework of 1777 date, the oldest surviving building on the site is the Listed 3-storey 'workshop' building dated to c.1800 adjoining the river bridge (see Figure 6). In the full report, although access to the building and measured surveys were not then available, the building is tentatively described as a workshop on the basis ofa comprehensive Inventory ofthe site made in 1844. Other than the main mill building, the site also included smiths', joiners' and turners' shops as well as lesser buildings, stables and iron house which together must have been housed in the 3-storey building or in the large block to the NW ofthe mill and shown in the 1786 plan (Figure 5).

The Listed Building (Figures 7 & 8) In coursed Wicksop sandstone with large quoins and a later Welsh slate roof the original building comprised 6 bays, almost symmetrically spaced on the river (8) elevation but on the mill (N) side less so. Ground floor bays 1 & 2 (from the E) comprise two broad adjoining doorways under flat-headed segmental arches with keystones (photo.2) with beyond, two further ground floor windows (bays 5 & 3 originally) under similar heads. Above, bays 1 & 2 and 4 & 5 (originally but now altered) have cambered arches with keystones. Plain cill bands run continuously at both ground and first floors. At second floor six square-headed windows with cills sit immediately under the eaves. The gable to the E has matching windows to first and second floors, a plain band across the • gable, with above; a round-framed recess and an end stack. The 8 elevation has a small projecting one-storey projection with original? grey slate roof the windows to ground and upper floors as those on the N elevation. The two further bays to the W were added later Internally, a substantial brick staircase occupies bays 3 & 4 and serves corridors at each upper floor formed along the N wall with a series ofoffices leading ott; some with solid, others with stud partitions. The staircase probably a later insertion although no evidence survives of an earlier structure.

Discussion Lumford Mill is almost certainly contemporary with Arkwright's 2nd mill at Cromford dating from 1776/7. The internal arrangement of both buildings can confidently be ascribed to the powered processes from carding to spinning: but that others such as storage and the labour intensive processes such as the unpicking and cleaning ofthe raw cotton were probably carried out in separate buildings not necessarily on the mill site. From the beginning, a machine building workshop would have been a neccesity as the mill was being equipped, so too a mill turning out the thousands ofwooden bobbins needed. At Cromford other buildings included a 3-storey 'Barracks' building ofc. 1791 providing accommodation for single male workers and a counting house. A 'Dinner Room' was also provided with immediate access to Mill Road for those workers whose food was brought in to the site by family or others at meal times. In other words associated with a mill site there would be a number of lesser buildings whose original purpose is not now obvious. '. At Lumford, the range ofbuildings to the NE ofthe main mill building is known to have been in existence by 1786 although considerably reduced in size by the 1870's whilst the Listed Building almost certainly dates from about 1800 some 20 or more years after the construction of the mill itself The Inventory of 1844 although comprehensive and listing a number of buildings which appear to be separate from the main mill building is not terribly helpful in identifYing their uses. They are separately described as, 'Yard and Shed', 'Back Stable', 'Smith's Shop', 'Joiner's Shop', 'Turner's Shop' 'Attic over the Turner's Shop', 'Iron House' and 'Dinner Room'. It is tempting to place the turner's shop in the Listed Building since the Inventory includes machinery which would have required a power source, '3 lathes', 'circular saw' and a • 'grooving engine': also listed is '27 feet of2 'A inch square wrought iron shaft and pullies and gallows' and '20 feet of2 inch round shafting turned and polished with 3 gallows and pair of bevil wheels'. The Listed Building is sufficiently close to the main mill that the latter could have provided the drive to it and whilst other functions, counting house, storage, or dinner room could also have been included in the building, it is likely that its principal function was to house the turner's shop. Unfortunately, the comprehensive alterations made to the building subsequently are likely to destroyed evidence for any ofthese uses as are the demolitions and conversion ofthe surviving NE block into four houses. However, the Listed Building, with if possible, the removal of the modem internal partitions and some restoration of the fenestration on the N elevation is a remarkable survival of an ancilliary mill building.

~) 2002 Patrick Strange Page 2 cttJ ...--- i:!_=.!fir m - --- "1 ,I __ _.lJd,, JIi, bTId =HI HI • , REAR ELEVATION SIDE fl I VA II' 'II

..··· .. SURVEY Of EXIST.I~I [ PROPERTY ---.-J .--r I . !.: . .~- ··· ..·I.lJl.lfORD t.'ILL ~ ~- . ~ __ I~UXTON RD, BMEWELL3 ( • ('/ LITTON PROPERTIES \ I 1 I 11 "'" tXIHING tLf:VATlON~ ~,] [ AND SECTION---.-J II) I ;~! I:;:!I IIIII1. I ! I I; ~i I:: _~. 1 __ 1 (.-. -- 0 I'3''l-02 __ .~ .. ·.. .--~ FRONT ELEVATION SECTIONAl III VA' 1'111 t 1,100 ) -~ (~.. ~~' OCTOBER _.=J t Figure 7 !f Q) OlorlElO DESIGN .. _- - ~'~"" .. "~-'"'" I~"""~".", ,.. " , 0"011,".",,, ",,, ..,,"'., ....:""., "'111.. ,,,, ,, '...... , .. "" ~------..,.------

SECOND fLOOR •

, -----,

fiRST fLOOR , " 11-:1' I '!I I ·:1'.[ lI'If,. 1"';1 1/'1 1< I/ ) ~r, ~-'-'-"" 1'11.11 "1':1' 1.1111, j 1; ,:::L1[j 1"1- 1"11 1':1', I',~I\J Will ,,~,;' 11 i i ~ ~.' 'I "I' 'I . !!~,;l_ :: 1II I' ~ I 1'1""1 'I "III '.

• ~: t I\r~' ! "', III II ,'J , 'I I , )

.--::, 1"" .- ( I j '" I j I r ) ,. . -;~"m:-u i==AA~_~~~f. • ~ ~ .~ ifl,'., f: I! II I ) , ): I···· -~_,:b 411 I (Jlil I·: . '(lui , , ~ ---~-.....ci- L~, ..J] ~ GROUND fLOOR I

Figure 8 '. :UIlII, PI :,ll.N II i j ...-.------~-_. •

• [Rear cover] • Appendix 3

Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation

• March 2004 Lumford Mill • Bakewell, Derbyshire Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation

March 2004 •

Patrick Strange Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation - Lumford Mill Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation at Lumford Mill, Bakewell, Derbyshire

NGR - SK 21266903

Summary An Archaeological Desktop Assessment* has been submitted in advance of a proposal for redevelopment ofthe Lumford Mill site and from which it has proved possible to identify a key area whose excavation may confIrm certain hypotheses made in the Assessment. The principal aim ofthe investigation was to confIrm the location, survival and nature ofa south-eastwards extension at the front ofthe main range ofthe 1776 mill. An associated Brieffor Archaeological Investigation was prepared after consultation with the Peak District National Park Authority Conservation Archaeologist and as recommended in DOE Planning Policy Guidance (PPG16 1990). • A surviving early C19 measured plan of the 1776 mill and the 1785 projecting extension (Frontispiece in Strange, 2001) formed the basis for setting out the location of a 3m x 2m evaluation trench alongside the original mill E wall. The excavation demonstrated that there had been considerable disturbance within and adjacent to the evaluation area; a pipe trench had been excavated along it parallel to the main mill wall down to c.600mm (c.2ft) below present ground level, a major culvert with the upper surface of its stone capping at c.600mm (c.2ft) below present ground level had been constructed across it and with the exception ofone large damaged gritstone quoin adjacent to the mill wall, the wall ofthe extension had been totally robbed out. It is suggested that this occurred between 1868, the date ofthe fIre which totally destroyed the original mill and 1875 when the major culvert serving the roofofthe new mill was constructed. Whilst the outer face ofthe surviving quoin stone was c.700mm (c.27ins) further to the N than the measured plan had suggested, the fact that the stone was properly fixed and bedded suggests that it was unlikely to have been disturbed and moved during construction of the culvert. Its survival in situ is more probably due to the fact that during robbing ofthe extension wall it had been severely damaged on its back edge and presumed to be not worth the trouble ofremoval. • Originally 6IOmm(L) x 380mm(W) x 330mm(H), (c.24ins x c.l5ins x c.l2ins), with gauged margins and close diagonal dressing it was sitting on compacted dirty soil and clay at 700mm (c.27 ins) below present ground level. Following dismantling ofthe remains ofthe earlier structures following the 1868 fIre and the construction ofthe culvert, the site had been levelled using c.300mm ofbumt rubble and lime mortar, presumably destruction material from the earlier buildings. These contexts are presently covered by a further c.300mm (c.l2ins) oftarmac layers. It is suggested that the surviving quoin formed part ofthe foundation junction between the 1776 main mill structure and the 1785 extension, the remainder of the foundation stones of the extension having been systematically robbed out following the fIre. The presence of the culvert and concrete flaunching alongside the present E wall precluded excavation below these levels at the present time. There were no small fInds.

1 Introduction Following Richard Arkwright's first water-powered mill at Cromford in 1771 in which it is supposed that he quickly developed the various machines which form the basis ofhis process of powered cotton spinning, he proceeded to erect in 1776, three further mills, those at Cromford (38m x 9.5m, 7 storeys), Lumford (49m x 9.5m, 4 storeys) and an experimental steam-powered mill at Wirksworth (18m x 9.5m, 3 storeys). Research has not yet identified the chronological order oftheir construction but it likely that all three were completed and running by 1777. The Lumford Mill was destroyed by fire in 1868, the second Cromford Mill in 1890: the much smaller Wirksworth Mill still largely survives. Whilst the site ofthe 1776 Lumford Mill was redeveloped as a single-storey mule-spinning shop following the fire in 1868, documentary evidence suggests that the SE wall ofthis later building • incorporated the foundations ofthe earlier mill. Redevelopment ofthe Lumford Site may afford the opportunity for wider investigation of the plan of the 1776 building: the purpose of the present Field Evaluation is to confIrm the latter hypothesis, the nature and depth ofthe original foundations and the exact location ofthe junction between the 1776 mill main range and its SE extension erected c.1785. The location ofthe Evaluation Trench 2m in width and extending for 3m immediately alongside the present main range wall ofthe 1875 mule-shop was based on a measurement recorded on a contemporary plan of the 1776 mill in the Boulton & Watt Collection, Birmingham City Archives. It assumes that the SE corner and S wall ofthe mule shop were set out on the foundations ofthe earlier building and thus that the foundations ofthe • S wall ofthe 1785 extension would fall within the trench. 2 Excavation ofthe Evaluation Trench. (Figures 1 & 2)

The 3m x 2m trench was set out alongside the present E wall ofthe former mule shop, its SW corner at 20.00m N ofthe datum, the SE corner ofthe present building. A stone saw was first used to cut around the edges ofthe area, the present tarmac and underlying base material then being removed to a depth ofc.300mm to a Context (001) comprising over much ofthe area a layer ofburnt building debris and decomposed lime mortar below which a further Context (002) comprised smaller similar debris down to c.600mm (plate I). Across the centre ofthe trench and parallel to the mill wall, backfilled similar material suggested the line

of a trench, ultimately confirmed in the S section as a modem service trench carrying an Alkathene water pipe (003) (plates 2,3 & 4). In the NW comer, at c.380mm a layer oflime mortar marked the top surface ofa large gritstone quoin, (004), 61Omm(L) x 38Omm(W) x 330mm(H) with gauged margins and diagonal tooling butting up to the main mill wall and sitting ona layer ofcompacted dirty soil and clay. Although the fill at this comer ofthe trench behind the stone was much disturbed and it was apparent that the back face ofthe quoin had been broken away and removed., the remaining portion ofstone was almost certainly still in situ (plates 5 & 6). No further foundations ofthis wall have survived eastwards. They appearto have been removed following clearance ofthe site following the 1868 fire and before the construction ofthe large• culvert (see below). No evidence survives in the area ofany previous ground level or fmish. • Elsewhere, with the exception of a strip c.180mm wide where a modem concrete flaunching (005) had been laid against the present mill wall prior to laying the final tarmac surface (plate 7), the trench was excavated down to c.600mm (the depth ofthe water pipe) at which level the upper stones ofa large stone structure (006) c.1 OOOmm wide crossed the trench at right-angles from below the main mill wall. Comprising large limestone slabs and lime mortar, this is now known to be the capping ofa large stone lined culvert running under the mill and constructed to drain the extensive roofofthe 1875 mule-shed into the 1776 tail race (plate I). No small finds were noted..

3 Conclusions

The prime purpose ofthe excavation was to confirm the survival and nature ofthe 1776 main • mill E wall which was presumed to have survived the 1868 fire, later to form the foundations of the E wall of the 1875 mule-shop, and confirmation of the location of the S wall of an E projection to the 1776 mill. Unfortunately the presence ofthe wide culvert and the later concrete flaunching effectively precluded investigation ofthe lowest courses ofthe E wall at this time. Since it is not possible to identify any construction trench, the present foundations could equally well have survived from the 1776 construction withthe laterculvert constructed under orthrough them or have been newly built in 1875 prior to the burnt material (Contexts ?? & ??) being laid down. The single dressed quoin? appears to be in situ and is associated with the S wall of the E © 2004 Patrick Strange 3 Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation - Lumford Mill

extension of1785 otherwise robbed out following the 1876 fIre although survey showed that its actual position was slightly (c. 700mm, c.27ins) further to the Nthan that recorded on the Boulton & Watt Plan. (Note. The datum for this measurement was the SE corner ofthe 1875 building which has been assumed to coincide with the SE corner ofthe former building of 1776.) Although oflimited scope the evaluation trench and the survival ofthe sole quoin appears to confinn the interpretation placed on the Boulton & Watt Plan: a more extensive programme of excavation will be possible when the Lumford Mill site is re-developed.

• Patrick Strange The Cottage Bath Street Bakewell Derbyshire DE45 lBX 10 May 2004

•

.. N _1777 ·~c.1785

..c.1790

~ c.1800 Siteofl827,1852 wme:r wheels. ~ 1955 water turbine 1845 B11875'

.. c.1881 o Modernor unknown

Gao·hol'" • Figure 1

Lumford Mill, Bakewell

Locationof O~,"",!i-~!iii-ilF""l~1~O===;20~~~3~O~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii4~O~~~50 Evaluation _os trench C 200 I Pafridt Strmge Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation - Lumford Mill \ M

~o o

N ~, ~ III

~X,;:, r:;j I I. 00 • Q) 1-0 +- 1:1~li~~ eQ) Iii' 11'1 I; I II~I I I I ~I I 1!,IIIIII,'llr"IIII- I~I I I I I I II I II, II I III I

~l§N0'1> 0 • _:J! - 0 g"

o () e E Figure 2 - Lumford Mill, Bakewell. BgCd • O~ Plan ofexcavated area

'. • • .,., ..., ."..- ~ - ... • _. • ~ ". --.. • "-0.. • • • [Tl • --~ ... • •• • OJ • • • • • "_. - - •. '"o - •.-. "• r Plate I- Lumford Mill. March 2004 trial trench. East section. (Composite image) ":3 a.0' - Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation - Lumford Mill

•

Plate 2 - Lumford Mill. March 2004 trial trench looking north.

•

Plate 3 - Lumford Mill. March 2004 trial trench looking south.

o 2004 Patrick Strange 8 Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation - Lumford Mill

•

Plate 4 - Lumford Mill. March 2004 trial trench. South section detail.

•

Plate 5 - Lumford Mill. March 2004 trial trench. Surviving c.1785 quoin.

o 2004 Patrick Strange 9 Results ofan Archaeological Field Evaluation - Lumford Mill

•

Plate 6 - Lumford Mill. March 2004 trial trench. Surviving c.1785 walling.

•

Plate 7 - Lumford Mill. March 2004 trial trench looking west.

~ 2004 Patrick Srrange 10 • Appendix 4

Archaeological Watching Brief

ARCUS (Archaeological Research & Consultancy at the • University ofSheffield) August 2006 Project Report 1047.2

•

• August 2006 By Katherine Baker

L nON PROPERTIES 1Broome Bar n PII.,I y Lan Plisle B kcvvt't1 [ll'rbyshlr DE4b lPF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 SITE LOCATION AND lAND USE 1 1.2 HISTORICAl. BACKGROUND ,..••••..•..•.•...... ••••..••.•.••..,.1 2 AIMS OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELDWORK 1

3 METHODOLOGY 2

3.1 FIELDWORK PROGRAMME 2 3.2 MElHODDLOGY fOR RECOROING GROUND WORKS 2 4 RESULTS 2

4.1 ExCAVATION OF GEOl£CHNICAl TRIAL lRENCHES 2 4.1.1 Trench 1 3 4.1.2 Trench 2 4 4.1.8 Trench 8 5 4.1.4 Trench 4 5 4.1.5 Trench 5 6 5 DISCUSSlON 7 • 6 AROHIVE 7 7 BIBUOGRAPHY 8

8 ILLUSTRATIONS 9

8 PLATES 10

•

Archaeological Watching Brief atRiverside Business Park, Bakewell. Derbyshire ARCUS 10472- August2006 illustrations 1 Site location 2 Site plan showing trench locations 3 Section drawings: Trench 1and Trench 2

Plates 1 Trench 1. sample of north-wast-facing section 2 Trench 1. boundary between ponds 3 Trench 2, sandstone wall at northern end .. Trench 2. sample ofwest-facing section •

•

Archaeol~caJ Watching Brief at Rlwrslde BusIness Park, Bakewell. Derbyshire ARCUS 1047.2 - August 2008 Ii NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY ARCUS were commissioned to carry outan archaeological watching brief during the excavation of geotechnical trial trenches at Riverside Business Park. Bakewell. Derbyshire (NGR SK 2108 6924) The geotechnical trial trenches were required to provide Information on the ground conditions In advance of the proposed redevelopment of part of the site. The watching brief involved the observation of ground works in order that any exposed archaeological remains were recorded. This report details the results ofthe watching brief. During the course of monitoring the ground works evidence was discovered for deposits relating to the silting up of the millponds that were marked on nlnetElElnth century maps and plans of the site. Evidence for a roughly built sandstone bank and wall were also uncovered. which were thought to mark the boundaries of the millponds. . •

• Checked by: Passed for submission to client: Date: Date:

Steve Baker Anna Badcock ARCUS Project Archaeologist ARCUS AssistantDirector

Al'Chaeologlcal Watching BrIef at RiYerside BusIness Part<. Bakewell, Derbyshire ARCUS 1047.2 - August 2006 III 1 INTRODUCTION utton Properties have submitted a planning application for the development of new business units at the RiversIde Business Park. Buxton Road. Bakewell. Derbyshire (Planning Application No: NPIDDD/1104/1221). Prior to any development on the site a programme of geotechnical trial trenching needed to be carried out to ascertain the ground conditions of the development area DurIng these ground works there was potential for uncovering structures that related to the use of the development area as millponds during the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century. Accordingly. the Senior Conservation Archaeologist of the Peak District National Park Authori1y Cultural Heritage Service imposed a planning condition upon the permission for the development The planning condition required archaeological monitoring of the geotechnical ground works to be carried out through a watching brief. ARCUS were commissioned by Utton Properties to undertake this archaeological monitoring during the excavation of the geotechnical trial trenches by Roe Construction. This report demlls the alms and methodologies of the archaeological fieldwork and the results ofthe watchlng brief.

1.1 Site location and land use The Riverside Business Park. Bakewell (NGR SK 2108 6924) (illustration 1) is located • on the Buxton Road north west ofthe town centre. The underlying geology comprises carboniferous limestone of the Monsal Dale formation. The current phase of redevelopment focuses on an area of rough ground lying to the north west of the existing business units. bounded by the flood defences of the River Wye to the south west. and to the north east bythe embankment ofthe millrace of the former Lumford Mill (partofa Scheduled Ancient Monument area).

1.2 Historical background Patrick Strange (2001. 2003) carried out a desktop assessment The site appears to have been meadowland prior to construction of Lumford Mill in 1m by Richard Arkwright By 1786 the site was occupied by the main millpond. with two smaller ponds also shown on plans from 1813. There Is therefore little potential for significant archaeology pre-dating the mill features. The pond features were shown on a map of 1836. but were no longer extant by 1879. The original mill building was completely destroyed by fIre in 1868. and was replaced by a new single-storey building In 1875. The original ponds ms,y therefore have been Infilled duringthe period of closure.

• 2 AIMS OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELDWORK The archaeological watching brief was established to monitor the excavation of the geotechnical trial trenches. The aims ofthe watching brief were. • To determine the extent condition. character. Importance and date of any archaeological remains present • To provide information enabling any remains present to be placed within their local. regional and natIonal context. as appropriate. and an assessment of the significance ofthe archaeology ofthe site to be made.

Archaeological Watching Brief at Riverside Business Park. Bakewell. DllI'byshlre ARCUS 1047.2 - August 2006 1 • More specifically. to identify and interpret any survMng features associated with the eighteenth- to nineteenth-century millponds.

3 METHODOLOGY All excavation and recording work was carried out in accordance with the methodologies outlined in the ARCUS project design (Baker 2006), with guidelines issued by the Institute of Field Archaeologists (IFA 1999), with the Brief for Archaeological Work issued by the Senior Conservation Archaeologist of Peak District National Park Authorlly Cultural Heritage Service. and with current Industry best practice.

3.1 Fieldwork programme ARCUS Archaeologist Katherine Baker conducted the archaeological monitoring of the excavation of geotechnical trial trenches by Roe Construction In July 2006. Five geotechnical trial trenches were located (illustration 2) to provide the required geotechnical Information on ground conditions. The locations of the three most north-eastern trenches were posltloned to cross the boundary between the main millpond and the subsidiary ponds. The other two trenches were positioned to cross • the western boundary ofthe northernmost subsidiary pond. 3.2 Methodologyfor recording ground works The contractor carried out the excavation of the geotechnical trial trenches with the assistance of a mechanical excavator. using an appropriate toothless ditching bucket underthe constant supervision ofthe ARCUS archaeologist Time was allowed forthe examination and assessment ofany deposits or features of Interest in addition to the collection of artefacts. No pre-twentieth-eentury artefactual material was discovered, therefore no artefacts were retained. The depth of the trenches were determined by geotechnical requirements. which in practice meant excavation until the water table and associated natural rlver-washed sand and gravel deposits were encountered. The presence of the water table in all trenches and their subsequent depth precluded safe access Into the trenches. Therefore, in line with the methodology outlined in the agreed ARCUS project design (Baker 2006). a photographic and written descriptive record was made of each trench, a schematic sketch section of each trench compiled, and the trench locations recorded in relation to the surrounding structures.

• 4 RESULTS

4.1 Excavation ofgeotechnical trial trenches Prior to the excavation of the geotechnical trial trelTChes. the ground cover over the whole of the site consisted of rough scrub vegetation with several large mounds of spoil covering extensive areas of the site, again overgrown with vegetation. These large mounds of spoil were particularly evident over the area where Trenches 3, 4, and 5 were located. Therefore, before excavation of these trenches began. large sections of these spoil heaps had to be excavated through. It was readily apparent

Archaeological Watching BrIefat Riverside Business Park, Bakewell, Derbyshire ARCUS 1047.2 - August 2006 2 that these spoil heaps were of modern date. consisting of friable mid brown clay slit topsoil mixed with quantities of modern demolition or bUilding rubble. such as red machine-made brick. slate. and concrete breezeblock. as well as modern rubbish. such as foam lagging and carpet Itwas assumed that these spoil heaps related to the clearance of the adjoining area of the business park during the construction of the current business units. The rubble within the spoil heaps will have either derived from building materials discarded during construction. or demolition of any modem structures previously standing on the site. or clearance of modern dumping or tippingover the area

4.1.1 TI't1RCh 1 Trench 1 was the furthest north of the three trenches positioned to cross the bound8IY between the maln millpond and the northernmost subsidiary pond. It was orientated north east to south west and measured 19.00m long, O.60m wide and O.80m deep. The first 0.30m of the stratigraphic sequence consisted of a friable mid brown clay silt topsoil. At the north east end of the trench the topsoil contained irregular medium- to large-sized angular sandstone slabs not placed In any particular pattern or mortared It was assumed that these slabs were made ground hardcore. given the presence of a track close to this end ofthe trench. The uppertopsoil deposit was followed by O.60m offirm silt cIl\Y below making upthe rest of the excavated depth (Illustration 3). This cll\Y was a dark yellowish brown at • the top of the deposit graduating to a dark greyish brown with a green tinge towards the bottom of the deposit (Plate 1). This cla,y deposit differed from the Inferred subsoil deposits encountered elsewhere on site (see 4.1.2 below). It appeared that this cla,y deposit related to the use of the site as millponds during the eighteenth- and nlneteenth-century. and was probably the result of the silting up of these millponds. The graduation In colour towards the top of the clay deposit can be explained by the natural bioturbation that would occur between the topsoil and clay horizons. The graduation in colour towards the bottom of the clay deposit will be partly a result of the silting process. as it would be naturally assumed that heavier silt particles would accumulate towards the bottom of the millponds during their use. as well as anaerobic conditions eXisting towards the base of the pond. At the bottom of the trench a deposit of natural river-washed sand and gravel was encountered. consisting .of mid yellowish brown coarse sand with small- to medium-sized rounded pebbles. The presence of the water table at the boundary between the clay deposit and the natural river-washed sand and gravel also helps explain the darker colour at the bottom ofthe clay deposit, because it would have been waterlogged. At the south-west end of the trench a relatively recent land drain was encountered cutting through the lower part of the topsoil into the clay deposit and capped with • large regular roughly-dressed sandstone slabs. This land drain was clearly later than the use of the site as millponds. due to its position In the stratigraphic sequence within both the clay and topsoil deposits. Roughly a.OOm along the trench from the south-west end the clay and gravel deposits began to rise up and there was a relatively substantial collection of large irregular sandstone slabs plied in a neat mound on top of each other over an area of between roughly 200m to 3.00m. but un-mortared and placed In no particular pattern On the north-east side of these stones the clay and gravel deposits began to dip back down again (Plate 2). The sandstone slabs were clearly placed much more carefully than those making up the hardcore within the topsoil further along the trench. It was assumed this pile of sandstone slabs marked the boundary between the main

ArchaeolOS;cal Watching Brief atRMlrslde Buslnass Park. 1Iakewef1. Derbyshire ARCUS 1047.2 - August 2006 3 millpond and the northernmost subsidiary pond. with the silts of both millponds banked up against either side of the pile of sandstone slabs. The location of this feature corresponded to the position of the boundary between the two millponds marked on the maps and plans depictingthe area In the nineteenth century.

4.1.2 Tl'tlnch 2 Trench 2 was the furthest north of the two trenches positioned to cross the boundary of the northemmost subsidiary millpond. Itwas orientated roughly north to south and measured 20.00m long, O.60m wide. and varied in depth from 1.70m at the southern end to 1.20m at the northern end The first O.40m of the stratigraphic sequence consisted of O.40m offriable mid brown cIa¥ silt topsoil Along the length of the trench the topsoil contained irregular small- to medium-sized angular sandstone slabs. not placed in any particular pattern or mortared. It was assumed that these sandstone slabs were made ground hardcore within the topsoil for the track that ran alongside the trench. The upper topsoil deposit was followed by firm dark yellowish brown silt clay below making up the rest ofthe excavated depth (Illustration 3). The thickness of this clay deposit varied from 1.30m at the southern end to O.80m at the northem end and It was the variation in the thickness of this deposit that determined the differential depth of the trench. At the far north end of the trench this clay deposit was noticeably different being a dark greylsh brown that became darker with more yoey • in it towards the bottom of the deposit At the bottom of the trench a deposit of natural river-washed sand and gravel was encountered. consisting of mid yellowish brown coarse sand with small- to medium-sized rounded pebbles. At the northern end of the trench was a rough walI1.00m to 1.20m wide and O.80m deep. built of medium- to large-sized. regular. roughly-dressed un-mortared sandstone blocks (P111te 8). This wall marked the change in colour ofthe clay deposit, with the dark yellowish brown deposit to the southem side of this wall and the dark greyish brown deposit to the northern side. The dark greyish brown clay looked similar in appearance to the millpond silting deposit encountered In Trench 1. wherees the dark yellowish brown deposit looked more like a subsoil deposit If this was Indeed the case then it was likely that this rough sandstone wall marked the western boundary of the northernmost subsidiary millpond. and was cut into the subsoil to the south with the millpond silt banked up against It to the north. The position of this wall did not match the position of the millpond boundary marked on the maps and plans depicting the area in the nlneteenth-eentury. However. given the apparent absence of mill pond deposits In Trench 5 (see 4.1.5 below) it might be that the northernmost subsidiary millpond did not extend as far west as was marked on the maps and plans. • The subsoil clay deposit became slightly darker and greyer towards the bottom ofthe deposit. but the portion of the deposit that was yellowish brown was much thicker than in comparison with the clay deposit in Trench 1(P111te 4). Therefore. as opposed to the natural bioturbation of the topsoil and clay horizons that appeared to occur towards the top of the deposit in Trench 1. it was thought in this trench that the reason for the darkening of the clay deposit towards its base was probably more due to the deposits being waterlogged as a result of the water table being present at this level.

Archaeological Watching Briel at Riverside Business Park. Bakewell. Derbyshire ARCUS 1047.2 - August 2006 4 4.1.8 Tl'tJnch 8 Trench 3 was the middle of the three trenches positioned to cross the boundary between the main millpond and the northernmost subsidiary pond. It was orientated north east to south west and measured la.OOm long. O.80m wide. and varied in depth from 1.20m deep at the south-western end to 1.30m deep at the north-eastern end. The first O.30m of the stratigraphic sequence consisted of a friable mid brown cla.Y silt topsoil Tawards the north-east end of the trench the topsoil contained a considerable amount of demolition rubble such as red brick and slate. which was probably used as made ground hardcore due to the presence of a track close to this end ofthe trench. The uppertopsoil deposit was followed by O.90m to 1.00m of firm dark greyish brown silt cla.Y below. which became darker with more grey In It towards the bottom of the deposit. making up the rest ofthe excavated depth. This clay deposit was very similar In appearance to the clay deposits encountered in Trench 1 and at the northern end of Trench 2, suggesting that in this trench the clay deposit again related to the silting up of the millponds. At the bottom of the trench a deposit of natural river-washed sand and gravel was encountered, consisting of coarse sand with small- to medium sized rounded pebbles both of a dark blue ~y colour at first which became mid yellowish brown with depth. The change in colour of the natural river-washed sand and gravel is probably most adequately explalned by the staining of the top of this horizon from contact and • mixing with the overlying clay deposit This staining was not encountered In Trenches 1 and 2 but was also observed in Trenches 4 and 5. Trench 5 did not contain clay deposits relating to the silting up of the millponds, so rather than this staining being due to the miXing of the soil horizons within the millponds themselves. It Is probably due to the elTects of the water table at this location. The absence of this staining within Trenches 1 and 2 suggests that there may be differential effects from the Influence ofthe water table across the site. Between 5.00m and a.OOm along from the south-west end of the trench an area of irregular medlum- to large-sized angular sandstone slabs was uncovered within the clay deposit. not placed In any particular pattern or mortared. This area of sandstone slabs was at a similar location to the comparable pile of sandstone slabs uncovered within Trench 1, but It was not placed as neatly. and no corresponding rising of the clay or gravel deposits was observed. This area of sandstone slabs was assumed to be a continuation of the stone bank discovered within the clay deposit in Trench 1, which was thought to demarcate the boundary between the maln millpond and the northernmost subsidiary millpond. • 4.1.4 TI'tJnch4 Trench 4 was the furthest south of the three trenches positioned to cross the boundary between the main millpond and the northernmost SUbsidiary pond. It was orientated north east to south west and measured la.OOm long. O.80m wide and 200m deep. The first O.90m of the stratigraphic sequence consisted of a friable mid brown clay slit topsoil. the depth of which was due to the overlying spoil heap not being completely removed before excavation of the trench began. The topsoil contained a considerable amount of demolition rubble and building rubbish, especially towards the north-east end. This was probably a combination of the overlying spoil heaps not being completely removed and the construction of made ground hardcore for the track close to the north-east end ofthe trench.

Archaeological Watching Brief at Riverside Business Park. Bakewell. Derbyshire ARCUS 1047.2-August!lOO8 5 The upper topsoil deposit was followed by 110m of firm dark greyish brown slit cta.v below. which became darker with more grey in ittowards the bottom of the deposit making up the rest of the excavated depth. This clay deposit was very similar in appearance to the cta.v deposits encountered in Trenches 1and 3. and atthe northern end of Trench 2, suggesting that in this trench the clay deposit again related to the silting up of the millponds. At the bottom of the trench a deposit of natural river washed sand and gravel was encountered, consisting of just dark blue grey coarse sand at first which became mixed with small- to medium-sized rounded pebbles with depth. Both the impingement of the water table and the existing depth of the trench severely hampered observation at this level and it was not possible to excavate deeper to ascertain whether the colour of the gravel deposit changed to mid yellowish brown. as had occurred in Trench 3. Between 5.00m and 7.00m along from the north·east end of the trench an area of Irregular medlum- to farge-sized angular sandstone slabs was uncovered within the clay deposit not placed In any particular pattern or mortared. This area of sandstone slabs was at a similar location to the comparable pile of sandstone slabs uncovered within Trench 1and the area ofsandstone slabs uncovered within Trench 2. However. it was definitely not placed as neatly as the pile in Trench 1 and again no corresponding rising of the clay or sand and gravel deposits was observed. It was probably even more Indistinct as a pile of stones than the equivalent area in Trench 3. This area of sandstone slabs was again assumed to be a continuation of the stone bank discovered within the clay deposit In Trenches 1 and 3, which was thought to • demarcate the boundary between the main millpond and the northernmost subsidiary millpond.

4.1.5 Trench 5 Trench 5 was the furthest south of the two trenches positioned to cross the boundary of the northernmost subsidiary millpond. However, no evidence of any stone bank or wall was discovered that could have marked this boundary and also no cta.v deposits were uncovered that were similar to the clay deposits In the other trenches, which were related to the silting up of the millponds. The trench was orientated north east to south west and measured 17.00m long. O.80m wide and 230m deep. The first O.70m of the stratigraphic sequence consisted of a friable mid brown clay silt topsoil, the depth of which was due to the overlying spoil heap not being completely removed before excavation ofthe trench began. The upper topsoil deposit was followed by 180m of firm silt clay below. which was dark yellowish brown at the top of the deposit and graduated to dark greyish brown towards the bottom of the deposit This clay deposit was very similar in appearance to the subsoil deposit encountered in Trench 2. The absence of any deposits relating • to the silting up of the millponds within this trench may help to support the Idea that the wall discovered in Trench 2 might have been the boundary wall of the northernmost subsidiary millpond even though it did not correspond with the position of the boundary marked on the maps and plans. At the bottom of the trench a deposit of naturall'iver-washed sand and gravel was encountered, consisting of just dark blue grey coarse sand at first which became mixed with small- to medium-sized rounded pebbles with depth. Again as with Trench 4, both the Impingement of the water table and the eXisting depth of the trench severely hampered observation at this level and it was not possible to excavate deeper to ascertain whether the colour of the gravel deposit changed to mid yellowish brown. as had occurred In Trench 3.

Archaeological Watching Briel at Rlvarslde Business Park. Bakewell. Derbyshire ARCUS 10472 - August 2006 6 5 DISCUSSION The archaeological watching brief was established to monitor the excavation of geotechnical trial trenches. Trenches 1. 3 and 4 were positioned to cross the boundary between two millponds depicted on maps and plans from the nineteenth century. Trenches 2 and 5 were positioned to cross the western boundary of the northernmost subsidiary millpond. A clear distinction was discovered between cla,y subsoil deposits uncovered In Trenches 2 and 5. and darker cla,y deposits in Trenches 1. 2. 3 and 4 that were Inferred to relate to the silting up of the millponds. A roughly built bank of sandstone slabs was discovered within the millpond silts in Trenches 1.3 and 4 that closely matched the position of the boundary between the two millponds as marked on the maps and plans. This bank was interpreted as forming the separation between the two millponds. A roughly built sandstone wall was encountered at the northern end of Trench 2 that clearly demarcated the dltrerence between the subsoil and millpond silts. This wall was Inferred as forming the western boundary of the northernmost subsidiary millpond. This well was at a significantly different location to the boundary marked on the maps and plans. and along with the absence of any deposits relating to the millponds within Trench 5. It was inferred that this boundary ma,y in fact have been further east than was marked. • It is clear from the ephemeral structural nature of the sandstone bank and wall that they were not designed as retaining structures to support a millpond that existed as an above ground structure. The clear division between the cla,y deposits relating to the silting up of the millponds and the underlying natural river-washed sand and gravel deposits. without the presence of any subsoil between the two. suggest that the existing ground level was deliberately cut into through the subsoil down to the natural gravel to create the millpond area Then the sandstone wall and bank were constructed to line and demarcate the millponds rather than forming formal retaining structures. The consistent gradation in the colour of the cla,y deposit within the millponds clearly suggests that the filling of the millponds occurred as a natural silting process during the use of the ponds. not as a single episode of infilling after the ponds went out of use. It is possible given the relativety shallow depth of the millpond silts and the relatively low height of the sandstone bank and wall that they could have been truncated at a later date dUring modern levelling or use of the site. However. given the large extent of the area of the millponds as marked on the maps and plans. It is also likelY that enough water could be contained within the existing depth to provide sufficient amounts dependent upon the nature of the other elements of weter • management relatingto the mill over the rest ofthe surrounding area

6 ARCHIVE The archive and finds will be deposited with Buxton Museum and Art Gallery under accession number OERSB:2006.13. Copies of this report will also be deposited with the Museum as part of the archive. and with the Derbyshire Sites and Monuments Record.

Archaeologlcal Watching Brlelat RIversIde Business Park. Bakewell. ~hlre ARCUS 1047.2 - August2006 7 7 BIBLIOGRAPHY Baker, S. 2006, Project design for archaeological watching briefatRiverside Business Park Bakewell. Derbyshire, Unpublished ARCUS Project Design 1047,1. Institute of Field Archaeologists. 1999. Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Watching Brief Strange. P. 2001. Lumford Mill. Bakewell: archaeological desktop assessment for Litton Properties (unpublished report. Patrick Strange) Strange. P. 2003. Lumford Mill. Bakewell: archaeological desktop assessment for Litton Properties; addendum - JanlKl1Y 2003 (unpublished report. Patrick Strange)

•

Archaeological Watching Brief at RlVBl'Slde Business Part<. Bakawell. Derbyshire ARCUS 1047,2 - August2008 8 8 ILLUSTRATIONS

•

Archaeological Watching BrIefat Riwlrslde Business Pari<.llakewel~ Derbyshire ARCUS 1047.2 - August2006 9 9 PLATES

•

Plate 1: Trench 1, sample of north-west-facingsection.

•

Plate 2: Trench 1, boundary between ponds.

ArchaeolotlicaJ Watching !llie! at Rlverside Business Park. Bakewell. Derbyshire ARCUS 10472 - August 2006 10 • . ,t,.. ,..v Plate 3: Trench 2, sandstone wall at northern end

•

Plate 4: Trench 2. sample of west·facing section

Archaeological Walching Briel at Riverside Business Park, Bakewell, Derbyshire ARCUS 1047.2 - August 2006 11 '"~ --- .-\..... -' , ~ -

Ewe Close ~ Farm

• , _L-

" • .., •

•

Reproduced h'om Ordnance Surveis 1-2.5000 Jtleel 01.24. with the perm_on of the ContI"oIer or Her Mt;esty'. St-tJOf1lWY Oftlce. 0 Crown Project: CoP.triChI Ucence No. Ai.. 502'28A Riverside Business Park. Bakewell Title: Site location plan Scale: Date- 1:25000 Julv2006 AACUS NGR: Drawn: Research School oI-"'Cl1oeolot!Y SK 2108 6024 Steve Baker Westcourt 2 Mappin St Project No: Illustration No.: Shemeld UK 5140T Tel 0114 2225106 Fax 0114 2797158 1047 1 • •

_ Approximate extenl of mll 5 shown on historic maps -

ARCUS "-,~--"' ._.-_"oIC1 '.0".~tOl "..,01"1"'''16

Project: Archaeol<9cal watching bt1ef at Rlverslde Busfness Busfness Pari(, 8akewel TltIe

Site plan showing trench locations

SoBle Date '" ,hoM> July 2006

NGR Drewn o SK 2108 6924 Steve Baker roJBet Ill. No. o. 1047 2 •

Trench 1 • north.west-facing section ~ 10_ . . -I ______.Hty~: . --~ ._----+--_-_--__ ~~~ ~__ ._~ J ___. ._.__..__._- I .~ \ lOcatIon of stony bank feature • land drain with 3and15tone some sandstone cobbfes left In cap • posl-d9tes mill sectJon ponds

=O==~ __~== ==~5m

Trench 2 • west·faclng section s N I~~z_-+!_l------____ ..~ 1 sandstone cobble wall or bank ------'------J foodng

ARCUS --"'-.... ---._.-_.,4ll't r~01"n21," ,.,.,,,.mt1"

Projoot W8 ..ng brief at RJverskle Business Park, Bakewetl TItle SectIon drawings: Tnmch 1 and Trench 2

Scale 10'" "'shown JUly 2006 IN"" ~Baker SK21086924 ,"-No. ~O47 3 • Appendix 5

Building Survey ofthe 'Retort House'

Greenhatch Group - Building Surveys

• October 2006 • • , , ," I', , 2928 1\\ I / ,, I\\ - II- , 1\\ II Woi r'rt Wood 1\\ "- , II \I " '- • 1/1 II I II '/I \ tl '\ II" II ", "II

3319 . Figure 1 r--..... -- • • ..... • Location Plan • • • Retort House • & • I I Gasholder

"C;ri{ • I I I • { El -- J / M ....,/ St. ,// EJ ~iU Stream <. ( - -- • - -.- • C1 - ----.::=-~------121 • ---• ------~+ ------" :---.J Lumford Mill, Bakewell: The Former Gas Works The Gas Works

I Introduction

From the early 1820's, cotton mills had established on-site gas works not only to provide improved lighting but also for the 'gassing' ofcotton thread, a process in which the finer spun threads were rapidly passed through a series ofgas jets. The resultant singing cleared the thread ofloose fibres and helped to produce a finer count and a rounder form.

• Recent excavations at the site ofStrutt's Milford Cotton Mill have revealed the form ofthe 1823 gas plant with its Retort House, Coal Store and Gasholder. Additionally, it is known that the plant also provided some rudimentary gas lighting in Milford and Belper.

The gas plant at Lumford Mill was installed following the lease ofthe mill by Simpson, Herbert & Co in 1844 as a part ofthe subsequent improvements made to the premises, not only to provide gas for the 'gassing' process but also for the next 5 or 6 years to provide gas lighting in the town ofBakewell. It was sited immediately to the north ofthe mule-shed and is apparently set into the embankment carrying the head-race to the water-wheels with the result that the building stands at an angle to the north wall ofthe shed. There are no above-ground heritage assets associated with the gas works, although the site of the characteristic circular gas holder is shown on 25" as Plans ofthe site down to 1897. A • year later, cotton production had ceased and the buildings been converted to lead-acid battery production. An earlier survey ofthe site (Strange 200I) had suggested that the Retort House may be represented by the stone building and the apparently contemporary chimney to the north ofthe mule-shed but further research now questions whether a chimney would have formed a part ofthe gas plant. An alternative explanation for the building and chimney is that it housed the steam engine installed about 1852 to provide additional power when the River Wye was affected by drought. In that case, conservation work on the 'Retort House' which is to be retained in the proposed site development will almost certainly confirm this hypothesis,

whilst demolition ofthe buildings around the site ofthe gas holder will confirm whether or not the associated retort house stood close by. The schematic diagram below shows the likely form ofthe gas plant, in which a, band c are the gas retort in which coal is burnt to form coal gas and various waste products, d, e and fare

Fig. 2161. II 'b •

11 l f F"""" d g A~rlf~lJ I;:: II----;r-IFrt-----Jli!fl'i • • Gaa-MaflUJllclOl'?/.

the condenser, washer and purifier and g the gas-holder for storage.

2 The 'Retort House' (referred to throughout as the Retort House but see above)

Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5 Constructed oflocal sandstone the building measures 17m x 9m under a pitched slate roof, with, for much ofits length a 9-Iight glazed roofvent. A series ofKing-post trusses with • struts and upper collars carry the structure. At a raised level on the east elevation are three round headed windows, on the north gable two square headed openings with above, in the gable, a large circular opening. On the west elevation is the site ofa former doorway but much ofthis elevation has been destroyed by the insertion ofa modem wide opening. Internally, two later partition walls divide the Level I floor into three separate rooms, that at the southern end having a later inserted mezzanine floor accessed by a flight ofwooden stairs. Abutting the south-east comer is a square chimney stack in similar sandstone some 20m in height with a stone band course just above halfheight. Later iron straps have served to

reinforce the structure. Photographs II, 12 & 13 in Appendix I show the chimney standing above the burned out remains ofthe 1777 mill building.

4 Later uses of the building

Following the disposal ofthe site to DP Battery Co in 1898 the building at some time seems to have been employed as an engine house, almost certainly to house a diesel generator to supplement the water driven generators. Enormous electric currents are required to form the • plates oflead-acid batteries.

•

© 2007 Patrick Strange 3 Riverside Works, Bakewell 'Gas Retort House' - Survey October 2006 r-----__ 49.93 / In••rt/oft Point / tJ EB "'49.91 G Ground Floor 0/ -. t------. • - - -- ."------_._-~------~"! '------HH:J.25m -- Duc' r Duc' IFL. = 50.06m Ceiling Height:".73m = = ~ = =-..: ;.:.- ::;: :_- ::: ;:

IFL. = 50.'Om Cej/lng Ho1gM:4.51 m :c:: F 'Y; IFL. = 50. 10m IFL. = 50.02m IFL. = 50.'Om ;.;. CoiUng Holght:•.5J", • Max.CIf} Hi:? nm Malt.erg Ht:7.78m I i~ ; <;J . ==-;===-=-===~ ------\ \ ~

Duct Due' ~ IFL. = 50.06m Celtlng Height:J.73m ======I _ U\S.:J.4.Jm_

o," I E I ~.....iiiiiiiiiiiiiill~~iiiiiiiiiiiiiii~I~~~iiiiiiiiiiiiiii~1~~iIiIiiiiiiiii~1 o 5 10 15 20 metres FigureI 2 - Plan" Riverside Works, Bakewell 'Gas Retort House' - Survey October 2006 ,i

•

r .,. I I rTfi1 rnn OJ ~1~:ill~I~:{lll :{~~ I I~I~~ II:~ ~ o ------1- - ...... ------__---.J -~ mn

Datum fA"' ~ ".OOm I ~_~ ---;... _ Elevation F Elevation G: I , ~1"""!!Jii-~-§-ril-5iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~~5iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~~~~iiiiiiiiiiii~~~liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiili! 10 5 10 15 20 metres Figure 3 - North & West elevations •

,I Riverside Works, Bakewell 'Gas Retort House' - Survey Odtober 2006

I, , • .

11111 III II 111111 III II III II 1111 I II liT II ! ,Iii" nr

II III II II II. TTlf IT III : III ['hi I II II II II II III II II II II II OJ lH III III II IWI 111 ,IT I'I} Ii ,

i - , 0 \ • n nO I - j . '-- ~ , (

i I ~_iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil~~~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ~~~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!~~~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiliiiiiil 5 10 15 i 20 Datum La""I. = 4lJ.OOm o Elevation E metres I Figure 4 - East elbvation I I Riverside Works, Bakewell I In••rtlon Point E9 'Gas Retort House' - Survey October 2006 Mezzanine •

IF!.. = S2.S7m • CtUfilt9 HoJght:2.04m IF!.. -=_AJ1,10m. . __---' ODium b.-I = 48.00m Section O~~iiliiiiiliiiiiliiiiiiiiiii'~~~~ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiili!l!~O~~ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!1!~5~~""iiiiiiiiiiiiiii!i2bI metres Figure 5 - Section 7. TRANSPORT

7.1 The transport considerations of the various proposed redevelopment schemes were considered in the report commissioned from Savell Bird Axon (SBA) in 2004.

7.2 The report has recently been re-examined by SBA in the light of the amended masterplan and current transport considerations, and found to still be entirely relevant and credible.

7.3 The main conclusions of the report and subsequent review are:

7.3.1 The site can be considered accessible by public transport through being located close to the A6, providing the site with up to four buses an hour in each direction. The frequency of the buses are shown in the table in the report and the bus stops are very conveniently situated with one .' each way right on the A6 Buxton Road entrance to the Park and then conveniently spaced into and out of Bakewell Town Centre with similar arrangements at the A619 Baslow Road entrance to the Park.

7.3.2 The site is also close to the town centre and surrounding residential areas providing scope for alternative means of access, including walking and cycling. There are extensive pedestrian routes through the residential quarter as particularly shown on the 3D sketch. These include a new daytime riverside walk. Due to the nature and density of the development it is not considered practical for a dedicated cycle way to be provided. Likewise, pedestrian and cycle routes in the commercial and industrial sectors will be tailored to lead people safely into the heart of the sector rather than allow too much wandering between the units.

7.3.3 A travel plan is proposed for the redevelopment which would assist in the reduction of car borne trips and encourage more sustainable modes • of transport. 7.3.4 Car parking to accord with Derbyshire County Council's maximum parking standard for all new development.

7.3.5 The proposals include the provision of a new access on the A6, capacity analysis indicates that this junction would readily accommodate the proposals. SBA have also reviewed the design of the new access junction to the A6 Buxton Road and have confirmed that the design is still acceptable. 7.3.6 The new access is required if there is an increase in existing floor space. However, a change in the proposed mix of uses on the site could result .in an increase in traffic. On this basis, implementation of the new bridge and access to the A6 can be considered in the light of trip attractions resulting from a successful redevelopment scheme. This would provide the applicant with the flexibility to bring forward organic development of the site within overall economic constraints but at the same time ensuring that the redevelopment proposals would not give rise to significant intensification of the existing narrow access to the A6.

7.3.7 It is proposed to prohibit all commercial and normal traffic between the new A6 access and Holme Lane I A619 Baslow Road (the existing listed bridge access being closed off to all vehicular traffic). Access will be managed for residents and occupiers of commercial property, the • community bus, emergency services and utilities vehicles.

7.4 Savell Bird Axon's main conclusion was that there are no reasons in transport or highway terms why the outline application for redevelopment of the Riverside Works site should not be granted planning approval.

7.5 Having regard to the requirements of the Environmental Impact Assessment Savell Bird & Axon were re-consulted in June 2007 and they concluded that their original Transport Assessment and its conclusions remain valid for the determination of the outline application.

•