Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Report by: Trysor
For: Heritage Leisure Developments (Wales) Limited
Revised August 2019
Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
By
Jenny Hall, MCIfA & Paul Sambrook, MCIfA Trysor
Trysor Project No. 2018/675 HER Event PRN DAT 114826
For: Heritage Leisure Developments (Wales) Limited
Revised August 2019
38, New Road Gwaun-cae-Gurwen Ammanford Carmarthenshire SA18 1UN www.trysor.net [email protected]
Cover photograph: “The Platform”, the range of workshops, smithies etc to the north of the ironworks, looking northwest to Area A beyond the fence. Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
RHIF YR ADRODDIAD - REPORT NUMBER: Trysor 2018/675 HER EVENT PRN – DAT 114826
DYDDIAD 9ed Mehefin 2019 Fersiwn diwygied 31ain Gorffennaf and 8fed Awst 2019 DATE 9th June 2019 Revised July and August 2019
Paratowyd yr adroddiad hwn gan bartneriad Trysor. Mae wedi ei gael yn gywir ac yn derbyn ein sêl bendith.
This report was prepared by the Trysor partners. It has been checked and received our approval.
JENNY HALL MCIfA Jenny Hall
PAUL SAMBROOK MCIfA Paul Sambrook
Croesawn unrhyw sylwadau ar gynnwys neu strwythur yr adroddiad hwn.
We welcome any comments on the content or structure of this report.
38, New Road, 82, Henfaes Road Gwaun-cae-Gurwen Tonna Ammanford Neath Carmarthenshire SA11 3EX SA18 1UN 01639 412708 01269 826397
www.trysor.net [email protected] Trysor is a Registered Organisation with the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists and both partners are Members of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, www.archaeologists.net
Jenny Hall (BSc Joint Hons., Geology and Archaeology, MCIfA) had 12 years excavation experience, which included undertaking watching briefs prior to becoming the Sites and Monuments Record Manager for a Welsh Archaeological Trust for 10 years. She has been an independent archaeologist since 2004 undertaking a variety of work that includes upland survey, desk-based appraisals and assessments, and watching briefs.
Paul Sambrook (BA Joint Hons., Archaeology and Welsh, MCIfA, PGCE) has extensive experience as a fieldworker in Wales. He was involved with Cadw’s pan-Wales Deserted Rural Settlements Project for 7 years. He has been an independent archaeologist since 2004 undertaking a variety of work including upland survey, desk-based appraisals and assessments, and watching briefs.
Event Record PRN – DAT HER
PRN 114826 Name Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside, Impact on Setting of Historic Assets Type SETTING ASSESSMENT NGR SN1396007495 Easting 213960 Northing 207495 Summary In 2019, Trysor provided an assessment of the impact on (English) the setting of designated assets within 500 metres of SN1396007495. This was undertaken in relation to a proposal to further develop the leisure offer at Heritage Park, Stepaside. © Trysor 2019 Summary Yn 2019, paratowyd asesiad gan Trysor ar effeithiau ar (Cymraeg) leoliad asedau statudol o fewn 500 metr i gyfeirnod grid SN1396007495. Gwnaed hyd mewn perthynas â datblygiad arfaethedig i wella atyniadau twristiaeth yn Heritage Park, Stepaside, Sir Benfro. © Trysor 2019 Description In 2019, Trysor provided an assessment of the impact on the setting of designated assets from a proposal to further develop the leisure offer at Heritage Park, Stepaside. The impact on designated historic assets within 500 metres of SN1396007495. © Trysor 2019 Sources Trysor, 2019, Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside, Impact on Setting of Historic Assets) Copyright @Trysor 2019
Project boundary – 500 metres radius from SN1396007495, see Figure 1
Contents
Summary 1
1. Introduction 4
2. The Proposed Development Site 6
3. Heritage Park Development Site: Historical overview 7
4. Methodology 10
5. Impacts on Setting Stage 1 11
6. Impacts on Setting Stage 2 15
7. Impacts on Setting Stage 3 19
8. Impacts on Setting Stage 4 22
9. Conclusions 24
10. Bibliography 26
Appendix A: Setting Assessment PE418 - Kilgetty Ironworks Including Listed Buildings 6545 “The Platform” and 6543 Engine House 27
Appendix B: Impact Assessment PE418- Kilgetty Ironworks Including Listed Buildings 6545 “The Platform” and 6543 Engine House 32
Appendix C: Setting Assessment Listed Buildings 18861 & 18283 (Tramway Bridge) 41
Appendix D: Impact Assessment Listed Buildings 18861 & 18283 (Tramway Bridge) 46
Appendix E: Photographs 51
Appendix F: Client Plans 64 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Summary
This report examines possible impacts on the setting of the statutorily protected historic assets within 500 metres of a central point in the proposed development site at Heritage Park, Pleasant Valley, Narberth, Pembrokeshire (SN1396007495), arising from the masterplan to expand and improve facilities. The proposed masterplan includes six discrete areas located within and around the scheduled Kilgetty Ironworks complex and the present Heritage Park lodge park.
It assesses potential impacts on the settings and significance of the Kilgetty Ironworks (Scheduled Monument PE418). The ironworks has been protected in recognition of the quality of the surviving structures, which are a rare survival of a largely unaltered mid-19 th century ironworks complex.
The complex includes two listed buildings at the heart of the ironworks complex which would potentially be affected by the development; The Platform (Listed Building 6545), the Engine House (Listed Building 6543). A third listed building, a former tramway bridge on a private branch off the Saundersfoot railway (Listed Building 18861 & 18283), lies just to the north of the proposed development. The potential impacts on the setting of these three buildings have also been examined for this report.
Other Listed Buildings within the 500 metre radius were either not intervisible or screened from the development by extensive vegetation, other buildings or topography and their settings have been assessed to be unaffected. These include a number of structures within the scheduled area; the ironworks Casting House (Listed Building 6544), the furnace bank revetment wall (listed Building 18278), a bank of Lime Kilns (Listed Building 18277) and a Tramway Incline Structure (Listed Building 18282).
The Kilgetty Ironworks was established as an industrial site in the mid 19 th century and was built utilising the flat valley floor and the valley slope to the west. It was linked to other industrial sites in the area by a series of tramways and railways. The site of the ironworks was chosen because the topography suited the requirement to build furnace the wall, lime kilns and coke ovens against a steep slope so that they could be loaded from above. Another important consideration in selecting this location was the availability of the required raw materials, coal, iron ore and limestone, which are available locally. A tramway link to Saundersfoot Harbour also provided a convenient route to export the product from the ironworks. Views from and towards the
1 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets complex were not a material factor in the selection of the site or its development.
The listed bridge was built to carry one of the tramways over the Ford Lake stream. The tramway bridge was built c.1846 when a tramway was constructed to serve the iron furnaces and limekilns at Kilgetty Ironworks. From 1856 this tramway also served Grove Colliery. It connected the ironworks and local collieries such as Grove, Lower Level and Kilgetty with the harbour at Saundersfoot.
Of the six areas proposed for development, the developments in just two areas would cause an indirect impact on the scheduled monument and listed buildings.
Area A borders the northern side of the scheduled area and it is proposed that 23 lodges would be constructed within this area. This would cause a Moderate negative impact on the setting of part of the scheduled monument, as it impacts on the northern edge of the scheduled area, adjacent to the former ironworks workshop known as The Platform (Listed building number 6545). Proposed mitigation already included in the masterplan for the development includes the reduction in the footprint of Area A, reduction in number of lodges from an already consented scheme, moving lodges away from the scheduled monument boundary and the creation of a screening hedge with trees which will close off views of the lodges when viewed from the scheduled area. These mitigations would reduce the level of impact on the setting of the northern part of the scheduled monument area and the listed building known as The Platform (6545) to a Low negative.
Area B lies close to the listed Tramway Bridge at Stepaside (Listed Building 18861 & 18283). The proposed development would be of a much larger scale than the bridge, but local topography, tree cover and vegetation mean that any impact on this listed structure would Very Low and be caused by only a small part of the development at the northern edge of Area B. By way of mitigation, the view of Area B will be reduced by the maintenance of a screening hedge along the northern boundary of Area B, where it is close to the listed bridge, thereby reducing the impact to negligible.
Area C also borders the scheduled area. The nature of the topography here, along with tree cover along the edge of the scheduled area at this point and mature trees along the northeastern edge of Area C , mean that there are no views from Area C into the scheduled area or vice versa. There would be no impact on the setting of the scheduled area from the proposed development in Area C.
2 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Areas D and E are on the northeastern side of the road in Stepaside and separated from the scheduled area and listed building by tree cover and are already developed areas. There would no impact on the scheduled areas and listed buildings.
The addition of a new café/visitor centre/bicycle hire building and associated car park area proposed for Area F and lies within the scheduled area of the ironworks. The impacts of this element of the proposed development are addressed in a separate report (Trysor, 2019) and are not repeated in this document, which is restricted to assessing impacts on the external setting of the scheduled ironworks complex.
This assessment has concluded that overall the development would have a Low negative impact on the setting of statutorily protected historic assets but would not impact on their significance, which is largely derived from their physical form and historical importance.
3 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
1. Introduction 1.1 This document has been prepared by Trysor at the request of Heritage Leisure Developments (Wales) Limited on the impact of proposed changes outlined in the masterplan on the setting of nationally important historic assets within 500 metres of a proposed development site at Heritage Park, Pleasant Valley, Narberth, Pembrokeshire (centred on SN1396007495).
1.2 As part of the pre-application consultation with Cadw, it was advised that an assessment of the impact of the proposed development on the setting of statutorily protected historic assets in the vicinity of Heritage Park should be undertaken, using the methodology outlined in the Welsh Government’s Setting of Historic Assets (Cadw, 2017a).
1.3 The proposed development (see Figure 1 and Client Plan in Appendices) would include:
Area A – 23 lodge units in a parcel of land immediately north of the historic ironworks which previously had consent for 29 lodges (planning number 11/0585/PA). Area B - Lodge units on the area of the former Animal & Bird Park and Craft Village to the west of Area A. Area C - Equestrian Centre - A stables and equestrian centre on land upslope to the west of the ironworks. Areas D & E - Stepaside Inn - The renovation of the Stepaside Inn to create a spa resort, with additional lodge units in the Inn’s curtilage. Area F - Café and car park with tourist information and bike hire adjacent to the historic ironworks (A separate Heritage Impact Assessment has been undertaken for this as it lies within the scheduled area).
1.3.1 Planning permission has already been approved for 29 static caravan units within Area A (planning number 11/0585/PA). The 29 units have not been implemented to date and the current masterplan alters the configuration of Area A, which results in a reduced number of lodges.
1.3.2 The approved scheme, (planning number 11/0585/PA), included the provision of a 10 space car park which was to be constructed in the eastern part of Area F, and available for public use, prior to the occupation of any of the consented 29 caravan units within what is now Area A. Part of the 10 space car park lay within the scheduled area, but scheduled monument consent had not been sought as the previous scheme has not been implemented.
4 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
1.3.3 This report assesses any potential impacts on the setting, and therefore the significance, of the designated historic assets (scheduled monuments or listed buildings) within 500 metres of the centre of the proposed development.
Figure 1: Location of the development and the listed buildings within 500 metre radius.
5 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
2. The Proposed Development Site 2.1 The proposed development site is underlain by sedimentary bedrock of the South Wales Lower Coal Measures Formation, which includes mudstone, siltstone and sandstone laid down in swamps, estuaries and deltas some 318 to 319 million years ago during the Carboniferous Period. The superficial deposits along the Fords Lake stream valley floor are alluvial deposits, including clays, grits, sands and gravels deposited at the end of the last Ice Age. The soils here are classed as free draining, slightly acid loamy soils by the UK Soil Observatory (http://www.ukso.org/SoilsOfEngWales/home.html).
2.2 The development site is situated within the confines of a narrow stream valley, which is characterised by steep, wooded slopes. The small village of Stepaside is at the northern end of the valley, at a point where the valley turns to run westwards. The houses of the village extend from the valley floor up onto the slopes to the north and northeast of the valley.
2.3 The development includes six separate areas. The café and car park (Area F), and Area A would be located on the valley floor to the north of the heart of the ironworks complex, where the land is relatively flat and easily accessible. Area B and the stable and equestrian centre (Area C) are located on higher ground to the southwestern side of the valley, separated from the ironworks site and the valley floor by steep, wooded slopes. The Stepaside Inn development areas (Areas D & E) are located further up the valley to the north of the ironworks complex, on the northeastern side of the valley.
2.4 The local topography and the largely deciduous woodland growing across the valley slopes restrict views from and towards the proposed development sites. There are few long-range views possible within the confined valley and even on the flat valley floor, features such as the ironworks buildings and riverside trees, as well as a bend in the valley, shorten views considerably.
6 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
3. Heritage Park Development Site: Historical overview 3.1 The Heritage Park Development Site is dominated by the remains of the Kilgetty Ironworks, PE418. Associated and ancillary features are also present in the surrounding landscape.
3.2 The Kilgetty Ironworks was established in 1847 as part of a complex of industrial features which included associated collieries and railways. The ironworks was intimately associated with the Hean Castle estate, Saundersfoot, held by the industrialist C.R. Vickerman in the mid-19 th century (Price, MRC, 1982, pages 140-154). He had interests in local collieries and became one of the main driving forces behind the foundation of the ironworks. He was one of three partners who took out a lease on “mines and veins and ironstone in the parishes of St. Issells and Amroth, along with quarries and veins of limestone…” and formed the Pembrokeshire Iron and Coal Company in 1847. This company began the construction of the ironworks in August 1848.
3.3 Kilgetty Ironworks produced a high quality pig iron, which was mostly supplied to steelworks in southern Wales. However, the ironworks were far from successful and only worked intermittently throughout its lifetime. When the ironworks was in production, only one of the two furnaces would be in blast.
3.4 By 1872, Vickerman was the sole proprietor at the ironworks. In 1873, he established the Bonvilles Court Coal and Iron Company Limited and made another attempt to develop the ironworks. This venture was short-lived as the ironworks was now old fashioned and its iron ore unsuited for use in the new Bessemer steel-making process. By 1874 the furnace at Kilgetty Ironworks was extinguished forever. Vickerman concentrated on his mining activities and ultimately the ironworks site fell into disuse and was dismantled in 1889, see Figure 3.
3.5 Kilgetty Ironworks survives as one of the best preserved mid-19 th century ironworks complexes in Britain. Due to its short life span, limited re-development and early abandonment, much of the original stonework associated with the furnaces, engine houses, workshops and associated features such as limekilns has survived without later additions, albeit in a ruinous condition. Although the ironworks was dismantled by 1889, which meant that all reusable components, in particular machinery, metalwork and timber, were stripped from the site, its key buildings and structures were left as empty shells and were not demolished.
3.6 Some buildings were repurposed and continued to be used for some decades, into the early 20 th century. The workshops and office block at the northern end of the site was retained as part of a sawmill complex and the impressive casting shed and former engine house were used in association with the nearby Lower Level and Kilgetty collieries. These
7 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets buildings are shown as being in use on the 1907 1:2500 Ordnance Survey map. By the mid-20 th century, the whole complex had been abandoned however and became overgrown.
3.7 The network of colliery tramways which at one time served the ironworks complex survived and developed after the closure of the ironworks. Grove, Kilgetty and Lower Level collieries continued to be worked for some years and were linked by an extensive tramway system, which continued to link them to Saundersfoot Harbour as well as the disused ironworks.
3.8 Historic aerial and ground photographs show that the ironworks site was incorporated into a caravan park from the 1960s onwards. This development included a swimming pool, clubhouse and pitches for static and touring caravans. The area from the main part of the ironworks complex, up to the former workshops and the field now designated as Area A in the proposed masterplan were all part of this attraction. The swimming pool was located within the casting house and a large clubhouse stood between the casting shed and the ironworks engine house. A narrow-gauge steam train was also briefly installed on the eastern side of the adjacent Ford Lake stream in the early 1990s. Examples of these photographs can be seen on the Kilgetty, Begelly, Stepaside and Pentlepoir Community Voice page on Facebook as well as in the archives at the NMR in Aberystwyth.
3.9 From the 1990s onwards a programme of recording and consolidation work has been undertaken on the ironworks. Much of this work was initially carried out for Pembrokeshire County Council and Cadw and was completed in 2006. As a result the surviving buildings are generally well maintained by the current owner and in good condition.
8 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Figure 2: An excerpt from Michael Blackmore’s reconstruction of the ironworks during its heyday.
Figure 3: An excerpt from the 1889 1:2500 Ordnance Survey map showing the ironworks complex shortly before it was dismantled.
9 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
4. Methodology 4.1 This report has been prepared to support a planning application on behalf of Heritage Leisure Developments (Wales) Limited. It is an assessment of the impact on setting relating to one Scheduled Monument (Kilgetty Ironworks PE418) and three Listed Buildings (The Platform, The Engine House and the Tramway Bridge, the respective listed building numbers for which are 6545, 6543 and 18861 & 18283), arising from the masterplan to expand and improve facilities at Heritage Park.
4.1.1 The process outlined in "Setting of Historic Assets" (Cadw, 2017a) has been followed in order to assess impacts on the setting of the historic assets and any impacts on their significance.
4.1.2 This process has four stages; Stage 1: Identify the historic assets that might be affected by a proposed change or development.
Stage 2: Define and analyse the settings to understand how they contribute to the significance of the historic assets and, in particular, the ways in which the assets are understood, appreciated and experienced.
Stage 3: Evaluate the potential impact of a proposed change or development on that significance.
Stage 4: If necessary, consider options to mitigate or improve the potential impact of a proposed change or development on that significance.
4.2 This assessment area examines potential impacts on any other designated historic assets within a 500 metre radius of the proposed development. Three buildings at the former Kilgetty Colliery (Listed Buildings 6555, 6556 & 6557), are blocked from view of the development by vegetation, other buildings and topography so have been excluded. Further to the southwest are the scheduled ruins of Grove Colliery (Scheduled Monument PE489), where the engine house has been listed (Listed Building 18276). These have also been excluded as mature woodland blocks views. Within the Kilgetty Ironworks complex the Casting Shed (Listed Building 6544), the Furnace Revetment (Listed Building 18278), Lime Kilns (Listed Building 18277) and the Incline Revetment Wall (Listed Building 18282) are similarly blocked from view of the development by topography, woodland or other buildings.
4.3 These are all screened or blocked from view of the development by topography, buildings or vegetation. As there would therefore be no impact from the development on the setting of any of these historic assets, or any visual impact, they have not been further assessed.
10 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
5. Impacts on Setting Stage 1: Identify the historic assets that might be affected by a proposed change or development .
5.1 The assessment considers the impact on setting relating to one Scheduled Monument and three Listed Buildings;
5.1.1 Kilgetty Ironworks (Scheduled Monument PE418) (which includes several Listed Buildings, two of which would be affected by the proposed development, namely The Platform (Listed building 6545) and The Engine House (Listed building 6543), which are dealt with separately from the scheduled area.
5.1.2 The Engine House (Listed building 6543).
5.1.3 The Platform (Listed building 6545).
5.1.4 The Tramway Bridge, Stepaside, the respective listed building numbers for which are 18861 & 18283 as it lies within two communities.
5.1.5 Detailed notes on impacts on these historic assets are found in appendices of this report.
11 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
5.2 Kilgetty Ironworks – Scheduled Monument PE418 (see Appendix A & Appendix B)
5.2.1 The Kilgetty Ironworks was established in 1847 as part of a complex of industrial features which included associated collieries and railways. The ironworks declined during the late 1860s and was closed permanently in 1888. It was later partly dismantled, with some buildings retained for use in association with Grove Colliery and as a sawmill. By the mid-20 th century the whole complex was disused and the buildings fell into ruin.
5.2.2 The historical links between the ironworks with the industrial empire of its founder, Charles Vickerman of the Hean Castle estate, Saundersfoot is of particular significance and makes the ironworks one element in a group of industrial sites in the district, all of which were served by Saundersfoot Harbour, built in the late 1820s to allow the export of coal and iron from the locality.
5.2.3 Some of the larger buildings in the complex stand as imposing ruins. Other parts of the complex have been cleared away, but their foundations are likely to survive as archaeological features; this includes the many tramways which crossed the site and linked the individual buildings.
5.2.4 Since the mid-20 th century ironworks site has served as firstly a caravan park and more recently as part of the Heritage Park lodge park.
5.3 Kilgetty Ironworks Engine House (Listed Building 6543) (see Appendix A & Appendix B)
5.3.1 The Engine House was constructed when the ironworks was founded c.1846 and was used during the working lifetime of the complex. Early 20 th century Ordnance Survey maps show that the building was still a roofed structure some decades after the ironworks had been closed down, but it is not known if it served any purpose once iron making had ceased.
5.3.2 The building was undoubtedly left disused and derelict by the middle part of the 20 th century and by the 1960s was an overgrown ruin within a caravan park. From the 1960s until the 1990s the Engine House would have had tourer and static caravans parked to its northern side. During the 1980s a caravan park clubhouse was built immediately to its southern side, with a car parking area to the east. By this period a large leylandii screening hedge extended from the eastern side of the structure to blocking views from north to
12 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
south. For over half a century the engine house has stood in an ever-changing, leisure-focused landscape.
5.3.3 At the end of the 20 th century/start of the 21 st century management plans saw the removal of ivy from the structure, the leylandii hedge removed and the clubhouse also cleared away. The area to the east and southeast has remained in use as a car park, while the lodges of Heritage Park have replaced the caravans to the south. The area to the north, where caravans once parked, has been landscaped into a lawned area with a footpath through it. The Engine House is now a prominent heritage feature within the ironworks complex, which is an integral part of the Heritage Park lodge complex.
5.4 Kilgetty Ironworks, The “Platform” (Listed Building 6545) (see Appendix A & Appendix B)
5.4.1 The “Platform” was constructed when the ironworks was founded c.1846 and was used during the working lifetime of the complex. The name “Platform” is based on its similarity to a railway station. The building served as workshops and smithy to the ironworks. By the early 20 th century Ordnance Survey maps show that the building was in use as part of a sawmill and was still a roofed structure some decades after the ironworks had closed down. The sawmill was out of use by the mid-1930s.
5.4.2 The building was left disused and derelict by the middle part of the 20 th century and by the 1960s was an overgrown ruin within a caravan park. From the 1960s until the 1990s The Platform would have had touring and static caravans parked in its vicinity and for over half a century it has stood in an ever-changing, leisure-focused landscape.
5.4.3 At the end of the 20 th century/start of the 21 st century management plans have enabled the removal of ivy from the structure. The surrounding valley floor, where caravans once parked, has been landscaped into a lawned area with a footpath through it. The Platform is now a prominent heritage feature within the ironworks complex and an integral part of the Heritage Park lodge complex.
5.5 Tramway Bridge, Stepaside – Listed Buildings 18861 & 18283 (see Appendix C & Appendix D)
5.5.1 This bridge was built to carry a tramway over the Ford Lake stream. This tramway is thought to have been built in 1846 to serve the iron furnaces and limekilns at Kilgetty Ironworks. From 1856
13 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
this tramway also served Grove Colliery, which used an incline to bring coal down to the tramway head. The tramway crossed the bridge to connect to the rail network which connected the ironworks and local collieries such as Grove, Lower Level and Kilgetty with the harbour at Saundersfoot.
5.5.2 The tramway was adapted by the end of the 19 th century (after the closure of the ironworks and Grove Colliery) to supply the limekilns at the former ironworks site.
5.5.3 During the early 20 th century the tramway was abandoned. In modern times the bridge has again been repurposed for use to carry a footpath across the stream.
14 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
6. Impacts on Setting Stage 2: Define and analyse the settings to understand how they contribute to the significance of the historic assets and, in particular, the ways in which the assets are understood, appreciated and experienced.
6.1 The significance of an historic asset is derived from the sum of four heritage values according to Conservation Principles (Cadw, 2011, p.10). These four values are: Evidential value Historical value Aesthetic value Communal value
6.1.1 Conservation principles outlines that setting is part of the Aesthetic Value (Cadw, 2011, p.10, section 2.3 and p. 17 Aesthetic Value )
6.1.2 Guidance on assessing the setting of historic assets was introduced in 2017 (Cadw, 2017). Cadw states that: Setting is not itself a historic asset, though land within a setting may contain other historic assets. The importance of setting lies in what it contributes to the significance of a historic asset. (Cadw, 2017, p.2, Section 1, second para).
6.2 Kilgetty Ironworks – Scheduled Monument PE418 (see Appendix A for detailed assessment)
6.2.1 Kilgetty Ironworks is a scheduled monument because it is a rare example of a mid-19 th century ironworks complex which has surviving buildings and structures. Its significance arises from the evidential and historic values due to the quality and condition of its constituent buildings and structures, rather than its setting.
6.2.2 The Kilgetty Ironworks was established as an industrial site and was built utilising the flat valley floor and the valley slope to the west. It was linked to other industrial sites in the area by a series of tramways and railways. The site of the ironworks was chosen as the topography suited the requirement to build the furnace wall, lime kilns and coke ovens against a steep slope so that they could be loaded from above. Another important consideration in selecting this location was the local availability of the required raw materials, coal, iron ore and limestone. A tramway link to Saundersfoot Harbour provided a convenient route to export the product from the ironworks.
6.2.3 Views of the ironworks were not a consideration when the complex was first built. It was the functional relationship with the topography,
15 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
natural resources and other industrial sites which were of importance when the site was selected.
6.2.4 There are no popular viewing points of the complex in the wider modern landscape due to the wooded slopes along the narrow and steep sided valley in which it is located. The only meaningful views of the ironworks complex are gained at close proximity to the surviving buildings, within Heritage Park itself, which is publicly accessible by footpaths and a cycleway and has car parking facilities.
6.2.5 The ironworks complex is spread out along the valley floor and also up the valley slope, which means there is no single viewpoint from where the whole complex can be viewed and understood. It is a site which visitors have to move through to be able to appreciate its full extent and complexity.
6.2.6 There is an on-site interpretation panel at the ironworks which provides useful information to visitors about the history of the site and the purpose of the buildings which can be seen there, see Figure 3.
6.3 Kilgetty Ironworks Engine House (Listed Building 6543) (see Appendix A for detailed assessment)
6.3.1 The Engine House was built to provide motive power to the machinery of the Kilgetty Ironworks c.1846. As a surviving ironworks building of the 1840s it is of national importance.
6.3.2 After the ironworks was abandoned in the 1870s this building appears to have become derelict and ultimately an overgrown ruin. The internal machinery may have been removed in 1889 when the ironworks was dismantled.
6.3.3 Over the past 50 years this building has been appreciated as a feature within a caravan park, and more recently the Heritage Park lodge complex. In modern times the ivy and vegetation have been removed and uplighting is now used to highlight the building during the evening. The site is accessible to the public. Car parking and footpaths mean that casual visitors and interested parties are able to visit the ironworks and enjoy and appreciate this building alongside the other structures of the ironworks complex.
16 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
6.4 Kilgetty Ironworks, The Platform (Listed Building 6545) (see Appendix A for detailed assessment)
6.4.1 The Platform was built as a workshop and smithy for the Kilgetty Ironworks c.1846. As a surviving ironworks building of the 1840s it is of national importance.
6.4.2 After the ironworks was abandoned in the 1870s this building served as part of a sawmill during the early decades of the 20 th century before becoming disused, derelict and ultimately an overgrown ruin.
6.4.3 Over the past 50 years this building has been appreciated as a feature within a caravan park and more recently the Heritage Park lodge complex. In modern times the ivy and vegetation have been removed and the building is once again visible. The site is accessible to the public. Car parking and footpaths mean that casual visitors and interested parties are able to visit the ironworks and enjoy and appreciate this building alongside the other structures of the ironworks complex.
17 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
6.5 Tramway Bridge, Stepaside – Listed Buildings 18861 & 18283 (see Appendix C for detailed assessment)
6.5.1 This bridge was built to carry a tramway over the Ford Lake stream. This tramway is thought to have been built in 1846 to serve the iron furnaces and limekilns at Kilgetty Ironworks. From 1856 this tramway also served Grove Colliery, which used an incline to bring coal down to the tramway head. The tramway crossed the bridge to connect to the rail network which connected the ironworks and local collieries such as Grove, Lower Level and Kilgetty with the harbour at Saundersfoot.
6.5.2 Following the closure of the ironworks and Grove Colliery by the end of the 19 th century, the tramway which used the bridge was retained to supply the limekilns at the former ironworks site. During the early 20 th century lime production also ended at the tramway and bridge were abandoned.
6.5.3 In modern times the bridge has been repurposed to carry a footpath across the stream. The footpath follows the bed of the disused tramway.
18 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
7. Impacts on Setting Stage 3: Evaluate the potential impact of a proposed change or development on that significance.
7.1 Kilgetty Ironworks – Scheduled Monument PE418 (see Appendix B for detailed assessment)
7.1.1 The proposed development includes six areas where new lodges or recreational infrastructure will be constructed (Areas A to F), see Figure 1.
7.1.2 Of these six areas, Areas B, D and E will not be intervisible with the scheduled area of the ironworks and developments in these areas will have no impact.
7.1.3 Area A borders the northern side of the scheduled area and has already received consent as the location of 29 static caravans (planning number 11/0585/PA). Within the new masterplan, it is proposed that 23 lodges will be constructed within this area instead of the 29 static caravans. The new plan includes an amendment to reduce the footprint of the development, by moving the lodges at the southern end of the area further away from the scheduled monument boundary. The development of Area A would cause a Moderate impact on the setting of part of the scheduled monument, as it impacts on the northern edge of the scheduled area, adjacent to the former ironworks workshop known as The Platform (Listed building number 6545).
7.1.4 Area C borders the western side of the scheduled area. The nature of the topography, and tree cover along the edge of the scheduled area and mature trees along the northeastern edge of Area C, mean that there are no views from Area C into the scheduled area or vice versa. There would be no impact on the setting of the scheduled area from the proposed development in Area C.
7.1.5 The addition of a new café/visitor centre/bicycle hire building within Area F of the proposal, which lies within the scheduled area of the ironworks and an associated car park which also partly lies within the scheduled area. The impacts of this element of the proposed development are addressed in a separate report (Trysor, 2019) and are not repeated in this document, which is restricted to assessing impacts on the external setting of the scheduled ironworks complex.
7.1.6 Although the proposed development is relatively large in terms of its footprint, the local topography and mature wooded slopes views across the site and to and from the site are very restricted. There would therefore be only a Low impact on the setting of the Kilgetty/Stepaside Ironworks.
19 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
7.2 Kilgetty Ironworks Engine House (Listed Building 6543) (see Appendix B for detailed assessment)
7.2.1 The proposed café building in Area F would stand approximately 20 metres to the north of The Engine House and would be intervisible with it. This would cause a Moderate negative impact on the modern setting of the listed building as the location is currently an empty, lawned area.
7.2.2 The proposed café building would partially occupy the approximate position, and be on a similar alignment to, a range of buildings which stood here in the 19 th century but which had been cleared away by the start of the 20 th century. These may have been ironworks office buildings and/or a bank of coke ovens. The reintroduction of a building into the landscape here would represent a Low positive impact giving some mass and density back into the site.
7.2.3 The proposed café building would not impact on key views of the listed building. These are gained from the area of the proposed café but not further to the north where there is a slight bend in the valley, as well as from the east and south. That a building stood at this location when the ironworks was in operation means that the café building does not introduce a new barrier to historical views of the Engine House. The building would also not interrupt views between The Engine House or The Platform, which stands to the north but is hidden by trees and topography.
7.2.4 The proposed café car park would lie to the north of existing access road, therefore the addition of the new parking area would only represent a Low negative impact on the setting of the Engine House.
7.3 Kilgetty Ironworks, The Platform (Listed Building 6545) (see Appendix A & Appendix B)
7.3.1 The proposed lodges of Area A would be located in the area immediately to the north of The Platform building. Without mitigation, they would be visible and cause a Moderate impact.
7.3.2 The northwestern end of the proposed café car park would come within c.50 metres of southern end of The Platform. The car park will be built using low-impact materials and would therefore only represent a Low negative impact on the setting of The Platform.
20 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
7.4 Tramway Bridge, Stepaside – Listed Buildings 18861 & 18283 (see Appendix C & Appendix D)
7.4.1 Area B lies close to the listed Tramway Bridge at Stepaside. The proposed development would be of a much larger scale that the bridge, but local topography, tree cover and vegetation mean that there would be few views from or to the bridge which would be affected by the proposed development.
7.4.2 Any impact on this listed structure would Very Low, in terms of visual impact and impact on setting, and be caused by only a small part of the development at the northern edge of Area B.
21 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
8. Impacts on Setting Stage 4: If necessary, consider options to mitigate or improve the potential impact of a proposed change or development on that significance.
8.1 Kilgetty Ironworks – Scheduled Monument PE418 (see Appendix A & Appendix B)
8.1.1 Mitigation that has been included in the masterplan for the development includes a change in the footprint of Area A to keep the development outside the scheduled monument boundary reduction in the density of lodges from 29 to 23 creation of a screening hedge along a former boundary which will close off views of the lodges when viewed from the scheduled area.
8.1.2 A further mitigation required with regard to Area A, in advance of development, would be that the boundary of the scheduled area to be clearly marked out to ensure that construction vehicles and machinery are not able to stray into the scheduled area. The scheduled area boundary originally followed a field boundary bank which has now disappeared from the landscape. The reinstatement of this boundary as an earthwork bank or bund would be advantageous as it would raise the level of, and strengthen, any screening hedge.
8.1.3 These mitigations would reduce the level of impact on the setting of the northern part of the scheduled monument area, and the listed building known as The Platform (6545) to a Low negative.
8.2 Kilgetty Ironworks Engine House (Listed Building 6543) (see Appendix A & Appendix B)
8.2.1 No mitigations are proposed in relation to the construction of the café building to the northern side of The Engine House, apart from that the style and colour of the building should help it blend in with the character of the lodge park and the surrounding woodland, see Appendix F). Any form of screening hedge or planting would increase the impact of the development not reduce it in this case.
8.2.2 Mitigation suggested for the proposed café car park includes the use of low impact materials for its construction, such as Grasscrete or Golpla. This has been agreed and would ensure that the car park, when empty, would not be highly visible from the Engine House. Cars are already parked in areas closer to the Engine House therefore the level of impact on of this aspect of the development on the Engine House is not significant.
22 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
8.3 Kilgetty Ironworks, The Platform (Listed Building 6545) (see Appendix A & Appendix B)
8.3.1 The proximity of Area A to The Platform requires that some mitigation be put in place to reduce any impacts on the setting of this listed building. This has been achieved in the Masterplan by the planting of a screening belt of trees and shrubs along the boundary of the scheduled area to close off views to the north from The Platform area and reduction in the number of lodges from the consented scheme.
8.3.2 Until the early 21 st century there was a field boundary and hedgerow in this area which effectively screened the view, and there is no evidence that the northward view was of any importance to The Platform.
8.3.3 The introduction of a screening belt at the edge of the scheduled area would reduce the impact on the setting of The Platform from Moderate negative to Low negative.
8.3.4 Mitigation included in the Masterplan for the proposed café car park includes the use of low impact materials for its construction, such as Grasscrete or Golpla. This has been agreed and would ensure that the car park, when empty, would not be highly visible from The Platform. No further mitigations are suggested of relevance to The Platform.
8.4 Tramway Bridge, Stepaside – Listed Buildings 18861 & 18283 (see Appendix C & Appendix D)
8.2.1 The proximity of the woodland lodges in Area B required some mitigation to reduce the impact of the development on the setting of the bridge.
8.2.2 Area B was formerly used as a Craft Village and some derelict structures still stand there. The area is visible through trees and bushes to the south of the bridge and this view can be reduced by ensuring that a screening hedge is maintained along the northern boundary of Area B.
23 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
9. Conclusion
9.1 The proposed developments will take place in the context of the existing Heritage Park and are part of a wider masterplan which covers the whole of Heritage Park. The Kilgetty Ironworks site has been used as a tourism attraction since at least the 1960s, and has in the past included a swimming pool, clubhouse, static and touring caravan pitches and parking facilities within the area of the proposed development, all predating the development of the lodges at Heritage Park. It is evident that there has been a considerable amount of landscaping and disturbance within this area in the past 50 years or more.
9.1.1 The assessment has found that the proposed development would cause a Low negative overall impact on the Kilgetty Ironworks scheduled monument, including its constituent listed buildings.
9.1.2 The proposed development would have no impact on the significance of the complex. The significance of the site is derived mainly from its Evidential and Historical values and a Low negative impact on setting will not alter the significance of the scheduled monument or the Listed Buildings within it.
9.2 The new lodges proposed for Area A could have a potentially Moderate negative impact on the northern portion of the scheduled monument, specifically at the listed workshop building known as The Platform (less than 10% of the scheduled area).
9.2.1 To mitigate this impact the field boundary bank which formerly defined the northern boundary of the scheduled area will be reinstated and strengthened by a screening hedge, with some trees, to close off views into Area A from the scheduled area. This would reinstate a boundary which helped screen northward views before it was removed in the early 21st century. The overall impact is considered to be Low negative, however it is noted that the Area A already benefits from planning permission for 29 static caravans, and the proposals would result in a reduction in density to 23 units in the new masterplan.
9.3 The introduction of the café building into Area F, just north of the listed ironworks Engine House, would create a Low impact on the Engine House.
9.3.1 No mitigation measures on setting are recommended for the development of the café as it would stand above the site of a lost ironworks building and would not impact on key views of the Engine House. The re-introduction of a building into the area north of the Engine House will add density back to the Ironworks which has been lost since the buildings were cleared away at the end of the 19th century.
24 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
The structure will sit on a concrete raft which could be readily removed in the future.
9.3.2 A new car parking area is planned to accompany the café however planning permission is already in place for 10 car parking spaces in this area. Mitigation measures include the use of low-impact materials such as Grasscrete or Golpla, which has been incorporated into its design to reduce visual and physical impact on the monument, listed buildings and their setting.
9.4 The development of Area B would also be a Low negative impact on the setting of the listed Tramway Bridge at Stepaside.
9.4.1 Mitigation in the form of maintaining and strengthening the hedge at the northern edge of Area B would reduce this impact to Very Low negative.
9.5 No other historic environment mitigations are considered necessary in relation to the setting of the scheduled monument or listed buildings.
9.6 A separate report (Trysor, 2019) addresses heritage impacts caused by the planned addition of a new café building and car parking within the scheduled area.
9.7 In accordance with both national and local planning policy and Cadw guidance, the impact of the proposed development, on the historic asset and its setting, has been managed in a sensitive and sustainable way to the benefit of the historic asset and future enjoyment of its visitors. The proposed development has also safeguarded the character of historic buildings and ensured that their significance and historic interest is preserved.
25 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
10. Bibliography
Cadw, 2011, Conservation Principles.
Cadw, 2017a, Managing Setting of Historic Assets in Wales.
Cadw, 2017b, Managing Heritage Impact Assessment in Wales
Ordnance Survey, 1889, 1:2500 map
Ordnance Survey, 1907, 1:2500 map
Price, MRC, 1982, Industrial Saundersfoot
Trysor, 2019 , Heritage Park, Stepaside, Stepaside/Kilgetty Ironworks Scheduled Monument PE418, Heritage Impact Assessment of Proposed Café, Car Park and Footpath
Online Sources
UK Soils Observatory, http://www.ukso.org/SoilsOfEngWales/home.html (accessed 12/11/2018)
British Geological Survey - http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html? (accessed 12/11/2018)
Cof Cymru - https://cadw.gov.wales/historicenvironment/recordsv1/cof- cymru/?lang=en accessed throughout the project
Kilgetty, Begelly, Stepaside & Pentlepoir Community Voice - https://www.facebook.com/groups/1844080002283442/about/
Archives
National Monuments Record - Scheduled Monument files for PE418
26 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
APPENDIX A
SETTING ASSESSMENT NOTES STEPASIDE/KILGETTY IRONWORKS Scheduled Monument PE418 Including Listed Buildings 6545 “The Platform” and 6543 Engine House
27 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Stepaside/Kilgetty Ironworks Stage 2: How do the present surroundings contribute to our understanding and appreciation of the historic asset today? • Thinking about when the historic asset was first built and developed: What were its The Kilgetty Ironworks was established in physical, functional 1847 as part of a complex of industrial and visual features which included associated collieries relationships with and railways. It was an industrial site and other structures/ was built utilising the flat valley floor and the historic assets and valley slope to the west. It was linked to natural features? other industrial sites in the area by a series of tramways and railways. What topographic or The site of the ironworks was chosen as the earlier features topography suited the requirement to build influenced its furnace the wall, lime kilns and coke ovens location? against a steep slope so that they could be loaded from above. Raw materials such as coal, iron ore and limestone were available as well as water and an outlet for the product of the ironworks, namely Saundersfoot Harbour. What was its The heart of the ironworks was located on relationship to the the flat floor of Pleasant Valley, with the surrounding furnace wall and banks of lime kilns and coke landscape/ ovens set against the slope which rises streetscape? steeply above it to the west. Was it constructed to Views were not a consideration when the take advantage of ironworks complex was built. It was the significant views or functional relationship with the topography, to be a part of a natural resources and other industrial sites significant view? which were important. Although there may be a 360 degree view, some areas of the view may be more significant than others. Has its function or The ironworks declined during the late 1860s use changed? and was closed permanently in 1888. It was later partly dismantled, with some buildings retained for use in association with Grove Colliery and as a sawmill. By the mid-20 th century the whole complex was disused and the buildings fell into ruin. The ironworks
28 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
then became the site of a caravan park for the second half of the 20 th century. It is now part of Heritage Park, a leisure complex providing holiday lodges. What changes have The complex is now included within the happened to the boundaries of the Heritage Park lodge site surrounding and has undergone considerable changes landscape/ with some landscaping around the site to streetscape? create car parking areas and pathways, with holiday chalets erected relatively close to the main surviving ironworks buildings. Areas have been grassed over or covered by tarmac, or stone chippings. Have changes The fact that the historic asset is disused has happened because of enabled the site to become publicly changes to the accessible, with purpose-made trails and on historic asset or to site interpretation. its historical setting? Has the presence of The presence of the ironworks has restricted the historic asset the available development area for the influenced changes adjacent chalet park. It also, however, is to the landscape, for perceived as offering potential as a visitor example, where a attraction and hence a car park has been monument has been provided. used as a marker in the layout of a field enclosure? Has the presence of Yes, the buildings and structures at the the historic asset ironworks site are large and imposing and influenced the dominate the immediate area. character of the surrounding landscape /streetscape?
Have historic and There are no historic and designed views designed views to associated with the ironworks. and from the historic asset changed?
29 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
• Thinking about the original layout of the historic asset and its relationship to its associated landscape: Were these The site for the ironworks would have been relationships carefully selected for ease of access to designed or minerals and the physical suitability of the accidental? location for the erection of the complex. The structures within the complex would all have How did these been largely built at the same time and was relationships change not expanded during the period of operation. over time? Once the site was no longer in use it lost its links to the wider landscape as railways and tramways disappeared. How do these Some of the larger buildings in the complex relationships appear stand as imposing ruins. Other parts of the in the current complex have been cleared away, but their landscape; are they foundations are likely to survive as visual or buried archaeological features; this includes the features? many tramways which crossed the site and linked the individual buildings. • Are there other The historical links with the industrial empire significant factors, of Charles Vickerman, of the Hean Castle such as historical, estate, is of particular significance and makes artistic, literary, the ironworks one element in a group of place name or scenic industrial sites in the district, all of which associations, were served by Saundersfoot Harbour, built intellectual in the late 1820s to allow the export of coal relationships (for and iron from the locality. example, to a theory, plan or design), or other non-visual factors such as sounds or smells that can be vital to understand the historic asset and its setting?
30 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Stage 2 should also identify the viewpoints from which the impact of the proposed change or development should be assessed, taking into account, for example: • views to, from Views to, from and across the Ironworks were and across the not an important consideration when the historic asset complex was built. It was an industrial complex that were which was built in its location for ease of access designed and to raw resources and the physical suitability of developed when the topography for the erection of the complex. the historic As the site is extensive and within a curving asset was first valley not all points within the complex are created — for intervisible with each other. In particular the example, in the workshops at the northern end of, known locally case of a as The Platform as they resembled a railway defensive or station, are not intervisible with other aspects ritual structure of the complex. • views to, from After the ironworks was dismantled and the and across the metalwork and valuable items were removed, it historic asset became derelict and overgrown. Views of the which are linked monument were not important when it was in with a time in use. In modern times there have been artistic its history — for depictions of the site as it is thought to have example, a been in the 1860s with the casting house wall historic artistic being the main focus. depiction of the site • important Important modern views of the complex are modern views from the current car park area looking to, from and southwest towards the walls of the casting across the house, the engine house and the furnace walls historic asset – which create an imposing group of features at for example, the heart of the complex. popular visitor viewing points.
31 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
APPENDIX B Notes on Impacts on Setting STEPASIDE/KILGETTY IRONWORKS Scheduled Monument PE418 Listed Buildings 6545 “The Platform” and 6543 Engine House
32 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Stage 3: Evaluate the potential impact of change or development. POSSIBLE COMMENT IMPACT ON IMPACT ON IMPACT SETTING SIGNIFICANCE OF THE HISTORIC ASSET The visual The lodges proposed Moderate-High None impact of the within Area A are in Negative proposed close proximity to The reduced to Low change or Platform, which is the Negative with development former workshop mitigation relative to the building at the included in scale of the northern end of the masterplan historic asset ironworks complex. It and its setting is proposed that trees would be planted as a buffer zone between Area A and The Platform. This would block views of the lodges but also close off the present view from The Platform into the adjacent field and create a more closed setting for the building.
The proposed café and would be located to the None northern side of the ironworks Engine Low Negative House. The café building will be relatively small in comparison and position on a north- south axis so that its gable end would face the engine house.
The proposed café car None park will not be a dominant feature and Very Low will be located adjacent negative on
33 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
to an existing parking the scheduled area to the east and monument, southeast of the Low negative Engine House. It will on The be built with low- Platform and impact materials to Engine House. reduce visual and physical impacts. The visual Of the six separate Low Negative None impact of the areas of development, proposed five are located outside change or the scheduled area and development only one of these, Area relative to the A, is close enough to location of the cause a visual impact. historic asset Area B, the Equestrian Centre and the Stepaside Inn Area are all separated from the scheduled area by topography, vegetation and/or buildings. It is proposed that a buffer zone of trees will be created to block views of Area A from within the Scheduled Monument, reducing significantly any visual impact.
The café and car park would be located Very Low None within the scheduled negative on area. They will be low- the scheduled ground impact monument, developments and Low negative would not be dominant on The features. They would Platform and not interrupt key views Engine House. of the surviving ironworks buildings or views between the surviving buildings of the complex.
34 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Whether the The proposed Very Low None proposed change development would not Negative or development dominate the would dominate scheduled monument the historic asset or detract from our or detract from our ability to understand it. ability to understand and Of the six separate appreciate it — for areas of development, example, its five are located outside functional or the scheduled area and physical only one of these, Area relationship with A, is close enough to the surrounding cause a visual impact. landscape and It is proposed that a associated buffer zone of trees will structures and/ or be created to block buried remains views of Area A from
within the Scheduled Monument, reducing significantly any impact.
The café and car park would be located Very Low between the negative on workshops to the north the scheduled and the engine house, monument, casting house and Low negative furnace walls to the on The south, but would not Platform and block views between Engine House. these as they are not intervisible due to the topography and tree cover in the valley. Putting a low rectangular structure in the location of the former coke ovens could add to the mass
and density of the site
making it more similar
to the arrangement in th the 19 century.
Additional
35 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
interpretation on or in the café building could help enhance understanding of this area of the site and the purpose of the coke Low Positive ovens.
The presence, The ironworks is now Low Negative None extent, part of Heritage Park, character and with holiday lodges scale of the and their infrastructure existing built clearly visible in the environment valley floor to the within the south. The proposed surroundings of café and car park are the historic designed to asset and how complement the style the proposed of the existing lodges. change or development The monumental compares with industrial buildings and this structures which stand within the ironworks complex are markedly different in character and are unmistakably the dominant structures within the scheduled area. The development would not change their dominance of the site.
The five development areas which are located outside the scheduled area will not be visible from the heart of the scheduled area and will not compete for attention. Area A is close to the former ironworks workshops at the northern end of the complex but it is
36 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
proposed that a buffer zone of trees will be created to block views of Area A from within the Scheduled Monument, which would hide the development in views from and of the workshop. The lifespan of The café is to be a Neutral None the proposed low-ground impact change or building so could be development taken away. The car and whether or park area could also not the impact be removed. might be reversible In the later 20 th century several holiday buildings and features, including a swimming pool and clubhouse, stood within the scheduled area. These have been removed without trace.
The lodges of the development areas outside the scheduled area could also be removed in future and the buffer zone to the north of The Platform also removed to open the view northwards. The extent of The valley floor is now Neutral None tree cover, grassed and mown as whether it is part of the Heritage deciduous or Park but the slope to evergreen, and the west is now its likely covered with longevity deciduous trees and mature trees grow along Fords Lake stream.
37 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
The impact of There is already night Neutral None artificial time lighting within lighting — for the scheduled area, as example, on the ironworks night-time buildings have views uplighting to illuminate them at night. The lights of the existing lodges at Heritage Park are also visible close to the scheduled area. There is also some street lighting along Pleasant Valley. It is proposed that the lighting within the woodland lodge park will be installed on low-level bollards instead of overhead “street” lighting, which will minimise light pollution.
Area A and Area B are likely to create additional lighting adjacent to the scheduled area.
The working ironworks complex would have been illuminated by the flames of the furnaces, kilns and coke ovens at night, which means that this would not have been a dark site at night.
38 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
The capability The wooded landscape of a landscape of the valley will help setting to absorb the new absorb change developments outside or new the scheduled area as development they will be mostly without the screened from view. A erosion of its buffer zone of new tree key planting would screen characteristics views of Area A from the scheduled area.
The small scale of the proposed café and car park alongside the monumental ironworks buildings means that they would not detract from the industrial buildings, but will themselves be dominated by the nearby structures. The impact of the The ironworks was an Neutral None proposed change industrial site. When it or development was in use it would have on non-visual been a noisy, smelly elements of the place with movement setting and throughout the character of the complex. It would not historic asset, have been a tranquil or such as sense of attractive place. The remoteness, complex is now much evocation of the more tranquil as part of historical past, the Heritage Park lodge sense of place, site. cultural identity The proposed or spiritual developments, responses particularly the café and car park within the scheduled area are proposed to increase footfall on the site so would increase activity and noise.
39 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
The impact of As above Neutral None non-visual elements of the proposed change or development, such as the removal or addition of noises and smell
The cumulative The Heritage Park is a Low – None effect of the dynamic development Negative proposed which continues to change or evolve and change. development — The industrial buildings sometimes within the scheduled relatively small area are large changes, or a structures and series of small dominate the changes, can immediate area. have a major impact on our The size, scale and ability to nature of the proposed understand, café and car park appreciate and would not change this. experience a The other five historic asset. development areas are outside the scheduled area and will be screened from view by trees and topography.
40 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Appendix C:
SETTING ASSESSMENT NOTES TRAMWAY BRIDGE, STEPASIDE Listed Buildings 18861 & 18283
41 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Tramway Bridge, Stepaside Stage 2: How do the present surroundings contribute to our understanding and appreciation of the historic asset today? • Thinking about when the historic asset was first built and developed: What were its This bridge was built to carry a tramway over physical, functional the Ford Lake stream. This tramway is and visual thought to have been built in 1846 to serve relationships with the iron furnaces and limekilns at Kilgetty other structures/ Ironworks. From 1856 this tramway also historic assets and served Grove Colliery, which used an incline natural features? to bring coal down to the tramway head. The tramway crossed the bridge to connect to the rail network which connected the ironworks and local collieries such as Grove, Lower Level and Kilgetty with the harbour at Saundersfoot. What topographic or The presence of the Ford Lake stream earlier features demanded a bridge and the topography of influenced its the valley made it essential to run the location? tramway along the side of the valley to serve the iron furnaces and limekilns at the Kilgetty Ironworks site. This seems to have been a considered plan undertaken by the proprietors of the ironworks. What was its It ran along the edge of pre-existing fields to relationship to the reach the ironworks furnaces. surrounding landscape/ streetscape? Was it constructed to No. It was constructed to give adequate access take advantage of to the ironworks complex. It is now hidden in significant views or woodland. to be a part of a significant view? Although there may be a 360 degree view, some areas of the view may be more significant than others. Has its function or Originally serving the ironworks, and later use changed? Grove Colliery also, it had been adapted by the end of the 19 th century (after the closure of the ironworks and Grove Colliery) to
42 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
supply the limekilns at the former ironworks site. During the early 20 th century it was abandoned. In modern times the bridge has been repurposed to carry a footpath across the stream. What changes have The industrial character of the area in the happened to the second half of the 19 th century has faded and surrounding the surroundings are now largely wooded, landscape/ with the former industrial complexes derelict streetscape? and used as heritage tourism features. Have changes No. The changes have happened due to the happened because of end of ironmaking, lime-burning and coal changes to the mining here. historic asset or to its historical setting? Has the presence of The line of the tramway has been reused as a the historic asset modern footpath, and the bridge is an influenced changes important part of the pathway as without it to the landscape, for the Ford Lake stream would be a barrier. The example, where a bridge has thereby served the conversion of monument has been the tramway from an industrial feature to a used as a marker in leisure feature. the layout of a field enclosure? Has the presence of As above. the historic asset influenced the character of the surrounding landscape /streetscape?
Have historic and There are no designed views of the bridge, designed views to but it has changed appearance as it is now and from the historic partly hidden by ivy and obscured by trees asset changed? making it far less visible than it would have been when in use in the 19 th century.
43 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
• Thinking about the original layout of the historic asset and its relationship to its associated landscape: Were these The bridge was designed and carefully relationships located to enable the tramway to work. designed or Later after the tramway had fallen out of use, accidental? the bridge became important as a way for pedestrians to cross the Ford Lake stream How did these and therefore the bridge is now a rather relationships change rustic feature in a wooded environment, over time? rather than a structure in a working industrial complex. How do these The relationship is a visual one. The bridge is relationships appear partly obscured by vegetation and trees in the current however. landscape; are they visual or buried features? • Are there other No. significant factors, such as historical, artistic, literary, place name or scenic associations, intellectual relationships (for example, to a theory, plan or design), or other non-visual factors such as sounds or smells that can be vital to understand the historic asset and its setting?
44 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Stage 2 should also identify the viewpoints from which the impact of the proposed change or development should be assessed, taking into account, for example: • views to, from There are no designed views – the bridge was a and across the purely functional structure. It was a small historic asset structure across a minor stream and was that were therefore not an obvious landscape feature. designed and developed when the historic asset was first created — for example, in the case of a defensive or ritual structure • views to, from None. and across the historic asset which are linked with a time in its history — for example, a historic artistic depiction of the site • important The bridge is obscured by vegetation and trees modern views and difficult to see from adjacent path to either to, from and side or either end. The bridge is not obvious to across the anyone crossing it due to the tree growth either historic asset – side and the style/lack of parapets. for example, popular visitor viewing points.
45 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
APPENDIX D Notes on Impacts on Setting STEPASIDE TRAMWAY BRIDGE Listed Buildings 18861 & 18283
46 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Stage 3: Evaluate the potential impact of change or development. POSSIBLE COMMENT IMPACT ON IMPACT ON IMPACT SETTING SIGNIFICANCE OF THE HISTORIC ASSET The visual The development Low negative None impact of the would be of a but Very Low proposed considerably larger negative after change or scale that the bridge, mitigation development but the visual impact included in relative to the would be from only a masterplan. scale of the limited part of the historic asset development and its setting The visual Part of the Low negative None impact of the development would be but Very Low proposed on adjacent land to the negative after change or southwest. Much of mitigation development this would not be included in relative to the visible and mitigation masterplan. location of the could help reduce the historic asset impact. Whether the The bridge is not easy Low negative None proposed change to understand as it is but Very Low or development overgrown and negative after would dominate detached from of the mitigation the historic asset historic assets which it included in or detract from our served or with which it masterplan. ability to was associated. The understand and original function of the appreciate it — for bridge is not apparent example, its to the general public as functional or the tramway was physical taken away over a relationship with century ago and the the surrounding bridge and tramway landscape and bed used thereafter as associated a path. None of the structures and/ or industrial complexes or buried remains structures served by the tramway are in view.
47 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
The presence, There are three Low negative extent, terraced cottages but Very Low character and immediately to the negative after scale of the northwest of the mitigation existing built bridge. The village of included in environment Stepaside is to the masterplan. within the north. Topography and surroundings of tree cover mean that the historic there are not long asset and how views of other the proposed buildings but that change or closer buildings can be development seen from or in views compares with of the bridge to a this limited extent. The development would similarly be partially visible and the retention of trees or the addition of screening hedges or trees would screen new structures from view effectively. The lifespan of The proposed lodges Neutral None the proposed would be in use for a change or generation but could development be removed and whether or completely in time. not the impact might be reversible The extent of There is a Neutral None tree cover, considerable amount whether it is of tree cover around deciduous or the bridge which evergreen, and screens and blocks its likely views in all directions. longevity The impact of There would be some Neutral None artificial impact from artificial lighting — for lighting, although it is example, on proposed that the night-time lighting within the views woodland lodge park will be installed on
48 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
low-level bollards instead of overhead “street” lighting, which will minimise light pollution. There already is artificial lighting within the village and from adjacent cottages. Street lighting is so this would not be a new additional element in the local landscape The capability The key Neutral None of a landscape characteristics of the setting to local landscape are absorb change now dominated by or new regenerated woodland development environment which is without the a modern erosion of its phenomenon and key masks the agricultural characteristics and industrial history of the land in post- medieval times. A well designed lodge park with adequate tree cover could maintain in quiet and intimate setting of the area. The impact of the The setting is now Neutral proposed change wooded and relatively or development quiet, with local on non-visual walkers and visitors to elements of the the industrial heritage setting and sites nearby character of the frequenting the historic asset, footpath. There is such as sense of likely to be an increase remoteness, in footfall on the evocation of the footpath, although this historical past, may be felt further sense of place, south, where the cultural identity ironworks and Grove or spiritual Colliery site are found, responses as well as the paths to
49 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
the coast at Wiseman’s Bridge, rather than on the bridge itself. The impact of It is not anticipated Neutral None non-visual that significant extra elements of the noise would be proposed introduced into the change or setting or new smells. development, such as the removal or addition of noises and smell The cumulative The development is on Very Low None effect of the a relatively large scale negative proposed but the topography change or and woodland in the development — area would mean that sometimes its full scale would not relatively small be readily apparent changes, or a and the localised series of small impact would also not changes, can be significant. It will have a major not impact on the impact on our ability to appreciate or ability to experience the listed understand, bridge, which is a appreciate and relatively modest and experience a almost anonymous historic asset. feature at present.
Interpretation and Low positive management of the bridge could improve the ability to appreciate its history and purpose.
50 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
APPENDIX E Photographs
51 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
52 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 1: A view of the Casting Shed at the heart of the ironworks complex, looking southeast. Note the lodges and car park in close proximity and the modern chippings across the area. The Heritage Park lodge site is an important element in the modern setting of the ironworks.
Plate 2: A view of the lights installed around the main buildings and structures of the ironworks complex to illuminate the site at night, looking south-southwest. The buildings are striking features and much appreciated by visitors.
53 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 3: A view of the ironworks engine house, looking northwest. The car park and modern landscaping set the context for the modern setting of this imposing structure.
Plate 4: Another view of the ironworks engine house, looking north-northwest. Note that there is a caravan park just visible through the trees to the right of centre. Tourism dominates Pleasant Valley in the modern period and is key to the modern setting of the ironworks complex.
54 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 5: Another view of the ironworks engine house, looking northwest. The lawned area to the right of the engine house would be the location of the proposed café, see Appendix F. The ironworks workshop “The Platform” lies beyond the lawned area but is hidden from view by trees and topography.
Plate 6: A view, looking southwest, of the furnace bank (centre), engine house (right) and casting shed (left) from the entrance to the car park. The surviving ironworks buildings are of monumental scale.
55 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 7: A view northwestwards towards “The Platform”, the ironworks workshop, barely visible from the entrance to the present car park (blue arrow). Area A (red arrow) is just visible through the gap in the trees just left of centre. This gap would be closed by a buffer zone of new trees planted to block views of the lodges in Area A.
Plate 8: A view of the boundary (red arrow) between Area A and the ironworks site, with the workshops known as The Platform to the left, looking northwest. A buffer zone of trees in the masterplan, planted along the edge of the scheduled area along a former boundary, will block views of the lodges in Area A, and not significantly foreshorten views in this wooded valley.
56 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 9: A view southeastwards along Fords Lake stream shows how riverside trees, even in winter, block views of the ironworks buildings to the south. “The Platform” is partially visible on the right of the photograph.
Plate 10: A view looking southeast from the western bank of Fords Lake shows “The Platform” to the right. Part of the engine house is just visible in the distance, but there is no intervisibility between “The Platform” and the main part of the ironworks complex.
57 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 11: A view looking northwest at the modern boundary fence. The former boundary to the north of this that marked the edge of the scheduled area was removed a while ago. This view would be closed off by a buffer zone of trees reinstating the former boundary.
Plate 12: A view looking south down Ford Lake stream. Area A (red arrow) is to the right. The trees partially block the view of “The Platform”, even in winter. The rest of the ironworks complex is out of view. Note the wooded slopes either side of the valley.
58 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 13: A view looking northeastwards towards the Areas D & E (Stepaside Inn) from the entrance into Area A. Trees block any view of the development area where changes will make a material difference.
Plate 14: A view south-southeastwards across Area A towards “The Platform” (blue arrow), which cannot be understood or appreciated from this distance. The lodges of Area A would block this view, but it is not an important view of “The Platform”. The main ironworks buildings are not visible from this area.
59 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 15: The listed tramway bridge over Fords Lake, on the line of the former Grove Colliery tramway, looking west. The bridge is set down in the stream valley and hidden by trees and vegetation. It would not be intervisible with Area A.
Plate 16: The listed tramway bridge over Fords Lake, on the line of the former Grove Colliery tramway, looking north-northwest. It has been metalled in modern times and now carries a public footpath across the river. The proposed development would have no impact on it.
60 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 17: The structures of the former Animal and Bird Park can still be seen in Area B, looking southwest. This area is currently very overgrown. Trees on the valley slope screen it from the scheduled area.
Plate 18: The Grove Colliery tramway rises up the slope to the right, on its way to the colliery. The branch to the left ran to the limekilns above the ironworks. These are now metalled footpaths used by visitors exploring the industrial heritage of Heritage Park. This section of the tramway lies within the scheduled area. Plans to resurface the trackway will have no impact on the setting of the scheduled monument.
61 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 19: The trees which cover the valley slopes, as well as the lodges of Heritage Park, already screen views of the main ironworks buildings from the road to Wisemans Bridge. There are no long range views of the complex which can be enjoyed. The top of the engine house is just visible here, looking northwest.
Plate 20: A view of the main ironworks buildings from the entrance to Heritage Park, looking southwest.
62 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Plate 21: A key view of the casting shed from inside the structure, looking east. In the 1990s there was a popular swimming pool within the walls of the building, of which no surface trace can be seen.
Plate 22: A key view of the engine house, looking north. In the 1980s and 1990s a clubhouse stood in this area. It was removed post-1997 and no physical trace of it remains.
63 Heritage Park Masterplan, Stepaside Impact on Setting of Historic Assets
Appendix D: Client Plan
64