Land Off the Street, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

Land off The Street, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire Heritage Desk-Based Assessment

For

Tetlow King Planning on behalf of Cotswold Homes

CA Project: 6149

CA Report: 17014

January 2017

Land off The Street, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire Heritage Desk Based Assessment

CA Project: 6149 CA Report: 17014

Lillie Bennetto, Assistant Heritage Consultant prepared by February 2017 date

checked by Alan Ford, Senior Heritage Consultant

date February 2017 Richard Morton, Principal Heritage Consultant

approved by

signed February 2017

date

issue 01

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

Cirencester Milton Keynes Andover Exeter Building 11 41 Burners Lane Stanley House Unit 53 Kemble Enterprise South Walworth Road Basepoint Business Centre Park Kiln Farm Andover Yeoford Way Kemble, Cirencester Milton Keynes Hampshire Marsh Barton Trading Gloucestershire Buckinghamshire SP10 5LH Estates GL7 6BQ MK11 3HA Exeter t.01285 771022 t.01908 564660 t.01264 347 630 EX2 8LB f.01285 771033 t. 01392 826185 e. [email protected]

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 7 Outline ...... 7 Location and Landscape context ...... 7 Summary of development proposals ...... 8 Scope and objectives ...... 8 2. METHODOLOGY ...... 9 Study area ...... 9 Data acquisition ...... 9 Previous archaeological investigations ...... 10 Walkover Survey ...... 10 Limitations ...... 10 Significance of heritage assets ...... 11 The setting of heritage assets ...... 13 3. PLANNING POLICY ...... 14 Legislative framework, national planning policy and relevant sector guidance ...... 14 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (1990) ...... 14 National policy: National Planning Policy Framework (2012) ...... 15 Local Planning Policy: Wiltshire Core Strategy, adopted January 2015 ...... 16 4. OVERVIEW OF THE HERITAGE RESOURCE ...... 17 Introduction ...... 17 Topography, Geology and the palaeoenvironment ...... 17 Summary of designated heritage assets ...... 18 Prehistoric period (pre-AD 43) ...... 18 Roman period (AD 43 – AD 410) ...... 19 Early medieval - medieval period (AD 410 – AD 1539) ...... 19 Post-medieval period (1540 – 1800) ...... 20 Modern period (1801 – present) ...... 21 Historic land use within the Site ...... 21 5. SIGNIFICANCE AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EFFECTS ...... 29 Significance of Recorded and Potential Heritage Assets within the Site ...... 29 Previous disturbance within the Site ...... 29 Potential Development Effects ...... 29 6. THE SETTING OF HERITAGE ASSETS AND DEVELOPMENT EFFECTS ...... 30 The Fox and Hounds Pub ...... 31

Broughton Gifford Conservation Area ...... 32 7. CONCLUSIONS ...... 41 8. REFERENCES ...... 42 Cartographic sources ...... 43

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure 1 Site location plan

Figure 2 Designated assets, non-designated assets and previous works

Figure 3 Site location

Figure 4 1817 Ordnance Survey Map of Wiltshire

Figure 5 1841 Broughton Gifford Tithe Map

Figure 6 1886 Ordnance Survey Map

Figure 7 1900 Ordnance Survey Map

Figure 8 1924 Ordnance Survey Map

Figure 9 1946 aerial photograph

Figure 10 1970 Ordnance Survey Map

Figure 11 1985 aerial photograph

Figure 12 2017 Master Map of the Site

Figure 13 View from The Street, showing The Fox and Hounds on the left, facing north towards the Site

Figure 14 Conservation Area character areas

Figure 15 View from the street, facing north-west, modern housing on the left and 19th century housing on the right

Figure 16 View from The Street facing south-east, 1920’s housing on the left and 19th century housing on the right

Figure 17 View of the Site from The Street, facing north-east

Figure 18 View from within the Site facing south-west

Figure 19 View of the buildings within the Site, facing west-south-west

Figure 20 View of the Site from Newleaze Park, facing west

SUMMARY Project Name: Land off The Street, Broughton Gifford Location: Wiltshire NGR: ST 87891 63764

In January 2017 Cotswold Archaeology was commissioned by Tetlow King Planning on behalf of Cotswold Homes to carry out a heritage desk based assessment in relation to land off The Street, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire.

This assessment identified no heritage assets within the Site and that within a 1km study area around the Site there is limited archaeological evidence for prehistoric and Roman settlement activity. The Site falls within an area previously documented as garden on historic maps and likely lay within the agricultural hinterland of the dispersed settlement of Broughton Gifford during the medieval and post-medieval periods. Given this low potential and the likely truncation of potential archaeological assets by the footings of the current buildings on the site it is unlikely that any such remains survive within the Site.

Development within the Site will not impact the setting or significance of The Grade II Listed Fox and Hounds pub, located c.65m south of the Site.

It is considered that the removal of the current buildings will have a positive impact by replacing an area of modern commercial units, which detract from the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. It is recommended that to meet the requirements of local and national planning policy the replacement by residential development should be achieved through sensitive design to complement and fit in with the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Sensitive development would enhance the character, appearance and hence significance of the Conservation Area, and have a positive effect.

1. INTRODUCTION

Outline 1.1. In January 2017, Cotswold Archaeology was commissioned by Tetlow King Planning on behalf of Cotswold Homes to carry out a heritage desk-based assessment in relation to land off The Street, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire, centred on NGR: ST 87891 63764 (hereafter ‘the Site’, Figure 3).

Figure 3 Site location (2009 Aerial Photograph)

Location and landscape context 1.2. The Site is located within the settlement of Broughton Gifford and currently contains concrete parking areas and commercial buildings. The Site lies at c.43m aOD and is approximately 0.25ha in size. To the south-west of the Site is The Street. The Site is bordered to the north-east and south by residential development. It is set within a small area of modern residential development to the rear of the historic street which forms the focus for the ribbon of settlement that comprises Broughton Gifford. The settlement lies within an agricultural hinterland and is dispersed along The Street from the vicinity of St Mary’s Church c. 600m to the south to Broughton Common c. 800m to the north-west.

1.3. Broughton Gifford is situated in the low-lying land to the west of the River Avon and is situated in a rural landscape surrounded by small settlements. Melksham lies some 2.4km to the east.

Summary of development proposals 1.4. The development proposal is for ten residential dwellings with associated utilities, services and landscaping. A finalised design plan has not yet been issued.

Scope and objectives 1.5. The assessment focuses upon known and potential archaeological remains within the Site, as well as a 1km ‘buffer’ around the it, hereafter referred to as the ‘study area’ (Figure 2). This assessment also considers potential changes to the settings of non-designated and designated heritage assets within a 1km buffer around the Site, as considered appropriate for a development of this type and size.

1.6. The key objectives of the assessment are:

 to identify and gather information on designated and non-designated heritage assets within the proposed Site and surrounding landscape, and the settings of those assets that may change as a result of the proposed development;

 to assess the effect of the proposed development on the significance of designated and non-designated heritage assets within the Site and the surrounding landscape arising from potential changes to their setting;

 to identify recorded heritage assets of archaeological interest (designated and non-designated) within the proposed Site and, where sufficient information allows, to assess their significance;

 where possible, to assess the resultant baseline information, and to offer an analysis of the potential for the presence of currently unrecorded heritage assets of archaeological interest within the proposed Site, and of their likely significance; and

 to assess as far as possible, the potential effect of the proposed development on the significance of known and potential buried archaeological remains or upstanding earthwork remains within the proposed Site.

2. METHODOLOGY

2.1. The methodology employed for this assessment is based upon key professional guidance including predominantly the Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment (Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, 2014); and Historic England’s Conservation Principles (2008). Relevant heritage statute and policy is set out in Chapter 3 below.

Study area 2.2. This assessment considers a minimum 1km study area surrounding the Site (Fig. 2) but also, where informative, historic environment evidence and heritage assets in the wider landscape. This study area has ensured that data sources provided sufficient contextual information about the Site and the surrounding landscape from which to assess known and potential impacts on the heritage resource.

2.3. Known and potential heritage assets within the study area are discussed in Section 4 and a gazetteer of these has been compiled, and is presented as Appendix A. Heritage assets are referred to in the text by a unique reference number 1, 2, etc., or A, B, etc. for previous archaeological works. In the case of designated assets, LB1, SM1, etc., and are illustrated on Figs 2.

Data acquisition 2.4. Historic environment data was requested in January 2017 from the Wiltshire Historic Environment Record (HER). This data related to all known designated and non-designated heritage assets recorded at the time of enquiry, and included detail on monuments, buildings, findspots, historic land-use and previous archaeological investigations.

2.5. In addition the following resources were consulted:

 Historic England National Heritage List for statutory designated heritage assets (including scheduled monuments, registered parks and gardens, battlefields and world heritage sites);

 The Wiltshire Historic Environment Record (HER), for details of previously completed archaeological works in the vicinity and recorded heritage assets;

 Historic England Archives (HEA), for further records of known archaeological sites and events;

 Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC);

 Wiltshire Archives, for documentary sources and historic mapping to demonstrate previous land-uses;

 The Wiltshire Know Your Place website;

 The HEA Aerial Photographic Research Room, Swindon for historic aerial photographs of the site and vicinity;

 Local Authority listing descriptions and policy information; and

 The site itself and environs, which were inspected during a visit.

Previous archaeological investigations 2.6. No previous archaeological works have been undertaken within the Site. Within the 1km study area two relevant investigations have been undertaken:

 Evaluation at Norrington Common, (AC Archaeology 2012) (Figure 2, A). Remains of a Roman building were recorded; and

 Geophysical Survey at Land at Roundponds Farm, (Archaeological Services WYAS 2014) (Figure 2, B). Evidence of medieval ridge and furrow was recorded.

2.7. A Heritage Desk-Based Assessment was also undertaken at Land at Roundponds Farm (Cotswold Archaeology 2013).

Walkover Survey 2.8. A Site visit and study area walkover survey was undertaken on 23 January 2017, in order to identify heritage assets not previously recorded within the Site and to assess potential effects on the significance of heritage assets arising from changes to their setting as a result of the proposed development. The setting of designated heritage assets and their potential relationship with the Site was also assessed, as closely as possible from permitted rights of way. The Site visit also provided an opportunity to identify visible potential heritage assets not recorded by the above accessed sources and to more fully understand the potential constraints, if any, to the proposed development. It also allowed the identification of previous impacts on the Site arising from land-use or existing / remains of buildings etc.

Limitations 2.9. This assessment is principally a desk-based study and utilised secondary information derived from a variety of sources, only some of which have been directly examined for the purpose of this assessment. The assumption is made that

this data, as well as that derived from other secondary sources, is reasonably accurate. The records held by the Wiltshire HER and HEA are not a record of all surviving heritage assets, but a record of the discovery of a wide range of archaeological and historical components of the historic environment. The information held within it is not complete and does not preclude the subsequent discovery of further elements of the historic environment that are, at present, unknown.

Significance of heritage assets 2.10. Heritage assets are defined by the National Planning Policy Framework (henceforth, ‘the Framework’; Annex 2, 2012) as ‘a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions because of its heritage interest. The term Heritage Asset includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing)’. Designated heritage assets include: World Heritage Sites; Scheduled Monuments; Listed Buildings; Protected Wreck Sites; Registered Parks and Gardens; Registered Battlefields; and Conservation Areas. Non-designated heritage assets include sites held on the Historic Environment Record, in addition to other elements of the landscape understood to have a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions (see below, Section 3).

2.11. Assessment of the heritage value (significance) of a site sets out to identify how particular parts of a place and different periods in its evolution contribute to, or detract from, the identified heritage values associated with the asset.

2.12. Heritage significance is defined in the Framework (Annex 2) as ‘the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical fabric, but also from its setting’.

2.13. Current national guidance for the assessment of the significance of heritage assets is based on criteria provided by Historic England (formerly English Heritage) in Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment. Within this document, significance is weighed by consideration of the potential for the asset to demonstrate the following criteria:

 Evidential value derives from ‘the potential of a place to yield evidence about past human activity’ (ibid, 28). It is primarily embodied by physical remains or historic fabric, but also includes buried archaeology;

 Historical value derives from ‘the ways in which past people, events and aspects of life can be connected through a place to the present’ (ibid, 28). Illustrative historical value depends on visibility in a way that evidential value does not; and ‘has the power to aid interpretation of the past […] through shared experience of a place’ (ibid, 29). Associative historical value creates resonance through felt connections with a notable family, person, event or movement;

 Aesthetic value derives from ‘the ways in which people draw sensory and intellectual stimulation from a place’ (ibid, 30). Aesthetic value might be generated through conscious design and artistic endeavour, fortuitous and organic change, and the relationship of structures and materials to their setting; and

 Communal value is tied to historical (associative) value and aesthetic value, deriving from ‘the meanings of a place for the people who relate to it, or for whom it figures in their collective experience or memory’ (ibid, 31). Communal value may be commemorative, symbolic or social. The latter is typically ‘associated with places that people perceive as a source of identity, distinctiveness, social interaction and coherence’ and might only be articulated when the resource is under threat (ibid, 32).

2.14. Further information on good practice in implementing historic environment policy in the Framework is provided within the Historic England’s guidance Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment. This document provides advice on the assessment of the significance of heritage assets in support of applications for planning permission, and emphasises that the information required regarding heritage significance should be no more than would be necessary to inform the planning decision.

The setting of heritage assets 2.15. Historic England’s document, Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3: the Setting of Heritage Assets provides guidance on setting and development management, including assessment of the implications of development proposals. Quoting the Framework, this guidance reiterates that ‘the setting of a heritage asset is the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed, and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral'. The extent and importance of setting is often expressed by reference to visual considerations, but may also comprise other elements that contribute to the ways in which a heritage assets is experienced, including factors such as noise, vibration and other pollutants or nuisances; tranquillity, remoteness, ‘wildness’; sense of enclosure, seclusion, intimacy or privacy; the rarity of comparable survivals of setting, and associative relationships between heritage assets.

2.16. The methodology for the assessment of the setting of heritage assets employed by Cotswold Archaeology has been informed by this guidance. A stepped approach is recommended for assessing the implications of development proposals. The first step is to identify the heritage assets affected and their settings. Step 2 is to assess whether, how, and to what degree, these settings make a positive contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s), i.e. ‘what matters and why’. This includes a consideration of the key attributes of the heritage asset itself, as well as the asset’s physical surrounds relationship with other heritage assets; and the way in which the asset is appreciated. The third step (where appropriate) is to assess the effect of the proposed development on the significance of heritage assets through the consideration of the key attributes of the proposed development, including its location and siting; form and appearance; additional effects; and permanence. The fourth step is to maximise enhancement and minimise harm, and the fifth step refers to making and documenting the decision and monitoring outcomes.

2.17. In relation to development within the setting of a heritage asset, the guidance states that ‘protection of the setting of heritage assets need not prevent change’. Change to setting is accepted in Historic England’s guidance as part of the evolution of landscape and environment; it is whether they are neutral, harmful or beneficial to the significances that matters. A recent judgement by Justice Lindblom in (The

Queen) v. Sevenoaks DC [2014] EWHC 1895 (Admin) states ‘preserving’, for both Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas in terms of character, appearance and setting, means doing ‘no harm’. Thus ‘preserving’ does not necessarily mean ‘no change’; it specifically means ‘no harm’.

3. PLANNING POLICY

Legislative framework, national planning policy and relevant sector guidance 3.1. This assessment has been compiled in accordance with the following legislative, planning policy and guidance documentation:

 National Heritage Act 1983 (amended 2002);

 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (1990);

 National Planning Policy Framework (2012);

 National Planning Practice Guidance: Conserving and enhancing the historic environment (Dept. for Communities and Local Government 2014);

 Historic England, (2016): Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 1: Conservation Area Designation, Appraisal and Management;

 Historic England, (2015a): Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment; and

 Historic England, (2015b): Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets.

Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act (1990) 3.2. The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act sets out the laws on planning controls with regard of Listed Buildings and areas of special architectural or historic interest (Conservation Areas). The document states that, when making planning decisions with regard to developments affecting Listed Buildings or their settings, the local planning authority or the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest that it possesses (Section 66).

3.3. Section 72 of the 1990 Act also states that with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation area…..special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. It should be noted that the Act clearly refers to land ‘in’ a conservation area in this regard.

National policy: National Planning Policy Framework (2012) 3.4. The Framework sets out national planning policy relating to the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment. It defines the historic environment as all aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged, and landscaped and planted or managed flora.

3.5. Individual components of the historic environment are considered heritage assets: buildings, monuments, sites, places, areas or landscapes identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of their heritage interest.

3.6. Heritage assets include designated sites and non-designated sites, and policies within the Framework relate both to the treatment of assets themselves and their settings, both of which are a material consideration in development decision making.

3.7. Key tenets of the Framework are that:

 when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be (Paragraph 132);

 significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset, or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to, or loss of, a Grade II Listed Building, park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to, or loss of, designated heritage assets of the highest significance, notably Scheduled Monuments, Protected Wreck Sites, Battlefields, Grade I and II* Listed Buildings, Grade I and II* Registered Parks and Gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional (Paragraph 132);

 where a proposed development will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal (Paragraph 133); and

3.8. with regard to non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having due regard to the scale of any harm or loss, and to the significance of the heritage asset affected (Paragraph 135).

3.9. Local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected by a proposed development, including any contribution made to significance by their setting. The level of detail required in the assessment should be ‘proportionate to the assets’ importance, and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.’

Local Planning Policy: Wiltshire Core Strategy, adopted January 2015 3.10. Core Policy 58: Ensuring the conservation of the historic environment states:

Development should protect, conserve and where possible enhance the historic environment. Designated heritage assets and their settings will be conserved, and where appropriate enhanced in a manner appropriate to their significance, including:

i. nationally significant archaeological remains

ii. World Heritage Sites within and adjacent to Wiltshire

iii. buildings and structures of special architectural or historic interest

iv. the special character or appearance of conservation areas

v. historic parks and gardens

vi. important landscapes, including registered battlefields and townscapes.

Distinctive elements of Wiltshire’s historic environment, including non-designated heritage assets, which contribute to a sense of local character and identity will be conserved, and where possible enhanced. The potential contribution of these heritage assets towards wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits will also be utilised where this can be delivered in a sensitive and appropriate manner in accordance with Core Policy 57 (Ensuring High Quality Design and Place

Shaping). Heritage assets at risk will be monitored and development proposals that improve their condition will be encouraged. The advice of statutory and local consultees will be sought in consideration of such applications.

4. OVERVIEW OF THE HERITAGE RESOURCE

Introduction 4.1. This section provides an overview of the historical and archaeological background of the study area, and the wider landscape, in order to provide a better understanding of the context and significance of heritage assets that may be affected by development within the Site. The assessment also seeks to identify the potential for encountering buried archaeological remains within the Site and to predict their likely nature, date, extent and condition. A determination is then also made of the significance of any such affected archaeological remains (Section 5).

4.2. Designated and non-designated heritage assets within the study area are recorded in Appendix A. Figure 2 provides an illustration of those recorded heritage assets within the environs of the Site, which are considered to be relevant to the assessment of its historical development and archaeological potential and that of its surroundings. Assets which are not illustrated are recorded in Appendix A.

Topography, Geology and the palaeoenvironment 4.3. The Site is within Landscape Type 16: Limestone Lowland, as designated by the Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment (Wiltshire County Council, 2005). This covers a large swathe of north-west Wilshire which has an underlying geography of predominantly mudstone and limestone with some pockets of clay. Across this landscape are numerous rivers forming shallow valleys.

4.4. The British Geological Society lists the bedrock geology of the area as Kellaways Formation sandstone, siltstone and mudstone, which was formed approximately 161 to 165 million years ago in the Jurassic period. The local environment was previously dominated by shallow seas.

4.5. The overlying soils of the area are freely draining lime rich loamy soils. The land is a mix of pasture and arable farmland, with small sized irregular fields enclosed by hedgerows and trees, with a few small woodland blocks. Great Bradford Wood is located to the south-west

4.6. The River Avon is located c.1.5km south-east of the Site, at its closest extent, and the South Brook is located c.1.7km east of the Site at its closest extent.

Summary of designated heritage assets 4.7. There are no designated heritage assets within the Site.

4.8. There are no World Heritage Sites, Registered Parks or Gardens or Registered Battlefields within the study area.

4.9. The Site is located with the Broughton Gifford Conservation Area. The Conservation Area contains one Grade I Listed Building; two Grade II* Listed Buildings; and 18 Grade II Listed Buildings, including:

 The Fox and Hounds, c.65m south of the Site (Figure 2, LB4).

4.10. Within the 1km study area, but outside of the Conservation Area, is Mill Farm House, Grade II Listed Building, located c.945m south-east of the Site (Figure 2, LB5).

Prehistoric period (pre-AD 43) 4.11. No Palaeolithic (500,000 -10,000 BC) or Mesolithic (10, 000 – 4000 BC) finds have been recorded within the study area. The Palaeolithic archaeological record of the region is primarily dominated by lithic find spots, mainly from fluvial deposits such as river gravels. There is also a dense concentration of find spots along the Avon in Wiltshire (Webster 2007). The Mesolithic in Wiltshire comprises a rich mixture of minor artefact and assemblage find spots. Mesolithic material tends to be found near waterways, although there are clusters in the south, north-east and north-west of the county (Webster 2007).

4.12. No features of known Neolithic (4000 - 2400 BC) date have been recorded within the study area. A possible Bronze Age (2400 – 700 BC) barrow is visible as crop marks located c.1km south-west of the Site (Fig. 2, 1). This is located close to a crop mark resembling a track way which appears to bend around the circular earthwork, suggesting the two are not contemporary. No other Neolithic or Bronze Age activity is recorded within the study area.

4.13. No Iron Age (700 BC – AD 43) features have been recorded within the study area, although Iron Age activity has been recorded in Wiltshire in proximity to the River Avon.

Roman period (AD 43 – AD 410) 4.14. There are no recorded Roman finds or features within the Site.

4.15. A geophysical survey undertaken in 2012 at Norrington Common, located c.700m north of the Site (Figure 2, A), identified areas of earthworks relating to a possible Roman building, along with surface finds of Roman tile and pottery (Sabin & Donalson, 2012). Further excavation work at this site in 2013 identified finds of Roman pottery and tile, iron nails, glass, animal bone and charcoal along with evidence of the structure (Robinson & Chadwik, 2013). This structure was made up of limestone fragments and was identified as a pier base for a pillar or terminal for a wall foundation. It is likely that this structure was an agricultural building.

4.16. A Roman road which runs from Speen to Bath is located c. 3.1km north of the Site. Margary describes this as the main western road in Roman Britain, as such there would have been many road side settlements, and by extension smaller rural farming settlements in their hinterland, particularly on the margins of the Avon valley.

Early medieval - medieval period (AD 410 – AD 1539) 4.17. The name Broughton Gifford originates from the Old English ‘broc-tun’ meaning ‘farm or dwelling by the brook’. The settlement is first mentioned in a charter of 1001 AD (Pugh 1954). The original settlement was probably situated between the 13th century St Mary’s Church, c.490m south of the site (Figure 2, LB1) and the common to the north. The 17th century manor house is located c.745 north-west of the Site (Figure 2, LB3), away from the church and common, suggestive of a highly dispersed settlement arranged along a trackway passing through cleared woodland or waste. Many of the field boundaries shown on historic mapping (including those within and bounding the Site) are curved, similar in shape to the backwards ‘S’ which is characteristic of medieval ridge and furrow. This strongly suggests that the Site lay within the agricultural hinterland of any settlement at that date.

4.18. The landscape surrounding the Site is heavily covered by ridge and furrow in varying states of preservation, as can be seen on the LiDAR imagery of the area The HER records a possible medieval settlement located on the common, located c.815m north-west of the Site (Figure 2, 2). This likely relates to the dividing up of land used for agricultural practices on the common, with the possibility of dwellings on the outskirts. The common is marshy land, and would have been difficult to manage during the winter with limited agricultural use. A series of undated square

enclosures is also recorded c.255m north-west of the Site (Figure 2, 4), and a series of linear earthworks c.85m south-west of the Site (Figure 2, 6). These are likely to be medieval, or later, stock enclosures or burgage plots. Located c.880m is an undated linear earthwork close to a ring ditch (Figure 2, 5). This appears to curve around the ring ditch suggesting it is a later feature, most likely a medieval trackway or similar.

Post-medieval period (1540 – 1800) 4.19. The pattern of settlement in the region in the post-medieval period was largely based on earlier medieval settlement (Webster 2007). Many medieval towns were extended in the post-medieval period, often using narrow burgage plots lining linear ribbon developments (Webster 2007). During the post-medieval period Broughton Gifford expanded along the main road (The Street) running through it, with the Manor House built in the early 17th century to the south of the Site (Figure 2, LB2), and Gifford Hall built in the early 18th century to the north of the Site near the common (Figure 2, LB3).

4.20. Within the village the main industry was agriculture and weaving. Areas of narrower post-medieval ridge and furrow have been recorded surrounding the village (Figure 2, 3). In an account from 1860 the Rev. John Wilkinson (Wilkinson, 1860) states that previously the town had grown corn, with the surrounding ridge and furrow testament to this. However, with the rising price for wool the land was turned over for pasture. This is likely a reference to the late 19th century agricultural depression, where cheap corn from the United States led to a 20% decline in the amount of land under arable cultivation. This prompted significant changes in land ownership and management, resulting in migration of rural populations into urban centres. This led to the reduction in the rural population and amalgamation of farmsteads and fields. This is alluded to by Rev. Wilkinson as happening at Broughton Gifford.

4.21. During the late post-medieval period further dwellings were built surrounding the common. Villagers used the common to graze their livestock and grow their crops, although the common was not included when the rest of the parish's lands were Inclosed in 1783. The common was a marshy area with poor drainage, and due to the common ownership little was done to improve the land resulting in the area being an unhealthy area with fevers caused by the wet conditions and poor sewerage facilities (Wilkinson, 1860).

4.22. Along the main street houses were also built, such as Hollybrook House, which dates to the late 18th century and is Grade II Listed (Figure 2, LB6). The majority of the listed buildings within the Conservation Area also date to this period. The buildings within the village are otherwise a mix of larger houses and small cottages used for ‘cottage industry’ such as weaving.

Modern period (1801 – present) 4.23. During the modern period the layout of the village altered little, although a number of houses were built along The Street, which still survive today. These are a mix of larger houses associated with land owners, and workers cottages occupied by a mixture of tenants and private owners. During the later modern period more houses were built and farmsteads converted to domestic use in some areas. This included in recent decades the creation of a housing estate on the eastern fringes of the village along with small scale commercial industry buildings, including those currently occupying the Site.

Historic land use within the Site 4.24. The earliest map of Broughton Gifford consulted dates to 1817 and shows the settlement within the wider landscape, lying between two main roads to Melksham (Figure 4) and surrounded by small rural hamlets and farmsteads.

Figure 4 1817 Ordnance Survey map of Wiltshire

4.25. The 1841 tithe map for Broughton Gifford shows the village in more detail (Figure 5). The map shows the Site area as being within two strip garden plots, and a large enclosed field. These strip gardens have curving boundaries, suggestive of former medieval ridge and furrow and were likely formed by enclosure of medieval arable land. The majority of the Site is made up of strip garden with associated dwelling. The apportionment records this as a ‘house, offices and garden’ as belonging to Jacob Gore, with William Gerrish as the tenant. Jacob Gore also owned a small parcel of land across the road from the Site. William Gerrish was also occupier of a house and garden just outside the Site area to the north-west and was recorded as renting some fields to the south-east of the Site.

4.26. Within the north-western area of the Site the apportionment records the land as pasture land belonging to Sir John Hobhouse, who owned a large area of land to the west of the Site. The south-eastern area of the Site falls within a large irregular field listed as pasture belonging to Mary Day, who also owned several fields to the east of the Site. A building, now No. 139, lies directly adjacent to the south-western boundary.

Figure 5 1841 Broughton Gifford tithe map

4.27. The 1886 First Edition Ordnance Survey (OS) map shows the garden area of Jacob Gore’s house as having been divided in two; this is likely due to the construction of Cromwell Cottages, located on the south-eastern boundary of the Site (Figure 6). These buildings are labelled as the post-office. Within the Site outbuildings have been erected associated with No. 139. The north-western and south-eastern Site area remains as it was on the 1841 tithe map.

Figure 6 1886 Ordnance Survey map

4.28. The 1900 OS map shows further divisions of the garden plots within the Site, along with extensions to the post office building and the existing house (Figure 7). Further residential development can be seen along The Street to the west of the Site.

Figure 7 1900 Ordnance Survey map

4.29. The 1924 OS map of the village shows further development within the Site, associated with No. 139 and Cromwell Cottages (previously the post office) and in the surrounding area (Figure 8). The southern part is now mostly buildings, likely to be outhouses. Within the northern part of the Site a small outhouse is also shown. The majority of the Site however stays undeveloped aside from some boundary changes. An additional cottage has also been added onto the end of the existing row on the south-eastern boundary of the Site. An aerial photograph from 1945 shows a tree lined boundary running through the Site north to south and an area of allotments in the western area of the Site (Figure 9).

Figure 8 1924 Ordnance Survey map

Figure 9 1946 aerial photograph

4.30. The 1970 Ordnance Survey map shows the modern residential development surrounding the Site to the east, replacing fields (Figure 10). Within the Site new buildings have been constructed labelled as engineering works. An aerial

photograph taken in 1970 (not shown) shows an area of trees along the boundary in the north-eastern part of the Site.

Figure 10 1970 Ordnance Survey map

4.31. An aerial photograph from 1985 shows the current buildings within the Site, along with the area of grass land and car park (Figure 11). Figure 12 shows the current lay out of the Site.

Figure 11 1985 aerial photograph

Figure 12 2017 Master map of the Site

4.32. The Site retains little of its original character with the modern development resulting in the total removal of the gardens associated with Cromwell Cottages and No. 139.

5. SIGNIFICANCE AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EFFECTS

Significance of Recorded and Potential Heritage Assets within the Site 5.1. No designated heritage assets are within the Site. No heritage assets are recorded within the site on the Historic Environment Record.

5.2. Little prehistoric and Roman activity has been recorded within the area; as such it is unlikely that remains relating to this period are present within the Site.

5.3. The Site is located within an area previously used as land associated with 19th century houses, and most likely formed part of the agricultural landscape of Broughton Gifford in the medieval and post-medieval period. It may be possible that small finds and features exist within the less developed areas of the Site; however these would be of low significance. It may be possible that evidence of the former boundaries survives within the north-western area of the Site, currently in use as lawn and north-eastern area of the Site below the car park.

Previous disturbance within the Site 5.4. No previous archaeological works have been undertaken within the Site.

5.5. During the 19th and 20th century the existing buildings were expanded and new buildings were built on Site, these would have required foundation trenches, along with utility and service trenches. Part of the land within the Site has been partially covered over with concrete. This previous development in the Site is likely to have severely truncated or removed any surviving potential for buried archaeology within the Site.

Potential Development Effects 5.6. The proposed development will require demolition of the current buildings on Site. It was noted during the Site visit that the 19th-century Cromwell Cottages lie adjacent to the buildings; as such care should be taken during this process.

5.7. Given the previous extensive impacts within the Site, and the generally low archaeological potential, no adverse physical effects on heritage assets (including below-ground archaeological remains) are anticipated.

6. THE SETTING OF HERITAGE ASSETS AND DEVELOPMENT EFFECTS

6.1. This section presents the results of the settings assessment. It considers any effects of the proposals on the setting and significance of heritage assets as a result of changes to their setting. In particular, it considers what heritage values contribute to the significance of any such assets, and any contribution that the Site may make.

6.2. The assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the approach outlined in the Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 1: Conservation Area Designation, Appraisal and Management (Historic England2016); and Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets (Historic England, 2015b), as summarised in Section 3.

6.3. ‘Setting’ is defined by the Framework (Annex 2) as ‘the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced’. The way in which one ‘experiences’ a heritage asset, how its historic values are revealed and understood, is thus central to the contribution that setting makes to significance. The Framework’s definition goes on to clarify that not all elements of the setting will contribute to the significance of the heritage asset: different parts may contribute positively, negatively or not at all.

Step 1 – Initial Assessment 6.4. The initial scoping, carried out as part of Step 1 of the setting assessment methodology (see Section 2), utilised readily available information to establish whether the significance of any heritage assets might be affected by the proposed development as a result of changes to their setting. The initial review established that the proposed development would have no potential to affect one of the Listed Buildings within the study area, which is considered to have no functional, historical or landscape association with the site. In this context, the development would have no negative impact on the following Listed building, and thus did not require further assessment:

 Mill Farmhouse, Grade II Listed Building, located c.925m south-east of the Site (Fig. 2, LB5).

Step 2 - The contribution of setting to significance, and Step 3 – The effect of development on significance 6.5. During this scoping analysis some heritage assets were identified as potentially susceptible to non-physical impact as a result of changes to setting, as such these heritage assets require step 2 and step 3 assessments. These comprise:

 The Fox and Hounds Pub, Grade II Listed Building, located c.65m north of the Site (Fig. 2, LB4); and

 Broughton Gifford Conservation Area, containing one Grade I, two Grade II* and 18 Grade II Listed Buildings (Fig. 2).

The Fox and Hounds Pub

Significance and Setting 6.6. The Fox and Hounds pub (LB4) is a Grade II Listed Building which dates to the late 18th century. It is built from painted rubble stone and is two storeys high with original features. The significance of the building primarily lies in its historic form and fabric, being one of the few 18th century buildings in the village with a painted façade and its association with the contemporary buildings within the village. The element of setting contributing most highly to its significance is its roadside placement within its own enclosure within the centre of the village.

Development Effects 6.7. Historic maps show the building set within a garden area with a tree and hedge lined boundary. This boundary remains as a high full hedgerow with trees, and as such there is no intervisibility between the Site and the pub (Figure 13). The development will not have any physical impact on the building, nor will it harm its setting. The proposed development will not have a negative impact on the Listed Building.

Figure 13 View from The Street, showing The Fox and Hounds on the right facing north towards the Site (Jan 2017)

Broughton Gifford Conservation Area

Significance and Setting 6.8. In the Conservation Appraisal (West Wiltshire District Council, 1975) Broughton Gifford is defined as a small village of a ribbon form, stretching over 1km. The Conservation Area encompasses most of the village, including an area of open land surrounding the Grade I Listed St Mary’s Church, and excluding modern development on the eastern fringes. The boundary of the Conservation Area encompasses all the buildings shown on the mid-19th-century tithe map, including their associated gardens. Some of the areas have subsequently been infilled with modern development, including the Site.

6.9. Buildings within the Conservation Area are predominantly two storeyed, and constructed of the local vernacular of coursed and un-coursed rubble. It is this stonework which the majority of the pre-20th century houses are built from and which contributes greatly to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The Listed Buildings within the Conservation Area reflect the multi-period development of the village, with the Church of St Mary dating to the 13th century, located c.585m south of the Site (Figure 2, LB1), The Manor House dating to the

early 17th century, located c.230m south of the Site (Figure 2, LB2), and Gifford Hall, located c.755m north-west of the Site (Figure 2, LB3) dating to the mid-17th century. The later 18th and 19th century buildings are still prevalent, however relatively few are Listed buildings.

6.10. The Conservation Area may usefully be examined as areas of different character (Figure 14). This approach is recommended in the Historic England guidance ‘Understanding Place: Historic Area Assessment, Principles and Practice’. The Common character area encompasses the settlement and buildings surrounding the common are large and sparse, and mostly set back from the road. An account of Broughton Gifford written in 1860 notes that the common was largely inhabited by the poorer families, with some of the houses encroaching, illegally, onto the common land. The author of this work, Rev. John Wilkinson, also noted that old houses were rarely repaired and often left to fall down, or were pulled down (Wilkinson 1860). As such the houses predominately date from the late 18th century onwards in this area of the Conservation Area.

Figure 14 Conservation Area character areas

6.11. The road leading down from the common is a narrow road, reminiscent of a rural trackway, bounded on the east by hedgerow opening into fields, and to the west by Hollybrook House and garden, a late 18th century house. This has a strong rural village character with the road leading into the more densely settled centre of the village.

6.12. The central part of the conservation area, The Street character area, is mostly focused around the buildings lining the narrow road through the village, with the exception of an area of open land opposite Hollybrook House. This area has smaller, closer houses, and has quite a distinct look, which is broken up by some modern bungalows and houses which stand out slightly due to the modern style and

construction materials used (Figure 15 -16). On the whole this area has the most cohesive feel, with the buildings being relatively similar in style and age. The general style of the houses within the Conservation Area, in the centre of the village, is that of coursed and un-coursed light-coloured rubble stone with stone tile or slate roofs.

Figure 15 View from The street, facing north-west, modern housing on the left and 19th century housing on the right (Jan 2017)

Figure 16 View from The Street facing south-east, 1920’s housing on the left and 19th century housing on the right (Jan 2017)

6.13. The settlement pattern to the south, St Mary’s character area, around the 13th century St Mary’s church, is sparse, made up of single houses and agricultural buildings. This area has a higher number of new builds within the Conservation Area. For the most part these are designed to fit in with the surroundings, although the area lacks some of the cohesion of the centre of the Conservation Area.

6.14. The Site is located adjacent to a row of houses on its south-eastern boundary, which date to the late 19th century, and a building to the south-west which is shown on the tithe map (Figure 17). This terrace of houses is Cromwell Cottages and they are constructed with a red brick front facing to the west, with light coursed rubble stone on the other elevations. The house on the south-western end of the row is an early 20th century addition but built in a way to match the older houses. The buildings do not have chimneys, which is suggestive of them originally being commercial or industrial buildings, as opposed to dwellings, although since converted for residential use. The red brick frontages are not a common feature within the Conservation Area; this is again suggestive of the commercial, as opposed to domestic, nature of the houses. These cottages add considerably to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Figure 17 View of the Site from The Street, facing north-east (Jan 2017)

6.15. The significance of the Conservation Area is derived from its historic layout, following a narrow road from St Mary’s Church in the south to the common in the north. The historic form and fabric of the Listed Buildings and historic buildings adds greatly to the character, appearance and hence significance of the Conservation Area, through complimentary evidential and aesthetic values. The Conservation Area does not include much of the surrounding agricultural landscape, although the countryside is easily accessible directly from the main road in some areas, placing an emphasis on the vernacular style of the village and the layout. However, there are no significant views from The Street, due to hedgerows and development, although there are multiple cross country footpaths to and from the village.

Development Effects 6.16. The Site is currently commercial buildings with a small area of grass. The remaining surface area has been concreted over for car parking. It was noted during the Site visit that the buildings are somewhat out of place with the character and appearance of the Conservation Area to the point of detracting from it. Neither the open-space within the Site, nor the modern commercial buildings within it, blend with the overall character and appearance of the designated area (Figures 18-19). Elements of the Site are visible from The Street, although it is mostly screened by

the existing houses. When approaching The Street from the east from Newleaze Park Road the buildings within the Site are very visible and block views of Cromwell Cottages (Figure 20). It is considered that this area has presently has a negative impact on the Conservation Area.

Figure 18 View from within the Site facing south-west (Jan 2017)

Figure 19 View of the buildings within the Site, facing west-south-west (Jan 2017)

Figure 20 View of the Site from Newleaze Park, facing west (Jan 2017)

6.17. The design of the proposed buildings should be sympathetic to the character and aesthetic of the Conservation Area. The Site is located close to 19th century buildings, with the current buildings on Site linked to these cottages. These buildings vary slightly from the general character of the area, with red brick frontages suggestive of the industrial and commercial uses, as opposed to domestic use. Care should be taken to conserve, where possible, the surviving historic material of these houses and the design of the development should complement these buildings.

6.18. The Conservation Area appraisal states that a high standard of design is required in the design of new buildings and extensions to existing buildings, with care being exercised to ensure that the colour and texture of the building materials harmonize with local traditional materials. It is also noted that buildings should relate in mass and outline to the existing fabric, continue the rhythm of the street scene and in character, scale and colour respect the design of neighbouring buildings (West Wiltshire District Council, 1975).

6.19. The Landscape Character Assessment (2005) notes that the strategy for the Limestone Lowland Landscape Type is to conserve those elements intrinsic to the type’s character or important in their own right, such as the distinctive stone villages.

6.20. It is considered that removal of the existing buildings and construction of aesthetically sensitive buildings will have a positive effect on the Conservation Area by removing buildings that currently detract from its overall character and appearance. It was noted that some of the more modern buildings within the Conservation Area jar with the general appearance and character of the area and care should therefore be taken to utilise materials historically used in the village, such as light coursed rubble stone, with the possibility of redbrick detailing so as to complement the historic Cromwell Cottages.

7. CONCLUSIONS

7.1. Within the 1km study area around the Site there is limited archaeological evidence of prehistoric and Roman settlement, and no remains dating to these periods are recorded within the Site or its close vicinity. There is little potential for currently unrecorded remains of this date within the Site.

7.2. The Site falls within an area documented as gardens on historic maps. It is possible that finds relating to the domestic use of the medieval to post-medieval periods, along with evidence of land division may survive, although it is clear that impacts within the Site from modern development have been extensive. It is therefore unlikely that significant remains of these periods lie below ground.

7.3. Development within the Site will not harm the setting or significance of The Fox and Hounds Pub, located c.65m to its south.

7.4. It is considered that the removal of the current buildings will have a positive effect on the Conservation Area, by replacing an area of modern commercial units which detract from its character and appearance. It is recommended that the replacement by residential development should be achieved through sensitive design to complement and fit in with the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Sensitive development would enhance the character, appearance and hence significance of the Conservation Area.

8. REFERENCES

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. (2014) Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment. Available online: http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/node- files/CIfAS&GDBA_2.pdf. [Accessed: 4th November 2015].

Chettle, H F, W R Powell, P A Spalding, and P M Tillott. "Parishes: Broughton Gifford." A History of the County of Wiltshire: Volume 7. Eds. R B Pugh, and Elizabeth Crittall. London: Victoria County History, 1953. 51-59. British History Online. Web. 20 January 2017. http://www.british- history.ac.uk/vch/wilts/vol7/pp51-59

Department for Communities and Local Government. (2012) National Planning Policy Framework Communities and Local Government 2012.

Harrison, D., 2014, Land at Roundponds Farm, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire, Geophysical Survey, Archaeological Services WYAS

Historic England, (2016): Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 1: Conservation Area Designation, Appraisal and Management;

Historic England. (2015a) Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2: Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment.

Historic England. (2015b) Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets.

Rev. J. Wilkinson, (1860) History of Broughton Gifford in The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, Vol. 6, Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society.

Robinson, S., & Chadwick, A., (2013) Proposed Solar PV Farm at Norrington Common, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire, results of an archaeological trench evaluation, AC Archaeology

Sabin, D., & Donaldson, K., (2012) Norrington Common, Melksham, Wiltshire, Magnetometer Survey Report, Archaeological Surveys LTD

Webster, C., J., (2007) The Archaeology of South West of England, South West Archaeological Research Framework

Wiltshire County Council, (2005) Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment, Land Use Consultants

Wiltshire Council, (2015) Wiltshire Local Development Framework, Wiltshire Core Strategy, adopted January 2015

Cartographic sources 1817 Ordnance Survey map (http://www.visionofbritain.org.uk/maps/sheet/first_edition/lm_14, viewed Jan 2017)

1841 Broughton Gifford tithe map and apportionment (Swindon and Wiltshire Archives, viewed Jan 2017)

1886 Ordnance Survey map (Wiltshire your place website http://maps.bristol.gov.uk/kyp/?edition=wilts viewed Jan 2017)

1900 Ordnance Survey map (Wiltshire your place website http://maps.bristol.gov.uk/kyp/?edition=wilts viewed Jan 2017)

1924 Ordnance Survey map (Wiltshire your place website http://maps.bristol.gov.uk/kyp/?edition=wilts viewed Jan 2017)

1970 Ordnance Survey map (https://www.old-maps.co.uk/#/ viewed Jan 2017)

Aerial Photographs

1946 RAF aerial photograph (Historic England Archives, viewed Jan 2017)

1985 Ordnance Survey aerial photograph (Historic England Archives, viewed Jan 2017)

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

Designated Heritage Assets

No. Description Designation Period Reference

Broughton Gifford Conservation Area One Grade I Medieval - Grade I - II* - Two Grade II* modern 18 Grade II LB1 Church of St Mary, 13th century Grade I Medieval 1251257 Manor House, 17th century Grade II* & Post- 1251184 LB2 Gates piers, walls and gate Grade II medieval 1251185 Gifford Hall, early 18th century Grade II* & Post- 1262897 LB3 Gate piers and walls Grade II medieval 1263012 The Fox and Hounds Pub, 18th century, Grade Post- LB4 Grade II 1262913 II Listed Building medieval Mill Farmhouse, mid-18th century, Grade II Post- LB5 Grade II 1251232 Listed Building medieval Post- LB6 Hollybrook House, late 18th century Grade II 1262865 medieval

Non-designated Heritage Assets

No. Description Period Reference

Bronze Age round barrow, cropmark. Internal diameter 1 Prehistoric 1579369 17m Probable medieval settlement visible as earthworks on 1579367 2 AP’s and Lidar on The Common. Rectilinear enclosures, Medieval MWI73893 linear banks and ditches, pond, field boundary, settlement 1579403 3 Narrow ridge and furrow, possibly no longer extant Post-medieval 1579392 MWI73913 Undated Square enclosures, possibly part of medieval Undated / 4 MWI1894 settlement. House platforms shown on 1971 AP medieval Ditch of uncertain date visible as cropmark on air photos, 1579384 5 lies close to a bronze age barrow, possibly curving to avoid Undated MWI1931 it. 6 Possible field boundaries (post-medieval?) Undated MWI1896

Previous Archaeological Works

No. Description Period Reference

Evaluation at Norrington Common, 2012, AC Archaeology. Roman / A Targeted anomalies identified by geophysical survey. EWI7889 modern Modern drains, Roman ditches and structure. Geophysical Survey, Land at Roundponds Farm, 2014, EWI8401 B Archaeological Services WYAS. No anomalies detected. Modern 1608778 19th agriculture. Possible earlier ridge and furrow.

Assets not shown on figures or referenced in the text

1579402 1579386 1579424 1579423 MWI1895 MWI73903 MWI73912 MWI1906 1579404 1579405 Ridge and furrow MWI31472 Medieval MWI73915 MWI73914 1579394 MWI73907 1579407 1579426 MWI73927 MWI73912 MWI73916 1579425 MWI73926 Possible hollow, undated earthworks, not plotted Undated MWI1917 Broughton House, 17th century farmstead. Only farmhouse Post-medieval MWI68585 survives Common Farm, 18th century farmstead. Partial loss of buildings Post-medieval MWI68586 Gifford Hall, 18th century farmstead, partially extant Post-medieval MWI68587 Eggerton House 18th century farmstead (Eggerton Villa) Post-medieval MWI68654 Out Farm at Eggerton House Farm Modern MWI68655 Mill Farm, 18th century farmstead Post-medieval MWI68635 Church Farm, 19th century farmstead, partial loss Modern MWI68652 Lower Farm, 19th century farmstead Modern MWI68653 Leechpool Farm, out farm, 19th century Modern MWI68631 The Pightle, farmstead, 19th century Modern MWI68664 Grade II Listed Buildings Modern 1487458 Strict Baptist Chapel, Grade II Listed Historic Building Record of the Methodist Chapel, Broughton EWI7151 Modern Gifford, 2010, Michael Heaton Heritage Consultants 1608104 144 The Street, house built c.1700 Post-medieval 515908