Norrington Solar Farm Ltd
Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
May 2017
Cultur al H eritag e Impact Assessment Norrington Sol ar F arm Ltd
Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd
Project No: B2281200 Document Title: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment Document No.: NSF-CH01 Revision: V1 Date: May 2017 Client Name: Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Project Manager: Ewan Pringle Author: Robert J. McMorran
Jacobs U.K. Limited
95 Bothwell Street Glasgow, UK G2 7HX +44 (0)141 243 8000 +44 (0)141 243 8757 www.jacobs.com
© Copyright 2017 Jacobs U.K. Limited. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright.
Limitation: This report has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of Jacobs’ Client, and is subject to, and issued in accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the Client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this report by any third party.
Document history and status
Revision Date Description By Review Approved
V1 11/05/17 Final draft for issue RM GT PM
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd i Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Contents Executive Summary ...... 3 1. Introduction ...... 4 1.1 Site Location ...... 4 1.2 The As-Built Development ...... 4 1.3 Scope of the Assessment ...... 5 2. Legislation and Planning Policy Context ...... 6 2.1 Legislation, Policy and Guidance ...... 6 2.2 Historic England – Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3 ...... 7 2.3 Local Policy ...... 8 3. Methodology ...... 10 3.1 Desk-Based Assessment ...... 10 3.2 Professional Guidance ...... 10 3.3 Assessment of Significance of Heritage Asset Impacts ...... 10 4. Historical Background ...... 13 5. Baseline Conditions ...... 15 5.1 Designated Heritage Assets ...... 15 6. Impact Assessment ...... 20 6.1 Assessment of Impacts on Listed Buildings ...... 20 6.2 Grade I & II* Listed Buildings within 2km of the Development Site ...... 20 6.3 Grade II Listed Buildings within 1km of the Development Site...... 24 6.4 Grade II Listed Buildings within Broughton Gifford Conservation Area ...... 25 6.5 Conservation Areas ...... 27 6.6 Historic Parks and Gardens ...... 27 7. Summary ...... 29 8. Conclusion ...... 30 9. References ...... 31
Appendix A. Landscape Mitigation Detail Design ...... 32
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd ii Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Executive Summary
A Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment has been undertaken by Jacobs of the existing Norrington Solar Farm (hereafter referred to as ‘Norrington Solar Farm’) on land at Norrington Lane, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire. It accompanies a minor material amendment application in respect of planning permission W/12/02072/FUL. This report and heritage impact assessment was undertaken by Robert J. McMorran and is a Senior Archaeologist at Jacobs. He is a full Member of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (MCIfA) and has over 15 years’ experience in the heritage sector. Additional contributions to the assessment were provided by Gareth Talbot (MCIfA), Principal Archaeologist at Jacobs who has over 17 years’ experience in the heritage sector.
The application site is on land west of 198 Norrington Lane, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire, with grid reference ST 877648. The application site extends to land for the solar PV panel arrays and associated development such as invertors, substation, tracks and fencing. The site is located approximately 7km to the north-northeast of Trowbridge and c. 700m from the centre of Broughton Gifford. The solar farm lies within an area of gently sloping farmland consisting of four fields bounded by mature hedgerow interspersed with deciduous trees at an elevation of c. 50m AOD. The wider landscape is rural in character with significant areas of urbanisation identified, particularly evident 2.3km to the east-southeast at Melksham. The northern extent of Broughton Gifford Conservation Area skirts the southwestern development boundary.
A previous Heritage Statement was submitted by Aardvark EM Ltd to Wiltshire Council in support of a planning application (Planning Application No. W/12/02072/FUL), within the same development boundary as the existing Norrington Solar Farm. This application was approved on 25th June 2013. However, the as-built design does not conform to the original approved plan.
This assessment has been prepared to address the legislative and planning policy requirements covering the conservation and management of the historic environment focusing on designated heritage assets within 2km of the Norrington Solar Farm. This study area was chosen to encompass any heritage assets which may have the potential to be impacted by the development. The assessment has identified whether impacts have materially changed in comparison to the project for which consent was granted on 25th June 2013.
Within the 2km study area 111 cultural heritage assets have been identified. These consist of Grade I, Grade II* and Grade II Listed Buildings. Additionally, two Conservation Areas and one Historic Park and Garden were identified.
The Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment of the Norrington Solar Farm has identified non-significant adverse impacts on the settings of Gifford Hall, The Hayes and Broughton Gifford Conservation Area. The impacts identified and significance of them are the same or lower than those associated with the consented scheme, making them acceptable. These impacts are likely to be reduced further as the landscape planting at the southern boundary of the Norrington Solar Farm matures.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
1. Introduction
Jacobs was commissioned by Norrington Solar Farm Limited to undertake a Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment of the existing Norrington Solar Farm within land west of Norrington Lane (hereafter referred to as ‘the solar farm’), Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire SN12 8LR (NGR E387799 N164803). It accompanies a minor material amendment application in respect of planning permission W/12/02072/FUL. The requirement of the brief was to undertake a review of previous documentation submitted for the approved plan, to ascertain whether potential impacts on surrounding heritage assets have reduced or increased as a result of the now operational as-built development.
1.1 Site Location
The application site is on land west of 198 Norrington Lane, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire, with grid reference ST 877648. The application site extends to land for the solar PV panel arrays and associated development such as invertors, substation, tracks and fencing. The solar farm is located approximately 7km to the north-northeast of Trowbridge and c. 700m from the centre of Broughton Gifford. It lies within an area of gently sloping farmland consisting of four fields bound by mature hedgerow interspersed with deciduous trees at an elevation of c. 50m AOD. The wider landscape is rural in character with significant areas of urbanisation present, which is particularly evident 2.3km to the east-southeast at Melksham. The northern extent of Broughton Gifford Conservation Area skirts the southwestern boundary of the solar farm.
1.2 The As-Built Development
The solar farm is built within the same development boundary as the approved project but with a different layout. In summary, it contains more rows of PV panels and a smaller number of inverters than the approved plan. A more detailed description of the differences between the approved and as built projects is given in section 2 of the Planning Statement that accompanies the MMA application referred to above.
Installed solar panels are 2.28m high, a decrease of 0.69m from the original approved panel height, and are located within the four fields which comprise the solar farm. The as-built plan left the south-eastern corner of Field 2 free from PV arrays as well as a section of Field 4 and a narrow strip along the path of the pylons crossing the site in contrast to the approved plan, that illustrated PV panels placed in rows further apart and occupying the whole area of the fields (refer to section 2.1 Site Location in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Aardvark EM Ltd, February 2013 for field reference numbers).
Eight inverter housings painted in green (to blend with the surrounding vegetation) are located in groups along the fences of the development rather than the fourteen inverter housings that were approved.
A wooden screening panel is located to the eastern side of three inverter housings, on the eastern side of the solar farm and one on the south, placed following discussions with local neighbours.
Landscape planting has been undertaken, and this is shown in the Landscape Mitigation Detail Design (Appendix A).
The physical differences between the consented solar farm and the Norrington Solar Farm are outlined in Table 1.1 below.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Table 1: Physical differences between the consented solar farm and Norrington Solar Farm
Item Approved As-built Minor Material Change (W/12/02072/FUL) Panel Rows (number) 93 155 Increase of 62 Rows Panel Style 6 x landscape 2 x portrait Immaterial Panel foundations 2 leg 1 leg Immaterial Panel Height (max) 2.97m 2.28m Decrease of 0.69 m Panel Height (minimum) 0.9 0.8 Decrease of 0.1 m Panel Width 5.95m 3.33m Reduction by 44% Gaps to hedge 10m 10m in majority of areas. 5- N/A. LEMP and ecological 8m in number of areas assessment confirm that the aims of the gaps are achieved by as-built Pond enhancements Various requirements from Completed 2017 N/A LEMP Landscaping Various Completed 2017 N/A Swales Around southern part of Completed 2017 N/A fields Noise attenuation None (no requirement or Around sides of 2 inverters Noise attenuation x3 condition on noise levels) in eastern field and now 1 in the most southern field Tracks See plan Alternative layout within the Immaterial site. Inverter size 29.72 m2 19.32 m2 Decrease of 10.4 m2 Inverter height 2.9m 2.4m Decrease of 0.5 m Inverter numbers 14 8 Reduction by 6 Inverter Area 416 m2 154 m2 Decrease of 262 m2 Substation size 29.83 m2 12.32 m2 Decrease of 17.5 m2 Substation height 3.2m 2.5m Decrease of 0.7 m Fence Height 2.2m 1.8m Decrease of 0.4 m Fence type Deer Fence Green Mesh Fence Different in appearance.
1.3 Scope of the Assessment
The assessment has been produced to evaluate designated cultural heritage assets within 2km of the solar farm, including Scheduled Monuments (SMs), Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, Historic Battlefield Sites, World Heritage Sites and Gardens and Designed Landscapes.
The objective is to undertake an assessment of impacts on cultural heritage assets associated with the Norrington Solar Farm.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
2. Legislation and Planning Policy Context
2.1 Legislation, Policy and Guidance
This Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment has been considered with regard to all relevant national, regional and local planning policy and guidance.
National Planning Policy Framework 2012, paragraph 128, 132, 134, 135 and 139
Historic England: The Setting of Heritage Assets: a guidance document (2011)
Historic England’s Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3 (2015)
English Heritage Conservation Principles (2008)
National Heritage Act 1983 (amended 2002)
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
Wiltshire Core Strategy (2015)
2.1.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012
In March 2012, the Government published the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which superseded Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (PPS5) as Government Policy on the management of change to the historic environment in England.
Paragraph 17 of the NPPF sets out the core planning principles which should underpin plan-making and decision taking. Bullet 10 determines that planning should “conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of this and future generations”.
The overarching policy and guidance for the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment have been formulated within Chapter 12 of the NPPF and build upon the core planning principle for the appropriate conservation of heritage assets. The framework classifies 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” (NPPF, Glossary).
Under this reviewed policy document archaeological sites, buildings, parks and gardens, conservation areas, battlefields or other aspects of the historic environment that have significance because of their historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic interest are considered heritage assets. These heritage assets include both designated sites and non-designated sites identified by the LPA and must be a consideration in the planning process due to their heritage interest.
The theme running throughout the NPPF is that: “Development that is sustainable should go ahead, without delay – a presumption in favour of sustainable development that is the basis for every plan, and every decision.” Policies outlined in the document consider both the treatment of the assets themselves and their setting in the landscape, which are the primary material considerations for heritage assets involved in the development planning process. The most relevant paragraphs to this project are detailed below.
2.1.2 Paragraph 128
“In determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
proposal on their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary. Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation.”
The methodology section within this report details the appropriate measures undertaken for the impact assessment that ensure compliance with Paragraph 128.
2.1.3 Paragraph 132
“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. 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.”
The significance of any heritage assets potentially affected by the proposed development have been evaluated preceding an assessment of impacts upon both the asset and its setting. This has determined the importance of the asset and whether any impacts upon it can be considered substantial harm.
2.1.4 Paragraph 134
“Where a development proposal 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, including securing its optimum viable use”.
2.1.5 Paragraph 135
“The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.”
2.1.6 Paragraph 139
“Non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest that are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled monuments, should be considered subject to the policies for designated heritage assets.”
This report includes a detailed assessment of designated assets in order to determine their significance and sensitivity to the development.
2.2 Historic England – Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3
This document mainly offers guidance and advice regarding consideration of the setting of heritage assets. The guidance was produced by Historic England and is contextualised by NPPF and the related guidance in the National Planning Practice Guide.
There are useful concepts regarding setting illustrated in the document, and it lays out the recommended procedure for assessing the effects a development proposal may have on the surrounding assets and their settings. The document defines setting as the surroundings in which an asset is experienced, and discusses the effects that developments can have on the different types of setting heritage assets have.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
“The contribution of setting to the significance of a heritage asset is often expressed by reference to views, a purely visual impression of an asset or place which can be static or dynamic, including a variety of views of, across, or including that asset, and views of the surroundings from or through the asset, and may intersect with, and incorporate the settings of numerous heritage assets.” (Paragraph 5)
Therefore this assessment takes into account the setting of all identified heritage assets and determines the impact that the proposed development may have on them. It is understood that views to and from the heritage asset, as well as any meaningful intervisibility that it shares with its surrounding landscape, can constitute significance. Detailed consideration of these views has been undertaken and any relevant impacts, with mitigation measures where appropriate, have been highlighted.
“Settings of heritage assets change over time. Understanding this history of change will help to determine how further development within the asset’s setting is likely to affect the contribution made by setting to the significance of the heritage asset. Settings of heritage assets which closely resemble the setting in which the asset was constructed are likely to contribute to significance but settings which have changed may also themselves enhance significance, for instance where townscape character has been shaped by cycles of change and creation over the long term.” (Paragraph 9)
As part of this assessment, the changes to an asset’s setting over time will be considered where appropriate. This will allow the significance of the setting’s contribution to the heritage value of an asset to be understood.
“Protection of the setting of heritage assets need not prevent change; indeed especially where the setting has been compromised by poor development change may be positive. Most places are within the setting of a heritage asset and are subject to some degree of change over time. NPPF policies, together with the guidance on their implementation in the Planning Policy Guidance (PPG), provide the framework for the consideration of change affecting the setting of undesignated and designated heritage assets as part of the decision‐taking process.” (Paragraph 11)
Historic England, therefore, are not seeking to ensure that heritage assets do not preclude development and their protection should not prevent change. However, the more important a designated asset the greater the weight should be given to its conservation. This assessment will identify the significance of designated and non- designated heritage assets and apply appropriate weight to the potential impact on them.
2.3 Local Policy
2.3.1 Wiltshire Core Strategy
The Wiltshire Core Strategy Development Plan was formally adopted on 20th January 2015. The plan provides an overarching planning policy framework for Wiltshire up to 2026. Core Policy 58 addresses the conservation of Wiltshire’s historic environment. The policy 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.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Distinctive element 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.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
3. Methodology
3.1 Desk-Based Assessment
The assessment focuses solely on the potential effects on the setting and potential visual impacts of the Norrington Solar Farm on designated heritage assets within the study area. There are no non-designated assets within 1km of the application site boundary and so no attempt to evaluate the direct impacts of the Norrington Solar Farm on non-designated cultural heritage assets has been conducted.
A search of designated heritage assets including Grades I, II* and II Listed Buildings, Scheduled Monuments, Conservation Areas, Historic Battlefield Sites, World Heritage Sites and Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes was conducted to 2km of the development boundary. The National Heritage List for England (NHLE) was consulted in order to identify designated assets within the study area.
Historical databases and various archives were consulted in order to undertake the DBA. The main sources which were consulted include: The National Heritage List for England (https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/) (accessed 09.01.2017); Historic England GIS datasets (https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/data-downloads/) (accessed 10.01.2017); Historic Maps; Previous desk-based assessment conducted by Aardvark EM Ltd (2013) and Southwest Archaeology (2014); Web based resources (e.g. Google Earth).
3.2 Professional Guidance
The assessment has been conducted in accordance with the appropriate professional guidance, which includes: Chartered Institute for Archaeologists Code of Conduct (CIfA, 2014a) Chartered Institute for Archaeologists Standards and guidance for historic environment desk-based Assessment (CIfA, 2014b)
3.3 Assessment of Significance of Heritage Asset Impacts
The NPPF defines significance of a heritage asset as the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest and suggests that heritage interest maybe archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic (DCLG, 2012).
For the purposes of this report, the significance of identified heritage assets was based on a four point scale of High, Medium, Low and Negligible, based on professional opinion informed by the guidance provided in Conservation Principles (English Heritage, 2008) and the NPPF. Significance was assessed in relation to the four categories of heritage interest identified in the NPPF. Table 2 summarises the factors used to evaluate the importance/significance of heritage assets.
Setting is recognised as contributing to the significance of heritage assets and the NPPF defines setting as the ‘surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced’, the extent of which ‘is not fixed and may change over time’ (DCLG 2012, 56). The assessment of the setting of heritage assets was undertaken in accordance with the guidance provided in Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets (Historic England 2015).
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Table 2 : Factors determining the importance/significance of cultural heritage assets
Importance/Significance Criteria
High Heritage assets identified in national policy as being of the highest level of significance, notably: Scheduled Monuments; Grade I and Grade II* Listed Buildings, Registered Parks and Gardens, Registered Battlefields, and remains of inscribed international significance, such as World Heritage Sites.
Moderate Grade II Listed Buildings Conservation Areas Grade II Registered Parks Sites of high archaeological resource value as identified through consultation with local authority archaeologist Historic Townscapes with historic integrity in that the assets that constitute their make-up are clearly legible
Low Locally important historic or archaeological sites. Parks and gardens of local interest
Negligible Heritage assets whose values are compromised by poor preservation or survival or of contextual associations to justify inclusion into a higher grade.
3.3.1 Assessment of Magnitude and Significance of Impact
The assessment of magnitude and significance of impact was assessed using professional judgement guided by the methodology provided in Volume 11, Section 3 Part 2 of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Cultural Heritage (HA208/07), as this method provides a robust means of assessing the magnitude and significance of impact.
The magnitude of impact is the degree of change that would be experienced by a heritage asset and its setting if the scheme and recommended mitigation measures were completed, as compared with a ‘do-nothing’ situation. Magnitude of impact is assessed without reference to the significance of the heritage asset, and may include physical impacts on the asset, or impacts on their setting or amenity value. The criteria for the assessment of the magnitude of impact are set out in in Tables 3 and 4 below.
Table 3: Magnitude of impact on cultural heritage assets
Magnitude Criteria
Major Change to most or all key archaeological materials, such that the resource is totally altered. Change to key historic building elements, such that the resource is totally altered. Change to most or all key historic landscape elements, parcels or components; extreme visual effects; gross change of noise or change to sound quality; fundamental changes to use or access; resulting in total change to historic landscape character unit. Comprehensive changes to setting. Moderate Changes to many key archaeological materials, such that the resource is clearly modified. Change to many key historic building elements, such that the resource is significantly modified. Changes to some key historic landscape elements, parcels or components, visual change to many key aspects of the historic landscape, noticeable differences in noise or sound quality, considerable changes to use or access; resulting in moderate changes to historic landscape character. Considerable changes to setting that affect the character of the asset. Minor Changes to key archaeological materials, such that the asset is slightly altered. Change to key historic building elements, such that the asset is slightly different. Changes to few key historic landscape elements, parcels or components, slight visual changes to few key aspects of historic landscape, limited changes to noise levels or sound quality, slight changes to use or access; resulting in limited changes to historic landscape character. Slight changes to setting. Negligible Very minor changes to archaeological materials or setting.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Magnitude Criteria Slight changes to historic buildings elements or setting that hardly affect it. Very minor changes to key historic landscape elements, parcels or components, virtually unchanged visual effects, very slight changes in noise levels or sound quality, very slight changes to use or access; resulting in a very small change to historic landscape character. No Change No change to elements, parcels or components; no visual or audible changes; no changes arising from amenity or community factors. Source: Table 5.3, 6.3 and 7.3 of DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 2 (HA208/07), Annex 5-7
The significance of impact was determined using professional judgement, informed by the combination of the significance of the heritage asset and the magnitude of impact. This was achieved using the matrix illustrated below in Table 4. Given levels of significance of impact were defined which apply equally to adverse and beneficial impacts.
Table 4: Matrix for determination of impact significance
Value Very High High Medium Low Negligible Magnitude Large/ Moderate/ Slight/ Slight Major Very Large Very Large Large Moderate Large/ Moderate/ Neutral/ Moderate Moderate Slight Very Large Large Slight Moderate/ Moderate/ Neutral/ Neutral/ Minor Slight Large Slight Slight Slight Neutral/ Neutral/ Neutral Negligible Slight Slight Slight Slight Neutral No Change Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral
Source: Table 5.4 of DMRB Volume 11, Section 31 Part 2 (HA208/07), Annex 5
3.3.2 Assessment Limitations
It is assumed that official data provided by public bodies is accurate and up-to-date.
A request was made to undertake a site visit to Gifford Hall, which is Grade II* listed (see Table 5), in order to assess the intervisibility of the building with the solar farm, however this request was declined by the owner of that property. Due to this, the assessment has been undertaken using information from previous studies, and from desk-based literature and map analysis.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
4. Historical Background 1
The village of Broughton Gifford, a parish in the hundred of Bradford, is first encountered in a description of the grant of the “Vill of Bradeford” by King Ethelred in AD1001 to the monastery of Shaftesbury. ‘Broctune’, a name of Saxon origin, is mentioned in the Doomsday Book purportedly meaning dwelling by the brook. The entry names Humprhey de I’Isle as the holder of the land; three thanes held it jointly, prior to 1066. It lists an estimated population of 100 – 140, with two mills, 12 acres of meadow, eight acres of pasture and woodland one mile long and two furlongs wide, with a total value of £10. Of the two mills, one was attached to the manor and the other belonged to a tenement called Greenhill.
From 1160 – 1269 the manor was held by the Dunstanville family and then it passed to John the first Baron Gifford who died in 1299. It passed through inheritance to the Audleys in the 1300s, Troutbecks and Holes in the 1400s, Talbots in the 1500s, then via the Hortons and Roberts from 1560 until it was sold in 1789 to Benjamin Hobhouse. In the 17th century there was no lord of the manor.
In the Tax list of 1334 Broughton Gifford contributed 70 shillings to the total for Bradford on Avon of 582s 8d. A total of 136 taxpayers were recorded.
Early farming practices concentrated on corn in contrast with the later preference for dairy farming. The lack of local transport, such as carriers, in the area meant that Broughton had to be self-supporting, resulting in home produced food and clothing.
Agriculture was responsible for the majority of employment in the village. In 1299, 310 arable acres were worked every other day from Michaelmas to August by the tenants, and an acre would be ploughed and harrowed at the winter sowing under the feudal system. Other tenants would give the usual cocks and hens as well as a cash sum for their land holdings. In the 17th century Broughton was well known for its geese and the locals were often referred to as “Broughton Ganders”.
New markets for wool at the beginning of the 16th century meant that the breeding of sheep became more profitable than corn, contributing to a thriving handloom weaving industry in the area. There were half as many textile workers as agriculture workers. James Terumber, also known as James Tucker, a rich clothier and a principle benefactor of Trowbridge, bought a house at Broughton Gifford. Thomas Kitson, a cloth exporter during the reign of Henry VIII specialised in white broadcloth, some of which was produced in Broughton Gifford. Due to increased mechanisation of cloth production in the early 19th century the handloom weaving industry declined and the occupation died out by 1860.
Changes in descriptions of the glebe2 land suggest that land inclosures were made between 1700 and 1783, forming the present agricultural landscape. This inclosure excluded the common, an open area of land within the northern extent of the village, despite the fact that all other arable commons were enclosed in 1783. This was due to the poor condition of the land which was often waterlogged. Common rights existed which were responsible for the erection of cottages surrounding the common.
Wheat, oats and peas were recorded as being the main crops in the early 1800s. In 1841, the tithe maps show 254 arable acres, 1,207 acres given over to pasture, 70 acres for houses and gardens, 20 acres for the railway, one acre for plantation and 83 acres for river, roads and waste.
In the 14th century and as a result of the plague of 1349 many holdings fell vacant. In 1851 there was a scarlet fever epidemic resulting in 17 deaths caused by poor sanitation. Areas of the village are prone to flooding, and these have been recorded as having great impact in 1935, 1968 and 2008, when roads have been made impassable.
Before 1762 an old pack road existed which consisted of a packhorse bridge near Monkton House linking Broughton and Whaddon. A turnpike road was constructed from Melksham, linking Broughton Gifford to Holt
1 Adapted from Chettle et al, 1953 2 Glebe – an area of land within an ecclesiastical parish used to support a parish priest.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
and then Bradford, now the B3107. By 1903, the Wiltshire railways were completed and a cheaply constructed wooden halt was opened at Broughton in 1903, closing in 1955.
In 1801 the population was 613 rising to 741 by 1841, dropping slightly to 649 by 1901. The most common Broughton names as recorded in 1860 were Mortimer, Keen, Cantelo, Gore, Wakely, Harding, Bull and Collett.
The Mortimer charity was founded in 1904 by Robert Mortimer, the income of which was paid at Christmas to the poor. He also left a scholarship to provide for the maintenance of two Broughton Gifford children at secondary schools.
A Conservation Area was designated in 1975 and listed properties of special architectural interest such as St. Mary’s Church, the Manor House, Hollybrook House, Broughton House and Gifford Hall. Twentieth century development includes the building of Curtis Orchard and Newleaze, the development of a small industrial estate along with domestic housing of varying sizes. This has increased the size of the village linking the original settlement with the area around the Common (Chettle et al, 1953)(Wiltshire Council, 2011).
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
5. Baseline Conditions
A study area of 2km from the development was decided on to assess the impact of the Norrington Solar Farm on designated heritage assets including Grade I, II* and II Listed Buildings. In addition, there are two Conservation Areas and one Historic Park and Garden within the 2km study area. The assets are listed in Table 5 below.
5.1 Designated Heritage Assets
Table 5: Listed Buildings within 2km Study Area
Asset List Entry No. Name Distance from Value No. Solar Farm (km)3
Grade I within 2km Study Area 1 1251257 Church of St Mary 1.48 High Grade II* within 2km Study Area 2 1262897 Gifford Hall 0.28 High 3 1194686 Christ Church 1.05 High 4 1251184 Manor House 1.13 High 5 1250764 Barn at Church Farm 1.74 High 6 1250853 Church of St Michaels and All Angels 1.79 High Grade II within 2km Study Area 7 1251169 Old Farmhouse 0.30 Medium 8 1263012 Gate piers and walls to front of Gifford 0.30 Medium Hall 9 1250908 Broughton Gifford Strict Baptist 0.44 Medium Chapel 10 1251177 65 0.48 Medium 11 1437698 Broughton Gifford War Memorial 0.53 Medium 12 1251173 Gate piers and gates to front of 0.54 Medium Broughton House 13 1250909 Broughton House 0.58 Medium 14 1263189 The Hayes 0.59 Medium 15 1262865 Hollybrook House with front railings 0.61 Medium 16 1194728 46 and 47, Folly Lane 0.62 Medium 17 1364116 Minster House 0.71 Medium 18 1285570 60, Folly Lane 0.72 Medium 19 1251187 30, The Street 0.73 Medium 20 1250755 Lodge to Great Chalfield Manor 0.75 Medium 21 1262913 The Fox and Hounds 0.87 Medium
3 Measured from the heritage asset to the nearest development boundary.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Asset List Entry No. Name Distance from Value No. Solar Farm (km)3
22 1250754 Newhouse Farmhouse 0.99 Medium 23 1021753 Church Farmhouse 0.99 Medium 24 1251185 Walls, gate piers and gates to front of 1.03 Medium the Manor House 25 1194444 Old Brewery House 1.07 Medium 26 1262859 Egerton House 1.07 Medium 27 1021750 Garden Walls and rear gate piers at 1.08 Medium Shaw House 28 1251129 178 1.09 Low 29 1021751 Stables at Shaw House 1.10 Medium 30 1364149 Shaw House 1.10 Medium 31 1194762 Slade's Farmhouse 1.11 Medium 32 1364119 75, School Lane 1.11 Medium 33 1285698 The Old Malthouse 1.13 Medium 34 1364150 Gazebo in gardens to left of Shaw 1.13 Medium House entrance front 35 1021752 Gates piers, gates and front wall and 1.14 Medium railings to The Old Malthouse 36 1250907 186 187 1.16 Low 37 1194450 227, Bath Road 1.18 Medium 38 1263188 Gordano Farm 1.20 Medium 39 1021765 Whitley Farmhouse 1.22 Medium 40 1250661 The White Hart 1.22 Medium 41 1194703 Lagard House 1.24 Medium 42 1194748 74, School Lane 1.24 Medium 43 1250678 Prospect Farm 1.24 Medium 44 1250566 Nos 150 and 151 with front railings 1.28 Medium and Gate 45 1021773 151 and 152, West Hill 1.29 Low 46 1263187 146, Bath Road 1.32 Medium 47 1285569 Barn at Whitley Farmhouse 1.32 Medium 48 1364115 Mounting block to right of farm 1.32 Medium entrance of Whitley Farmhouse 49 1194727 120, First Lane 1.33 Medium 50 1021766 The Malt House 1.34 Medium 51 1364151 Entrance gate piers to drive of Shaw 1.34 Medium House
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Asset List Entry No. Name Distance from Value No. Solar Farm (km)3
52 1250564 142 143, Bath Road 1.35 Medium 53 1263190 56 57, Bath Road 1.36 Medium 54 1251266 Cross Base in the churchyard about 4 1.39 Medium metres east of Church of St Mary 55 1263186 140 141, Bath Road 1.39 Medium 56 1251190 Two unidentified monuments in the 1.40 Medium churchyard about 6 metres south east of chancel of Church of St Mary 57 1251191 Rudman monument in the churchyard 1.41 Medium about 7 metres south of chancel of Church of St Mary 58 1364121 Pear Tree Inn 1.41 Medium 59 1251272 Three dark monuments in the 1.42 Medium churchyard about 16 metres south of chancel of Church of St Mary 60 1262860 Two monuments In the churchyard 1.43 Medium about 19 metres south of nave of Church of St Mary 61 1251192 Brook Cottages 1.44 Medium 62 1021764 209, Corsham Road 1.47 Medium 63 1364114 Multum in Parvo 1.49 Low 64 1021692 40 and 42, Bath Road 1.50 Low 65 1250562 Number 133 with front railings 1.51 Medium 66 1193398 Shurnhold Farmhouse 1.52 Medium 67 1263185 West Farmhouse 1.52 Medium 68 1263131 The Clock Tower 1.58 Medium 69 1263114 The Old Farmhouse 1.59 Medium 70 1285547 Northey's Farm 1.60 Medium 71 1250570 Turnpike Cottage 1.63 Medium 72 1263194 70 71, Bradford Road 1.63 Medium 73 1250747 72, Bradford Road 1.64 Medium 74 1263193 117, Bradford Road 1.64 Medium 75 1263087 Barn at Manor Farm 1.65 Medium 76 1250575 Vine Cottage with front railings and 1.66 Medium gate 77 1262910 Frying Pan Farmhouse 1.66 Medium 78 1263123 Manor Farmhouse with front walls and 1.67 Medium gates
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Asset List Entry No. Name Distance from Value No. Solar Farm (km)3
79 1250749 Atworth Primary School and School 1.68 Medium House 80 1021691 Shurnhold House 1.69 Medium 81 1262915 Lenton Farm 1.69 Medium 82 1251232 Mill Farmhouse 1.70 Medium 83 1263195 82, Bradford Road 1.70 Medium 84 1250753 89, Bradford Road 1.71 Medium 85 1263011 128, Neston Lane 1.72 Medium 86 1263090 The Foresters Arms 1.73 Medium 87 1263106 The Old Forge 1.73 Medium 88 1250571 Poplar Farmhouse 1.74 Medium 89 1250758 Goss House 1.74 Medium 90 1250760 94, Church Street 1.74 Medium 91 1250761 96, Church Street 1.74 Medium 92 1250825 93a, Church Street 1.74 Medium 93 1263086 95, Church Street 1.74 Medium 94 1250762 The Old Rectory 1.75 Medium 95 1263059 Church Farmhouse 1.75 Medium 96 1263111 Barn at Poplar Farm 1.75 Medium 97 1250768 Two unidentified monuments in the 1.77 Medium churchyard between 15 and 16 metres east of tower of Church of St Michael and All Angels 98 1263044 Four unidentified monuments in the 1.78 Medium churchyard on south side of path and 11 and 18 metres east of tower of Church of St Michael and All Angels 99 1263045 Three unidentified monuments in the 1.78 Medium churchyard between 1 and 5 metres east of chancel of Church of St Michael and All Angels 100 1263089 105 106, Church Street 1.78 Medium 101 1250766 Three Rogers Monument in 1.79 Medium churchyard about 1 metre north of tower of Church of St Michael and All Angels 102 1250767 Three unidentified monuments in the 1.79 Medium churchyard on north side of path and about 12 metres north east of tower of church of St Michael and All Angels
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Asset List Entry No. Name Distance from Value No. Solar Farm (km)3
103 1250874 Unidentified monument in the 1.80 Medium churchyard about 6 metres north of tower of church of St Michael and All Angels 104 1263043 Four monuments in the churchyard 1.80 Medium between 12 and 17 metres north of tower of Church of St Michael and All Angels 105 1250765 Newan monument in the churchyard 1.82 Medium about 23 metres north west of tower of Church of St Michael and All Angels 106 1263088 103, Church Street 1.83 Medium 107 1021775 Whitley House 1.85 Medium 108 1285548 Barn to rear of Whitley House 1.85 Medium Conservation Areas within 2km Study Area 109 Broughton Gifford Conservation Area 0.00 Medium 110 Atworth Conservation Area 1.6 Medium Historic Parks and Gardens within 2km Study Area 111 1001232 Great Chalfield Manor 0.71 High
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
6. Impact Assessment
6.1 Assessment of Impacts on Listed Buildings
There is one Grade I Listed Building, five Grade II* Listed Buildings, 17 Grade II Listed Buildings, two Conservation Areas and one Garden and Designed Landscape within the 2km study area. These have been considered in the impact assessment below.
Grade II Listed Buildings beyond 1km of the development are considered sufficiently distant and of a lower sensitivity to be affected and have not been considered any further in this assessment.
Compared to the consented solar farm, in summary the Norrington Solar Farm (as shown in Table 1 above) has a number of changes comprising the reduction in height of the solar panels, the introduction of landscape planting along the southern boundary, a reduction in the number of inverters, the reduction in height of the boundary fence, and a change in style of the fence. This has resulted in an overall reduced visual impact associated with the Norrington Solar Farm compared with the consented solar farm, and this has been taken into account in the impact assessment below.
6.2 Grade I & II* Listed Buildings within 2km of the Development Site
6.2.1 Church of St Mary, Grade I Listed Building (Asset 1)
This high value asset is located c. 1.48km to the south of the development boundary within a triangular plot of land on the southern extent of the settlement of Broughton Gifford. The asset is described as an Anglican parish church of c. 13th century origin but restored in 1878 by G.G. Scott. The church is constructed of rubble stone and limestone ashlar with a stone slate roof with coped verges and cross finials. Previous elements of past iterations of the church (e.g. 14th century chapel and 15th century west tower) are present testifying to its multi- phase construction.
The setting of the asset is characterised by small-scale rural settlement set within a wider agricultural landscape. Land divisions within the wider landscape are likely to be the result of post-medieval enclosure overlaying an earlier medieval system of land division. The current curtilage of the asset appears to represent a reduced land take than its original extent, with the adjacent land to the north of the asset occupied by buildings of a later date. Main views are primarily oriented to the south-southwest with views to the north impeded by adjacent development.
Intervisibility with the Norrington Solar Farm is not anticipated as views to the north are obstructed by adjacent development. It is anticipated that the development will have no change on the heritage value of the asset. The significance of the impact is predicted to be neutral.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
No change.
6.2.2 Gifford Hall, Grade II* (Asset 2)
Gifford Hall is located c. 280m to the southwest of Norrington Solar Farm within the settlement of Broughton Gifford. The asset is described as a detached house of early 18th century origin (c. 1700 AD). The two-storey house with attic was constructed with a limestone ashlar and has a hipped stone slate roof with two stone chimney stacks. The interior of the asset displays good original early 18th century fittings. While 20th century structural elements are present within the current fabric the asset is a good example of a little altered early 18th century classical house. Gifford Hall lies within Broughton Gifford Conservation Area and is considered to be of high value.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Country houses exist in substantial numbers throughout England occupying a special place in English architectural history as considerable effort was lavished on their design. They are a diverse group ranging widely in scale and extent (English Heritage, 2011).
The associated gate piers (Asset 11) to the south of the house are Grade II listed and of medium significance. It is likely that the adjacent Grade II listed Old Farmhouse (Asset 10) has a close historic relationship with Gifford Hall given its near contemporaneous construction and is therefore of medium value.
Views from the front of the asset are firmly oriented towards the south and will not be impacted by the development. Rear views extend northwards along a linear plot of land which includes small formal garden features leading to a sparsely wooded area of rough ground surrounded by mature hedgerow.
Figure 1. Extract of OS Map of 1889, Sheet 32 (25 inch series), showing Gifford Hall (Asset 2)4
Reference to the 1st edition OS map of 1889, Sheet 32 (25 inch series) (Figure 1) indicates that views to the north were originally far more restricted than they are at present with a line of evergreens lining the curtilage of the gardens to the rear of the asset. None of the present garden features are depicted so are likely to be later additions. The land beyond the rear garden area is also more heavily wooded than is currently present
4 Red line denotes the indicative southern boundary of the development site
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
suggesting that a more secluded atmosphere was sought for this area rather than the more open views that are currently present.
A property in close proximity to the north facing elevation of Gifford Hall is evident on the 1st edition, (OS map of 1889, Sheet 32 (25 inch series)) an element of which is still present today, although much reduced.
The wider setting is one of a rural character consisting of an agricultural landscape interspersed with rural settlement. However, significant modern development is readily identifiable within the wider landscape, including numerous electricity pylons and overhead power cables crossing the development site to a large rectangular sub-station located c. 900m to the northeast of the asset and particularly extensive development within Melksham to the east of Gifford Hall.
Broughton Common lies to the west of the asset and whilst Gifford Hall is a prominent component within the local setting, it is a much later addition with the Common likely to have medieval origins. The immediate setting of Gifford Hall is not without modern intrusions with modern development interspersed with period properties of an earlier date. Indeed, within close proximity to the asset, development and structures of more recent date include unsympathetic agricultural structures c. 40m to the northwest and c. 27m to the east. To the southwest of the asset (c. 50m) a 20th century residential property is identified. While the agricultural buildings adjacent to the asset’s eastern extent do appear on the 1st edition OS map (albeit much reduced in its present form) the present roofing utilises modern materials clashing with the refined nature of Gifford Hall. The present layout to the rear of Gifford Hall is likely to be of recent origin including a swimming pool and water features to the north of the present grounds.
Intervisibility with the solar farm is expected to be very restricted from ground level due to mature hedgerow surrounding the curtilage of the asset. However, views from upper storeys particularly from the attic of the east- facing elevation are anticipated to include views of the solar farm. These views are not expected to be comprehensive but are likely to include elements of Fields 2 and 3 and are also likely to include elements of surrounding modern development (e.g. pylons, overhead power cables, sub-station, Melksham etc). Without recourse to the original architectural plans it is not possible to determine whether the dormer windows currently present in the attic are contemporaneous with the original design or whether they are later additions. It is possible that views of the wider landscape from the attic were never a consideration of the original design of the asset. Indeed, views from the attic should still be considered atypical and cannot be considered a key view integral to the heritage value of Gifford Hall as dormer windows are primarily to allow light into the loft space and extend the functionality of the space rather than to incorporate views outwards to the landscape beyond. Views from the rear first floor are unlikely to be integral to the value of the heritage asset as reference to the 1st edition OS map depicts views to the north as being restricted by vegetation in close proximity and a building adjacent to the west and north facing elevations indicating that these views were considered of less importance. The key view from the asset is to the south (described in the Historic England listing description as “its primary façade”) overlooking the Common creating a visual relationship between the two creating a clear statement of its importance in relation to the surrounding properties that overlook the Common.
Impacts from modern intrusions on the setting of the asset are clearly identifiable in close proximity and within Broughton Common, and these have reduced the significance of Gifford Hall’s setting and its contribution to the heritage value of the asset. Taking this into consideration, the core heritage value of Gifford Hall appears to be primarily derived from its architectural qualities and the retention of interior features, rather than its setting.
Taking the above into account, it is concluded that the Norrington Solar Farm, with reduced heights for the fence, solar panels and inverters; and taking into account the landscape planting at the southern boundary of the solar farm, would have a minor impact on the setting of the asset, and the significance of the impact is predicted to be slight. This is not considered to be a significant impact. Historic England (English Heritage at time of writing) in their response of 22 May 2014 to Wiltshire Council stated that Norrington Solar Farm “would appear to cause harm to the setting” of Gifford Hall and the rating of a minor impact acknowledges this position. However, Historic England did not state that it was their opinion that the development would cause substantial harm to the asset. It is likely that the significance of the impact would be reduced to neutral as the landscape planting at the southern boundary of the Norrington Solar Farm matures. Evidence was submitted to the High Court of Justice on 20th August 2014 by the owner of Gifford Hall containing a series of photographs to illustrate views from the property of Norrington Solar Farm. Unfortunately, the photographic evidence does not state any
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
details of the parameters (e.g. camera used, lens type, whether zoomed in or not, whether compliant with the guidance provided by the Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/11) that were used to take the images and it cannot be ascertained with any clarity whether they are representative of the true visual experience from the asset.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
Potential impacts of the consented solar farm on Gifford Hall were considered as part of the Broughton Gifford Conservation Area. The building itself was not considered as an individual heritage asset, and there was no description of the setting of the building.
The heritage assessment of the Norrington Solar Farm has considered Gifford Hall, its setting and other associated values using a robust and thorough assessment approach, albeit without the benefit of undertaking a site inspection, and has identified a slight adverse significance of effect on the setting of Gifford Hall. This is not considered to be a significant effect. It is further considered that the effects are lower in the as-built solar farm compared to the consented.
6.2.3 Christ Church, Grade II* (Asset 3)
The asset is located c.1.05km to the northeast of the solar farm boundary, adjacent to Corsham Road (B3353) to the south of the settlement of Whitley. The asset is described as an Anglican parish church built in 1837 (the chapel was rebuilt in 1905) by C.E. Ponting at a cost of £20,000 paid for by Charles Awdry. The design of the church was influenced by the Art and Crafts movement and is built in the gothic style. The asset was constructed from squared rubble-stone with ashlar buttresses and consists of a northwest tower and five bay nave. The asset is considered to be of high value.
The asset resides close to a busy junction between Corsham Road, Bath Road and Shaw Hill. The immediate setting consists of significant modern residential development to the west-southwest of the asset and to the north-northwest. A large sub-station is located c. 0.65km to the north-northeast and Whitley Golf Course c. 0.16km, also to the north-northeast. The wider setting consists of an agricultural landscape with concentrations of urban development, particularly extensive at Melksham and Shurnold c. 1km to the southeast.
Views towards the development site are particularly well-screened due to the built environment immediately to the west of the asset and intervening vegetation. Indeed, views to the west, southwest and south of the surrounding landscape are very restricted. No views are anticipated of the development site from the grounds of the asset. If the tower is accessible views may be possible from its upper reaches, however, given the distance from the development and intervening mature hedgerow any views of the development site would be seen within the context of existing development in the wider landscape. Modern intrusions have largely diminished the value of the immediate setting and its contribution to the heritage value of the asset is not thought to be significant. The heritage value of the asset is primarily derived from its architectural qualities.
It is anticipated that the Norrington Solar Farm, with associated reductions in height of the fence, solar panels and inverters, will have no change on the heritage value of the asset. The significance of the impact is predicted to be neutral.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
No change.
6.2.4 Manor House, Grade II* (Asset 4)
The asset is located 1.09km to the south of the development site on the southern fringes of Broughton Gifford and is described as an early 17th century detached stone manor house. The L-plan, two storey house is constructed from random rubble stone with a stone slate roof and ashlar stacks. The asset is of high value.
While the immediate setting to the south of the asset maintains elements of a rural character, including properties of a historic origin that accentuate the heritage value of the asset, this has been greatly diminished by
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
a significant area of adjacent modern housing to the north and east of the asset. Due to its location on the southern fringes of Broughton Gifford it is not anticipated that views of the development site will be possible nor will it impact on the already diminished value of its setting. Main views are oriented to the east and west and will not be impacted by the development.
It is anticipated that the Norrington Solar Farm will have no change upon the present setting of the asset or views to and from the asset. The significance of the impact is predicted to be neutral.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
No change.
6.2.5 Barn at Church Farm, Grade II* (Asset 5); Church of St Michaels and All Angels, Grade II* (Asset 6)
Asset 6 is located 1.78km to the northwest of the development site within the western extent of Atworth. The asset is described as an Anglican parish church of c. 13th century origin but restored in 1878 by G.G. Scott. The church is constructed of rubble stone and limestone ashlar with a stone slate rood with coped verges and cross finials. Previous elements of past iterations of the church (e.g. 14th century chapel and 15th century west tower) are present testifying to its multi-phase construction.
In close proximity (c. 70m to the south) to Asset 6, the Grade II* Barn at Church Farm resides (Asset 5). The asset dates from the 16th century.
Both assets are of high value.
The setting of Asset 6 is rural in character consisting of period residential properties and agricultural buildings interspersed with modern development set within a wider rural landscape. In addition, the associated cemetery within the curtilage of the asset is a component of the asset’s setting.
The immediate setting of the asset is beneficial to its heritage value but slightly diminished by modern development to the east, within Atworth. Intervisibility with the development site is expected to be very restricted from ground level. If intervisibility is possible then it will likely be from the southern extent of the curtilage of the asset as views from this area to the east comprise more open views of the wider landscape. However, given the distance from the development site and intervening vegetation/terrain any impacts would not be of a sufficient level to adversely affect the setting or views from the asset.
Asset 5 broadly shares a similar setting to Asset 6 but is located within an area of agricultural structures. Main views from the asset are to the north-northeast and south-southwest and will not be impacted by the development. Similarly, due to the intervening distance and vegetation it is highly unlikely that there will be any impact on the setting of the asset from the development.
It is anticipated that the Norrington Solar Farm will have no change to the heritage value of both assets. The significance of the impact is predicted to be neutral.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
No change.
6.3 Grade II Listed Buildings within 1km of the Development Site
6.3.1 The Hayes (Asset 14); 46 & 47 Folly Lane (Asset 16); Minster House (Asset 17); 60, Folly Lane (Asset 18)
The Grade II Listed Buildings are located c. 600m – 780m to the north of the development site.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
The four assets generally share a similar setting consisting of a wider rural landscape with concentrations of modern development interspersed with properties of an historic origin. The assets are located in close proximity to Bath Road (A365); and are of medium significance.
Of the four assets it is likely that views from Minster House, 46 & 47 Folly Lane and 60 Folly Lane will be very restricted due to effective screening in the form of built structures and/or vegetative screening in close proximity to the assets. Asset 14, located c. 600m to the north-northwest of the development site, may have more comprehensive views of the development, particularly from the upper storey, due to its proximity to the development site, but intervisibility is likely to be mitigated by the low lying nature of the development and intervening hedgerow in most views.
It is anticipated that the Norrington Solar Farm will have no change on Assets 16, 17 and 18; and would have a minor impact on Asset 14. The significance of the impact on Assets 16, 17 and 18 is predicted to be neutral. A slight impact is predicted for Asset 14. This is not considered to be a significant impact, that is likely to be reduced to neutral as the landscape planting associated with the Norrington Solar Farm matures.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
The assessment of the Norrington Solar Farm has considered The Hayes and its setting using a more robust and thorough assessment approach and has identified a slight adverse significance of effect on the setting of The Hayes. This is not considered to be a significant effect, which will likely be reduced as the landscape planting at the southern boundary of the Norrington Solar Farm matures. It is further considered that the effects are lower in the as-built solar farm compared to the consented.
6.3.2 Lodge to Great Chalfield Manor (Asset 20); Newhouse Farmhouse (Asset 22)
The Grade II Listed Buildings are located approximately 0.86km to the west-southwest of the development boundary. Asset 20 is described as a lodge to Great Chalfield Manor and was designed by Sir Harold Brakspear in c. 1910 for Robert Fuller. The L-plan lodge consists of a coursed rubble stone with a stone slate roof and ashlar stacks. It is located at the entrance to Great Chalfield Manor (a long tree-lined avenue leading southwest to the manor house) adjacent to Coombe Lane. The asset is of medium value.
Asset 22, also located adjacent to Coombe Lane to the west-northwest of Asset 20, is described as a farmhouse of 18th century origin with mid-19th century alterations. The L-plan farmhouse is constructed with a coursed rubble stone with a stone slate roof, coped verges and gable end stone stacks. The asset is of medium value.
The local setting of the assets is largely rural in character residing within an agricultural landscape of post- medieval origin. No intervisibility with the development site is anticipated due to a combination of effective vegetative screening and undulations in the intervening terrain.
It is anticipated that the Norrington Solar Farm would have no change to the heritage value of the assets. The significance of the impact is therefore predicted to be neutral.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
No change.
6.4 Grade II Listed Buildings within Broughton Gifford Conservation Area
Of the nine Grade II Listed Buildings within Broughton Gifford Conservation Area, assets located on the eastern extent of the Conservation Area have the most potential to be impacted by the scheme. The remaining assets are not predicted to have intervisibility with the scheme due to their distance from the development, and the screening effects of the surrounding built environment and intervening vegetation.
The setting within which the assets reside is generally one of small-scale rural settlement with Broughton Common providing a focal point. Historic properties are intermingled with modern residential development
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
particularly evident in the southern portions adjacent to the Conservation Area (e.g. Newleaze Park, Woodpecker Close). The wider landscape consists of agricultural land but significant areas of modern development are identified (particularly to the east within Melksham) comprising residential, industrial and urban infrastructure.
6.4.1 Old Farmhouse (Asset 7)
The asset is located c. 0.31km to the south-southwest of the development site, and is an example of an early 18th century two storey farmhouse constructed from rubble stone with a stone slate roof with coped verge to the right and hip to the left with a stone stack. The asset is of medium value. Main views are oriented to the south and will not be impacted by the scheme.
Intervisibility with the Norrington Solar Farm is not anticipated due to vegetation and built structures in close proximity to the asset which effectively screen it from the solar farm. No change to the heritage value of the asset is therefore predicted and the significance of the impact is predicted to be neutral.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
No change.
6.4.2 Broughton Gifford Strict Baptist Chapel (Asset 9)
The asset is located c. 0.43km to the south-southwest of the development site. The chapel was founded in 1806 and consists of a two storey building constructed from limestone with a Welsh slate hipped roof. The entrance is located on the west facing gable end. A small cemetery is associated with the asset. The asset is of medium value.
Due to the relatively flat terrain, intervening built environment and vegetation the asset is considered to be well- screened from the scheme. No change to the heritage value of the asset is therefore predicted and the significance of the impact is predicted to be neutral.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
No change.
6.4.3 Hollybrook House with Front Railings (Asset 15)
The asset is a three storey late 18th century house located c. 0.63km to the south-southwest of the development site. The asset is of medium value.
No intervisibility is predicted from ground or first and second storey levels, however, very restricted oblique views may be possible from the third storey but are likely to be largely screened by intervening terrain and vegetation further mitigated by the low lying nature of the scheme.
The magnitude of impact on the heritage value of the asset is predicted to be negligible, resulting in an impact of neutral to slight significance. This is not considered to be a significant impact.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
Potential impacts of the consented solar farm on Hollybrook House were not considered by the heritage statement for the consented solar farm, despite it being identified in the baseline.
The assessment of the Norrington Solar Farm has considered Hollybrook House and its setting using a more robust and thorough assessment approach, albeit without the benefit of undertaking a site inspection, and has identified a slight adverse significance of effect on the setting of the building. This is not considered to be a significant effect, which will likely be reduced as the landscaping planting at the southern boundary of the
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Norrington Solar Farm matures. It is further considered that the effects are lower in the as-built solar farm compared to the consented.
6.5 Conservation Areas
Within the 2km study area two Conservation Areas are identified: Broughton Gifford, the northern tip of which is adjacent to the scheme, and Atworth located c. 1.6km to the west-northwest of the site.
6.5.1 Broughton Gifford (Asset 109)
Broughton Gifford Conservation Area was designated in 1975 and listed properties of special architectural interest such as St. Mary’s Church, the Manor House, Hollybrook House, Broughton House and Gifford Hall. Others mentioned include Egerton House Farm, the Fox and Hounds Public House, Common Farm and the Bell on the Common.
Twentieth century development includes the residential development of Curtis Orchard and Newleaze, and the development of a small industrial estate, along with other domestic housing of varying sizes. This has increased the size of the village linking the original settlement with the area around the Common. The asset is of medium value.
Intervisibility with the development site is expected to be very restricted with views confined to the northern portion of the Conservation Area. Broughton Common to the north, appears to be the prime focus for properties residing around this area which will remain largely un-impacted. The low lying nature of the scheme, surrounding built environment and intervening vegetation are expected to restrict most views.
It is anticipated that the Norrington Solar Farm would have a negligible impact on the Conservation Area, and the significance of the impact is predicted to be slight. This is not considered to be a significant impact, and will likely be reduced to neutral as the landscape planting at the southern boundary of the solar farm matures.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
No change.
6.5.2 Atworth (Asset 110)
Atworth Conservation Area is located 1.5km to the north-northwest of the development site consisting of two Grade II* Listed Buildings (Assets 5 & 6) and numerous Grade II Listed Buildings. The asset is of medium value.
Given the distance from the Norrington Solar Farm, intervening terrain and mature vegetation it is anticipated that there will be no intervisibility with the scheme. The previous heritage statement identified through a site visit that there were no views in to the consented solar farm fields from Atworth Conservation Area (Cookson & Hoare, 2013). It is anticipated therefore that there will be no impact on the asset’s heritage value and no change is predicted.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
No change.
6.6 Historic Parks and Gardens
6.6.1 Great Chalfield Manor (Asset 111)
Great Chalfield Manor is located c. 0.73km to the southwest of the scheme at its closest point. The asset consists of an elongated parcel of land with a long tree-lined avenue stretching to the northwest from the Grade I Listed Building, Great Chalfield Manor. The asset is described as an early 20th century garden designed by Alfred Parsons incorporating a medieval fishpond and the 15th century Manor. The asset is of high value.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Intervisibility with the Norrington Solar Farm is not anticipated due to intervening mature vegetation, terrain and the built environment within Broughton Gifford. It is therefore predicted that the development will have no change to the heritage value of the asset.
Comparison with consented solar farm heritage statement
No change.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
7. Summary
Potential impacts of the as-built solar farm on designated cultural heritage assets within the study area were assessed following an appropriate methodology. The assessment has identified whether impacts have decreased, increased or not changed in comparison with the consented plan assessed and consented on 25th June 2013.
Within the 2km study area, 111 designated heritage assets have been identified. These consist of one Grade I, five Grade II* and 102 Grade II Listed Buildings. In addition, two Conservation Areas and one Historic Park and Garden were identified.
All conclusions within the assessment are based on information gathered from desk-based assessment only as permission for site visits to key assets was not granted.
Changes from the consented solar farm assessment
A slight adverse impact is found on the setting of Grade II* Gifford Hall (Asset 2). While the consented solar farm assessment considered the setting of Gifford Hall within the context of the wider Broughton Gifford Conservation Area it did not consider the potential impacts on the individual building itself. The assessment of Norrington Solar Farm has identified that the views from Gifford Hall from the rear dormers (which may not have been original intended views) would be interrupted slightly and an impact of slight significance has therefore been concluded. This impact would likely be reduced as the landscape planting along the southern boundary of Norrington Solar Farm matures. It is further considered that the effects are lower in the as-built solar farm compared to the consented due to the nature of the changes and the additional landscaping proposals.
A slight adverse impact is predicted on the Grade II Listed Building, The Hayes (Asset 14); and a neutral to slight adverse impact on Grade II Hollybrook House (Asset 15). While the consented solar farm assessment considered the setting of the wider Atworth Conservation Area in which these buildings are located, it did not consider the impacts on the individual buildings. A minor Impact of slight significance on the view from the upper storeys of The Hayes was identified due to its proximity to Norrington Solar Farm; however the intervisibility is likely to be mitigated by the reduced height of the solar farm, and the intervening landscaping. Again, the effects are lower in the as-built solar farm compared to the consented.
For Hollybrook House (Asset 15), the assessment of the consented solar farm considered potential impacts on Broughton Gifford Conservation Area, within which the building is located was given, however no assessment of impacts on the building itself was made. There is likely to be no intervisibility from ground or first and second storey levels, however, very restricted oblique views may be possible from the third storey, although these are likely to be largely screened by the landscape planting. The magnitude of impact on the heritage value of the asset was predicted to be negligible, resulting in an impact of neutral to slight significance. As with the above assets, the effects are lower in the as-built solar farm compared to the consented.
In both cases, these impacts are likely to be reduced in significance as the landscape planting associated with the Norrington Solar Farm matures as it will further screen the solar farm from views from these buildings.
No changes from the consented solar farm assessment
Of the remaining Listed Buildings identified within the study area a neutral impact is predicted. This represents no change from the consented solar farm assessment.
A slight adverse impact is predicted for Broughton Gifford Conservation Area (Asset 109); and a neutral impact on Atworth Conservation Area (Asset 110). This represents no change from the consented solar farm.
A neutral impact is predicted on Great Chalfield Manor (Asset 111) Historic Park and Garden. This represents no change from the consented solar farm.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
8. Conclusion
The conclusions drawn within this Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment of Norrington Solar Farm are consistent with the heritage statement undertaken by Aardvark EM Ltd in their original assessment of the consented solar farm. However, as the Aardvark assessment did not consider potential impacts on individual Listed Buildings within the Broughton Gifford and Atworth Conservation Areas, additional potential impacts have been identified and assessed.
These additional, non-significant impacts, were predicted on the Grade II* Listed Building Gifford Hall, and the Grade II Buildings of The Hayes and Hollybrook House. Aardvark EM Ltd predicted that there would be no change to the setting and views of these buildings as part of the assessment of impacts on the Conservation Areas within which they are located, but not on the individual buildings themselves.
The assessment of Norrington Solar Farm has concluded that there are slight, non-significant, adverse impacts on the setting of these three Listed Buildings caused by views of the solar farm from them. However, the reduced height of the panels and fence; reduction in plant numbers and height; and additional landscape planting results in a reduction of these impacts to those identified for the consented solar farm as the landscape planting associated with Norrington Solar Farm matures.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
9. References
Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (2014a). Code of Conduct.
Chartered Institute for Archaeologist (2014b). Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment.
H. F. Chettle, W. R .Powell, P. A. Spalding and P. M. Tillott (1953) 'Parishes: Broughton Gifford', in A History of the County of Wiltshire: Volume 7, ed. R. B. Pugh and Elizabeth Crittall (London, 1953), pp. 51-59. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/wilts/vol7/pp51-59 [accessed 19 December 2016].
Cookson, P. & Hoare, J. (2013). Heritage Statement: In support of an application for the development of a solar photovoltaic scheme and associated infrastructure on land west of Norrington Lane, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire. Aardvark EM Ltd.
Department for Communities and Local Government (2012). National Planning Policy Framework.
English Heritage (2008). Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance
English Heritage (2011). Listing Selection Guide - Domestic 3: Suburban and Country Houses.
Highways Agency (2007). Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 2 ‘Cultural Heritage’ (HA 208/07).
Historic England (2011). The Setting of Heritage Assets: a guidance document.
Historic England (2015). Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning; Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets.
Walls, S. (2014). Norrington Solar PV, Broughton Gifford, Wiltshire: Results of a Historic Visual Impact Assessment. Southwest Archaeology.
Wiltshire Council (2011). Wiltshire Community History. [ONLINE] Available at: https://history.wiltshire.gov.uk/community/getcom.php?id=38. [accessed 19 December 2016].
Cartographic Sources
Ordnance Survey, 1889 (surveyed 1886), 1st Edition 1:10,560, Wiltshire, Sheet 32, 25 inch.
Ordnance Survey, 1889 (surveyed 1886), 1st Edition 1:10,560, Wiltshire, Sheet 32.
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
Appendix A. Landscape Mitigation Detail Design
Norrington Solar Farm Ltd Romaned - B2281200-L-14 - RECOMMENDED PLANTING DIAGRAM 10/05/2017 16:41:16 -
NORRINGTON SOLAR FARM - LANDSCAPE PLANTING SCHEDULES
NOT TO SCALE
*Note - Dimensions for tree pits in line with Table 30/1, 3000 series, DMRB Volume 1. FEATHERED TREE PLANTING
Scale 1:1250
10m 0m 10m 30m 50m 70m 90m
&RQWDLQV2UGQDQFH6XUYH\GDWD&URZQFRS\ULJKWDQGGDWDEDVHULJKW
Drawing title LANDSCAPE MITIGATION PLAN 95 Bothwell St, Glasgow, G2 7HX Tel:+44(0)141 243 8000 Fax:+44(0)141 226 3109 www.jacobs.com DETAIL DESIGN Client Norrington Solar Limited
Drawing status Project Amendments to plots for access and For Information Rev1 13/04/2017 DR DHW DHW PML Norrington Solar Farm maintenance purposes Scale 1:1250 @ A1 DO NOT SCALE Rev0 DR DHW DHW PML Jacobs No. B2281200 Rev Rev. Date Purpose of revision Drawn Checkd Rev'd Apprv'd Client no. Ξ Copyright 2015 Jacobs U.K. Limited. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Drawing number Rev
\\REAFIL06\Data\JI_Proposal\LUDM\B2281200_Norrington Solar Farm\7. Mitigation\CAD\B2281200_NorringtonSolarFarm_MitigationPlan_170510_.dwg Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of FRS\ULJKW/LPLWDWLRQ 7KLVGUDZLQJKDVEHHQSUHSDUHGRQEHKDOIRIDQGIRUWKHH[FOXVLYHXVHRI-DFREV &OLHQWDQGLVVXEMHFW WRDQGLVVXHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKHSURYLVLRQVRIWKHFRQWUDFWEHWZHHQ-DFREVDQGWKH&OLHQW-DFREVDFFHSWVQROLDELOLW\RU 1 responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this drawing by any third party. B2281200-L-14