Heritage Statement

Planning Application for 2 New Dwellings and Extension to Existing House 90 Roe Lane, Southport Heritage Statement David Chapman, Dip Arch, RIBA NJSR Chartered Architects LLP 57 Hoghton St Southport PR9 OPG ([email protected]) Page 1 of 21 1. Introduction. 1.1. This document should be read in conjunction with drawings and a Design and Access Statement prepared by Paul Keegan Associates who are architects for the scheme. 1.2. The site is 0.1Ha and contains a three bedroom dwelling house and outbuildings. 1.3. The proposals are for planning consent to retain and extend the existing dwelling house and also for two detached dwellings to the rear. 1.4. The building is not listed as of architectural or historic interest; it is not part of a conservation area or in the curtilage/close proximity of a listed building. However, the proposals have been subject to a pre-application process following which the Council’s Conservation Team opined that ‘the building is a Non Designated Heritage Assett and so policy NH15 would apply in which development will only be permitted where aspects of the asst which contribute to its significance are conserved or enhanced’. A number of further comments or advice were made. 1.5. This assessment is prepared in accordance with guidance published by English Heritage in their ‘The Setting of Heritage Assets’ and ‘Building in Context’ the latter being a joint publication with CABE. Broadly speaking the following assessment process is recommended; Step 1: identify which heritage assets and their settings are affected; Step 2 : assess whether, how and to what degree these settings make a contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s); Step 3: assess the effects of the proposed development, whether beneficial or harmful, on that significance; Step 4: explore the way maximising enhancement and avoiding or minimising harm; Step 5: make and document the decision and monitor outcomes. Government advice (www.gov.uk ‘Guidance Conserving and enhancing the historic environment’) says; ‘Local planning authorities may identify non-designated heritage assets. These are buildings, monuments, sites, places, areas or landscapes identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions but which are not formally designated heritage assets. In some areas, local authorities identify some non-designated heritage assets as ‘locally listed’. A substantial majority of buildings have little or no heritage significance and thus do not constitute heritage assets. Only a minority have enough heritage interest for their significance to be a material consideration in the planning process.’ 1.6. It is understood that the Council’s response to the pre-application process includes issue sot do with design and access which are addressed by the revised design forming the application. 1.7. This statement concludes that the building is of little architectural value, was built in about 1840 so is of limited historical value, no evidence has been found of any wider cultural value (for example it having been the home of a famous person) but does conclude that the property has some value in the setting of Roe Lane in a wider context. Page 2 of 21 2. History. 2.1. Geologically Southport was developed on a layer of windblown sand overlaying sandstone with marshland to the landward side much of which was flooded the last vestiges of which are Martin Mere about 5 miles to the east. It is interesting to note that Greenwood in 1818 (see appendix A) shows an extensive sand dune system to the north west of Roe Lane (then spelt Row) and in parts the dunes encroached right up to the edge of the lane. 2.2. There are records of a church at Churchtown in the 12 th century although the current building dates from the 17 th . Southport owes its rapid growth the railways in the mid 19 th century prior to which it was probably a collection of small hamlets and a fishing village at the coast. Therefore it is probable that Roe Lane connected the two areas during the period long before it was indicated on the Yates mapping (see appendix) in 1786. 2.3. Sporadic development existed along Roe Lane prior to the 1786 mapping but it is not possible to match the buildings shown with the more accurate mapping shown on the first edition of the ordnance survey. It is therefore reasonable to say that the mapping indicates a building on the site from the 1840’s onwards but does not indicate that the was a building in that location at an earlier date albeit that it is possible. 2.4. Prior to the construction of the canals in the late 18 th /early 19 th centuries and later the railways in the mid 19 th century it is usually found that simple domestic structures used the materials ready to hand for reasons of cost. Therefore mid to late medieval (and later) cottages tended to be wood, wattle/daub and thatch. The Lancashire plain on which Southport and the surrounding area stands is characterised by outcrops or near surface deposits of sandstone which is often seen in foundations of cottages or surviving boundary walls. The use of brick in the area tends to date from the mid 19 th C with the opening of brick and tile works along the canal at Burscough (about 6 miles from the site) and later at Tarleton to the north. Liverpool was rapidly growing in the 19 th century with a resulting greater number of brickworks but of a similar date, this period also corresponded with a widespread use of slate for roofing as communications with the Welsh quarries improved. The building is brick with sandstone lintels under a slate roof which tends to point at the building being no older than mid 19 th C. It is understood that the nearby earlier listed building at number 83 is painted brick but not clear whether the use of brick was a 19 th C ‘improvement.’ 2.5. The current owners believe that the building may have been a farmhouse farming land to the east and south. The historical mapping does not reveal any substantial farm buildings commensurate with the age of the dwelling so it may be better to describe the building as part of a small holding which use continued on a reduced scale into the late 20 th C (see aerial photograph in appendix A). 3. The Property and its Setting. 3.1. The Site. The map regression shown in appendix A reveals that the plot gradually reduced in size from the mid 19 th C as development encroached with the growth of Southport so that it reached its current frontage by the 1930’s. The depth of the plot may have further reduced more recently when flats to the rear were built. The mapping also reveals that the house originally stood further back from the street to become nearer as Roe Lane was widened to accommodate the tram line between Southport and Churchtown. The plot has Page 3 of 21 a width of nearly 23 metres and a depth of over 46 metres and therefore is 0.1 ha (0.25 acres). 3.2. Trees. There are no tree protection orders on or in the near vicinity of the site . Although there remain substantial shrubs at the western gable older photographs indicate that plot had become overgrown particularly by a large tree at the eastern gable. The nett result was to create a setting for the dwelling forward of the main building line and also to make the rear of the plot more secluded. Unfortunately much of this planting including the large tree has been removed by the present owner of a third party. An earlier photograph showing the large tree to the left (now removed) which also demonstrates how secluded the rear of the property had been. The extent of the planting is best seen in the aerial photograph in appendix A. The applicant and his architect feels that it is right to try and return to this sense of seclusion and is trying to establish what was there and to develop a suitable replacement planting scheme. 3.3. Setting. The site plan below is taken from the Council’s interactive mapping system (SIMON) and shows outlined in brown two listed dwellings at 79/81 and 83 Roe Lane 60 metres away at the nearest points. The blue circle is intended to illustrate the area considered to be part of the setting of the listed buildings and it is noteworthy that the council also use this type of circle to denote non designated heritage assets. The nearest being a pillar box some distance to the west of the subject site but notably not the subject site itself. Page 4 of 21 Site plan from ‘SIMON’ the subject property is ringed in red and nearby listed dwellings edged in brown with the setting outlined in blue. 3.4. Nearby Listed Buildings. (Statutory description – authors photographs) 79 and 81 Roe Lane; Listed grade II. Farmhouse, converted to 2 houses. Probably late C17 or early C18, altered in C19 and remodelled in C20. White painted render now with applied half-timbering; thatched roof. Single-depth 4-unit plan (with C20 additions to rear). EXTERIOR: one-and-a-half storeys; 2 plus 2 windows. Plinth, 2 3-light sliding sash windows to each house, the upper being in half-dormers. No.79 has the doorway in a C20 extension to the left; No.81 has a doorway with board door to the left of its windows (i.e.

Load more