Mereworth Castle Stables Kent

Heritage Statement ______

October 2020 | Project Ref 0000A

Site Name | 1

Project Number: 6347A File Origin: M:\HC\Admin\3. 2020 HCUK Templates\HC specific templates\2020 HC A4 Report Template.v1.docx

Author with date Reviewer code, with date

JOR 13.10.2020 RD-0001, 26.10.2019

JA-0001, 30.10.2019

Site Name | 1

Contents

1. Introduction ...... 1 2. Relevant Planning Policy Framework ...... 4 3. Background and Development ...... 6 4. Statement of Significance ...... 17 5. Heritage Impact Assessment ...... 23 6. Conclusions ...... 29 7. Bibliography and references ...... 31

Appendices

App. 1 Scale of Harm table (Heritage Collective, 2019)

App. 2 Assessment against Historic England’s Guidance on Setting (GPA3, 2017)

App. 3 List descriptions in full Figures

Fig. 1 Site Location with identification of listed buildings

Fig. 2 Mereworth Castle cross section as featured in Vitruvius Britannicus, c.1720

Fig. 3 Extract of the Dury map, 1767

Fig. 4 Extract from the Ordnance Surveyors’ Drawings, 1797

Fig. 5 1840 tithe map

Fig. 6 1867six inch to one OS mile

Fig. 7 1897 25 inch to one mile OS map

Fig. 8 1938 25 inch to one mile OS map

Site Name | 2

Fig. 9 1961 1:2,500 OS sheet TQ6653

Fig. 10 Aerial View identifying blocks of the former stables.

Fig. 11 Portrait of Evelyn Boscawen, Viscount Falmouth.

Site Name | 3

1. Introduction

1.1 This Heritage Statement has been prepared by Heritage Collective on behalf of Mereworth Estate. It presents information on heritage values and significance in order to assist in determination of a retrospective application for works to a series of ancillary structures located some 60m to the north west of the western pavilion of Mereworth Castle. Reference should be made to the site ownership and location plans prepared by Offset Architects for fully detailed site plans and to a full planning statement prepared by Edgars Planning Consultants.

Figure 1: Approximate site location © Historic England Search the List. The main block and two pavilions are identified with blue triangles. The ancillary stable blocks subject to his application are outlined.

1.2 Designated assets that may be affected by the proposals are as follows:

• Mereworth Castle, main block, Grade I (UID: 1070675)

• Pavilion to the north east of Mereworth Castle, Grade I (UID: 1363025)

• Pavilion to the north west of Mereworth Castle and stables, Grade I (UID: 1070676)

• Mereworth Castle Registered Park and Garden, Grade II* (UID: 1000938)

1.3 The ‘stables’ referred to in the list description of the north west pavilion are not explicitly identified within the description but it is considered that they relate most

Site Name | 1

specifically to the ruinous ranges directly attached to the rear (western) elevation of that pavilion. Through the provision of section 1.5(b) of the Planning (listed building and conservation areas) Act 1990 it is also considered that the site under consideration within this application should be considered as forming part of that listed building, the western pavilion. In addition, the Site falls within the Registered Park area and within the setting of the main Mereworth Castle and the Eastern pavilion.

1.4 This identification is a matter of technical fact and does not automatically confer the same degree of value to the stables as that embodied in the grade I listed pavilion. Not all parts of a listed building necessarily make the same contribution to significance.

The Context

1.5 In late 2019 the stable buildings under consideration here were in a ruinous condition. Roof structures were failing with several areas collapsed, or in imminent risk of collapse. The applicant began a series of repairs to the building comprising removal of the remaining roof tiles, removal of failed roof and wall structures and timbers and scaffolding of the whole building. By early 2020 certain repair works had also arisen comprising the reinstatement of a roof over an eastern structure and installation of garage doors, restoration of roof structure over the main stable, battening and installation of conservation appropriate membrane and battening to secure water tightness. Restoration of a roof structure and timber walling with appropriate membrane to the southern structure. The westernmost stable structure was in better condition and received no works, it is still in use as a stable.

1.6 Offset Architects and Heritage Collective became aware of the above works in the course of discussions with the client relating to another matter and application. Offset Architects and Heritage Collective advised that the scope of works to the stables had moved beyond what might ordinarily be considered as ‘like for like’ repair or regular ongoing maintenance and that works should cease in order that listed building consent could be applied for.

1.7 The local planning authority, Tonbridge and Malling District Council (TMDC) were informed, and a site visit made by conservation officer Mark Stevens and a member

Site Name | 2

of the enforcement team. It was agreed that a retrospective application should be made. Heritage Collective provided input into heritage significance and values

Purpose and scope of this Statement

1.8 Following this introduction and a summary of the legislative and policy background this statement provides an historic background of the Mereworth Estate and the stable buildings. A proportionate statement of significance is provided where the relative contribution made by the stables to the Grade I listed Pavilion, and Grade I listed Mereworth Castle, is provided. Then the proposals are considered in terms of their impact on the stables and significance of the listed building.

1.9 This report has been informed by multiple site visits by the author as well as by desk based research into the background history and development of the estate. No primary archive research has been undertaken at this stage. A full bibliography of resources is provided at the end of the report.

Key Considerations

1.10 The key consideration is whether or not the repair and restoration works undertaken to date have caused harm, that is the erosion of heritage values and significance, to the designated assets.

1.11 In addition, this report considers whether the application for the main stable building to convert it to form a future estate office and associated functions would similarly give rise to ‘harm’.

1.12 The work to the store building has involved the insertion of garage doors. This change is assessed against the significance of the listed building.

Site Name | 3

2. Relevant Planning Policy Framework

2.1 The decision maker is required by section sections 16(2) and 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building and its setting when exercising planning functions. The decision maker must give considerable importance and weight to the desirability of preserving the significance of the listed building, and there is a strong presumption against the grant of permission for development that would harm its heritage significance.1

2.2 For the purposes of this statement, preservation equates to an absence of harm.2 Harm is defined in paragraph 84 of Historic England’s Conservation Principles as change which erodes the significance of a heritage asset.3

2.3 The significance of a heritage asset is defined in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) as being made up of four main constituents: architectural interest, historical interest, archaeological interest and artistic interest. The assessments of heritage significance and impact are normally made with primary reference to the four main elements of significance identified in the NPPF.

2.4 The setting of a heritage asset can contribute to its significance. Setting is defined in the NPPF as follows:

“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.”

2.5 The NPPF requires the impact on the significance of the designated heritage asset to be considered in terms of either “substantial harm” or “less than substantial harm” as described within paragraphs 195 and 196 of that document. National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) makes it clear that substantial harm is a high test, and case law describes substantial harm in terms of an effect that would

1 Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Limited v East Northamptonshire District Council and others [2014] EWCA Civ 137. 2 South Lakeland v SSE [1992] 2 AC 141. 3 Conservation Principles, 2008, paragraph 84.

Site Name | 4

vitiate or drain away much of the significance of a heritage asset.4 The Scale of Harm is tabulated at Appendix 1.

2.6 Paragraphs 195 and 196 of the NPPF refer to two different balancing exercises in which harm to significance, if any, is to be balanced with public benefit. Paragraph 18a-020-20190723 of National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) online makes it clear that some heritage-specific benefits can be public benefits. Paragraph 18a- 018-20190723 of the same NPPG makes it clear that it is important to be explicit about the category of harm (that is, whether paragraph 195 or 196 of the NPPF applies, if at all), and the extent of harm, when dealing with decisions affecting designated heritage assets, as follows:

“Within each category of harm (which category applies should be explicitly identified), the extent of the harm may vary and should be clearly articulated.”

2.7 Paragraphs 193 and 194 of the NPPF state that great weight should be given to the conservation of a designated heritage asset when considering applications that affect its significance, irrespective of how substantial or otherwise that harm might be.

2.8 A full review of local policy is contained within the planning statements prepared by Edgars. A new local plan for the Borough of Tonbridge and Malling is currently at the examination stage but a development plan document (DPD) adopted in 20105 contains the following saved policy which is still relevant to this application:

“Policy SQ3

Development will not be permitted where it would harm the overall character, integrity or setting of the Historic Parks and Gardens identified on the Proposals Map and listed in Annex SQ3, or which might prejudice their future restoration”.

2.9 No individual local policy within the DPD pertains specifically to listed buildings or their settings and decision making is directed to the national policies within the NPPF.

4 Bedford Borough Council v SSCLG and Nuon UK Limited [2013] EWHC 4344 (Admin). 5 Managing Development and the Environment Development Plan Document, Tonbridge & Malling Borough Council Local Development Framework, adopted April 2010

Site Name | 5

3. Background and Development

Historic Development

3.1 The broad history of the Mereworth Estate and the descent through its holders to the present day is succinctly summarised in the opening passages of the list description for the Registered Park:

The manor of Mereworth was held by the de Mereworth family from the mid C12 to the late C14, passing by marriage first to the Beauchamps and then in 1435 to Edward Nevill, a son of the Earl of Westmorland. The estate descended through the Nevills until it passed by marriage in the C16 to Sir Thomas Fane, whose son was created Earl of Westmorland in 1624. It was not until the succession of Vere, the fourth Earl however that the Fane family came to live at Mereworth. His son, the fifth Earl, Mildmay Fane, died in 1715, leaving his estates to a younger brother, John Fane, who engaged the architect Colen Campbell (1676-1729) to rebuild the house as a replica of Palladio's villa 'La Rotonda' at Vicenza. Contemporary references (Gough MSS, Bodleian Library) indicate the association of the landscape designer Charles Bridgeman (d 1738) with Mereworth and in 1752 its house and gardens were visited and described by Horace Walpole (CL 1920). John Fane became the sixth Earl in 1736 and died in 1762, after which Mereworth passed by marriage to Francis Dashwood of West Wycombe (qv) and then in 1781, through the Fane line, to Thomas Stapleton. On his death in 1831, Mereworth passed to his granddaughter who in 1845 married Evelyn Boscawen, later (1852) to become sixth Viscount Falmouth. During their ownership and that of the succeeding seventh Viscount and his wife, considerable changes to the setting of the house and the establishment of surrounding formal gardens took place. Following the death of the seventh Viscount in 1918, Mereworth passed through the hands of a number of owners including, in the mid C20, Mr Michael and Lady Anne Tree, who made further, minor alterations to the formal gardens. In the mid 1970s the estate was purchased by Al Tajir Ltd and it remains (1997) in private hands.

3.2 Mereworth Castle featured within Campbell’s publication ‘Vitruvius Britannicus’, issued in three volumes between 1715-1725. Campbell was actually brought in

Site Name | 6

relatively late in the publication process, although it was initially simply a print seller’s publication Campbells involvement appears to have shifted the emphasis clearly towards extolling the virtues of Palladianism, over what he saw as the excesses of the English Baroque. Mereworth Castle features within the publication in several drawings including the below cross section.

Figure 2: Mereworth Castle cross section c.1720 as featured within Vitruvius Britannicus.

3.3 The two pavilions to the east and west of Campbell’s central building were added c.1740-50 and suggested by the list descriptions to be by Henry Flitcroft, though Mereworth is not listed in his body of work within Colvin’s in depth study6. Colvin suggests Roger Morris, who worked in Campbells office as the author of the pavilions and Mereworth Church.7 Flitcroft is also suggested as the possible architect for the nearby Mereworth Church8, which was built in its current location after the demolition of the former medieval church close to Mereworth Castle, which was considered to disrupt the symmetry of the new castle and which was then replaced by the western pavilion and low outbuildings behind.

6 Colvin, h (1995) A biographical Dictionary of British Architects 1600-1840, pp 365-368 7 Colvin (1995) p.669, and also in https://thecountryseat.org.uk/2012/12/20/finest-country-seats-mereworth-castle- kent/ 8 List Description for St Lawrence’s Church Mereworth, Grade I, among other sources.

Site Name | 7

3.4 The online available historic information provides far less information on the estate’s ancillary buildings9. The RPG description describes the Estate’s Home Farm as being constructed and established ‘by the late 1860s’. Historic maps described below suggests that there was some built form on this site prior to that date.

Cartographic evidence

3.5 The earliest map sourced showing Mereworth Castle (at present) is The Dury map of 1767. Though this map shows Mereworth Castle and its flanking pavilions, by this time c20-30 years old, it is unclear as to any built form on the location of the Site.10 Further detail is shown on the Ordnance Surveyors Drawing, compiled in 1797 which does suggest that a single rectangular building was positioned in the approximate location of the current Site.

Figure 3, left: Dury map, 1767. Figure 4, right: Ordnance Surveyors’ Drawing, 1797.

3.6 The tithe Map for Mereworth dates to 1840 and provides the first highly detailed representation. On the site are two long narrow ranges aligned approximately east to west, each with a small enclosure to their southern side. Access appears to be by a drive on the south east side. The apportionment identifies this plot, 256, as being

9 At the present time no archival visits or research has been undertaken. This is not considered to have limited a proportionate understanding of the site buildings or their significance sufficient to inform decision making. 10 This may be a factor of digital reproductions, no archive copy has been viewed. The map can be viewed online at: https://www.rct.uk/collection/701700/a-topographical-map-of-the-county-of-kent-in-twenty-five-sheets-on-a-scale- of-two

Site Name | 8

one of several occupied by John Fremlin. The purpose is given as ‘stables, cow shed, and yards’.11

Figure 5: Extract from the 1840 Tithe Map, © the Genealogist

3.7 The owner of Mereworth listed on the Tithe apportionment in 1840 was Baroness Frances E Stapleton Le Despenser. In 1845 she married Evelyn Boscawen, 6th Viscount Falmouth (18 March 1819 – 6 November 1889). He was a renowned equestrian and racehorse breeder, who set up a stud at Mereworth12. It appears possible that he was responsible for the construction of the present buildings to support his equestrian pursuits.

3.8 By 1867, as reflected in the list description for the RPG the single ranges have been expanded and the current extent of buildings is shown. That on the east remains simple, but that on the west is shown with a wider slightly off centre block, two perpendicular ranges defining a yard, which is divided into two. Smaller yards or enclosures are located to the western side of the ‘U’ shaped block with a further single range beyond, also with a yard. A track is dotted in running along the southern edge of these buildings with a second track leading north east out of the wider central block towards the main drive. .

11 Tithe Apportionment. 12 Wikipedia entry for Evelyn Boscowan and not yet corroborated through separate sources.

Site Name | 9

Figure 6: 1867 OS extract, six inch to one mile. The Site reflects close to the layout today. (Reproduced courtesy of the national Library of Scotland Maps)

3.9 Further detail still is provided on the larger scale 25 inch to one mile edition of 1895 (Figure 7). The narrow range to the south is added here, and the central portion is shown as having an opening passing through beneath the taller tower portion. The narrow eastern range is depicted with a dashed southern edge indicating an open fronted building.

Figure 7: 1895 25 inch to one mile extract (Reproduced courtesy of the national Library of Scotland Maps)

Site Name | 10

3.10 Examination of the building on site today suggests that the current stables was a single one phase construction that does not retain any element of the earlier narrow range shown on the tithe map. The consistency of brick and timber roof construction within the ‘U’ shaped building appears entirely consistent as a single phase building of the mid 19th century. It does appear, however, that the long narrow range to the east is an earlier survivor, that structure shown on the tithe in 1840. The character of brickwork within this building is slightly softer and less regular.

Figure 8: 1938 25 inch to one mile extract (Reproduced courtesy of the National Library of Scotland Maps)

Site Name | 11

Figure 9: 1961 sheet TQ6653 1:2500 extract. (Reproduced courtesy of the National Library of Scotland Maps)

3.11 During the early 20th century, Mereworth Castle was sold in 1930, was used as a prisoner of war camp (number 276) during the second World War (the precise location of the camp is not known), and was by the later 1940s owned by Peter Beatty, a renowned racehorse owner and breeder. At his somewhat early death in 1949 Mereworth Castle passed to his nephew Michael Lambert Tree (1921-1999), an artist. This period of time is depicted on the OS maps dating to 1938 and 1961. The most major alteration is the addition of the large indoor tennis court, which is shown on the 1931 OS (Figure 8). Interestingly the southern elevation of the main stabling block, the central range of the ‘U’ is shown as at least partially open, a dashed line, on both of these maps suggesting that the structure was at least partly open through out this period.

3.12 Reports by a current member of staff whose father was employed on the estate by the previous owners (Michael Tree) suggest that the stables were comprehensively re-fitted in the middle years of the 20th century. This assertion would fit with the general characteristics of the current stable fittings, which include troughs set in cast concrete, concrete floors, rough hewn machine sawn plank divisions and chip board ceiling linings.

3.13 Over the course of the later 20th century lack of use has seen all buildings in this part of the site decline. The Design and Access Statement includes a series of

Site Name | 12

historic aerial photographs that illustrate the decline and loss of the roof structure over the eastern store and the western range of the main stable. The loss of roof finish is clearly discernible in these images.

Current description

3.14 The Stables are primarily constructed in red brick set to Flemish bond. With openings clearly marked with smaller queen-closer bricks.13 They comprise four blocks as follows (see Figure 10): 1) a store to the east a single narrow range aligned east to west; 2) the largest block a ‘U’ shaped stable structure defining a yard on the south; 3) a smaller linear stable range to the west, which is constructed of uncoursed rubble stone with a single western brick façade and brick detailing to window openings in the gable; and, 4) a narrow low structure to the south with brick northern elevation and timber framed rear wall.

3 2 1

Figure 10: Aerial google earth image identifying the relevant stable blocks. The large block to the bottom of the image is the covered early 20th C tennis court.

13 Flemish bond consists of alternating header and stretcher bricks. Queen closers are defined by Brunskill (1990, p106)l as: ‘as a half bat brick cut to present a half header width’.

Site Name | 13

Block 1 – the eastern store

3.15 The eastern structure is a single storey range with brick walls to the west, north and east sides. The roof is a single pitch. It has no internal features and a poured concrete floor.

3.16 At the time of survey works had been undertaken but aerial photographs included in the Design and Access Statement show that in the period between 196 and 2008 the roof had collapsed. A temporary flat roof was in place prior to the most recent work.

Block 2 – the main stables

3.17 The main ‘U’ shaped block is most substantial and accentuated visually with a taller carriage or coach house slightly east of centre with broad opposed doorways and pitched gabbled roof. The ranges are divided into cellular spaces, with several fitted out as large loose boxes, the south east end is a workshop, the north east corner rooms appear to have been a tack room and office with an inserted WC and other partitions. The western range appears to have been more recently used as storage.

Plates 1-2 from left: The main stable block raised carriage entry and tower. The western part of the main stable and yard.

3.18 The building does show some signs of structural alterations, particularly in the presence of blocked doorways on the western elevation marked in newer mortar and queen closers indicating the former opening, one of which has a window inserted in the upper part (see plate6). Large doorways also appear to have been blocked on the northern elevation at the ends of the east and west ranges. The

Site Name | 14

most substantive changes relate to the internal changes to create the current loose boxes, doors and stable troughs. All windows appear to be relatively recent 20th century wooden frames, some may be 19th century but none are particularly remarkable other than in the lunette form, with double arch of brick headers (plate 3). Internally older doors remain but have been fixed closed, and usually blocked in brick on one side (NW corner and north range for example, see Plate 4).

Plates 3-5 from left: 3, typical lunette window into the stables. 4, older 19th century door fixed closed within the stables in the northern section. 5, typical loose box with concrete trough and plank boarding beneath truss position.

Plates 6-8 from left: 6, older area of cobbles aligned with blocked door (now window) and later concrete floor and trough. 7, evidence of former opening with stone block, interrupted plinth and queen closer bricks. 8, typical roof structure. Evidence that the roof was historically enclosed, not open to the apex.

Site Name | 15

3.19 Some evidence is legible for older cobble stone floor surfaces in the western range but these pieces of evidence are minimal now.

Block 3 – the western stable

3.20 The western stable was occupied at the time of site visit and so not internally inspected. It has similar external characteristics to the main U shaped range with the contrasting fabric of uncoursed rubble walling.

Plates 9-10 from left: the rear and then front elevations of the western stable, in use as a stable.

Block 4 – the southern stable

3.21 This range is small and diminutive with a timber framed rear wall. The brick frontages matches the detail of the main stable, as do the interior fittings. This structure was, at the time of survey midway through restoration. There remains some evidence of cobbling in some areas of the flooring.

Plates 11-12: Southern stable, from the west. blockwork wall within southern stable.

Site Name | 16

4. Statement of Significance

Introduction

4.1 Although Mereworth Castle, the East Pavilion and the West Pavilion are three individually Grade I listed buildings their significance here is described and assessed collectively. The three buildings were commissioned by a single owner and although separated by some years in date, and by different architects are clearly a closely related group with strong aesthetic connections focussed on the north to south alignment of the main Mereworth Castle building.

4.2 At Grade I all three buildings, individually and collectively are of the highest heritage significance. They share a coherent and designed landscape setting which is individually designated as a registered park and garden.

4.3 The stables that make up the Site under consideration here are considered to form part of the listed building by virtue of Section 1.5(b) of the Act (1990). The heritage values of the stables site are presented here as part of the main Mereworth Castle seeking to explore the contribution to the architectural, historic, archaeological or artistic values of that main listed building. The contribution made to the Registered Park is also explored.

Assessment of Significance

Mereworth Castle

4.4 Mereworth Castle has extremely high historic and architectural values as one of the foremost examples of classical Palladianism within England during the early 18th century. Mereworth Castle is considered to represent the archetypal Palladian ‘villa’ that inspired and instigated this type of country house dwelling though the 18th century and onwards14. It is important to note, as Summerson does, that Campbell did not, in the early 18th century refer to this type of dwelling as a ‘villa’, nor did Palladio himself. However, Colen Campbell’s work, including Mereworth is

14 Summerson, J (1953), p308

Site Name | 17

considered to form one of the key prototypes that developed over the course of the 18th century to a recognisable type, the English ‘Villa’.

Plate 13-14: The Villa Capra in Vicenza, Italy and an historic image of Mereworth Castle and its western Pavilion © Historic England Archive

4.5 Mereworth is the most faithful copy in England (albeit being scaled up to fit a larger footprint) of the Villa Capra in Vicenza, Northern Italy, begun in 1567 by Andre Palladio. Five copies were constructed in England, three remain: Henbury Hall, Cheshire; Chiswick House, Greater London (By Lord Burlington, an early patron of Campbell, and on a smaller footprint than the original), and Mereworth Castle. Foots Cray Place, Kent, and Nuthall Temple, Nottinghamshire have been demolished. This group of architectural structures draw high historical contextual values from each other.

4.6 Internally the planform and exceedingly high quality of internal decoration add both architectural and artistic values. Interior paintings are by Francesco Sleter, with those in the long gallery dated 1732, similarly rich plasterwork is by Giovanni Bagutti. The artistic interest of the interior is heightened by being exceptionally complete and unaltered. The volumes and spaces with a sequence of rooms around a soaring central domed space are highly dramatic and the sumptuous interiors are in luxurious contrast to the austere Palladian stucco stonework of the exterior with its symmetry and rhythm in the round as one passes around the square volume.

4.7 There are high associative values embedded at Mereworth linked to several well known and renowned individuals. The Castle was instigated by John Fane, 7th Earl of Westmorland, a member of the British aristocracy, member of parliament and military man who rose to the rank of Colonel. The site as a whole has a significant association with great families, including ongoing associative interest with owners

Site Name | 18

through to the later 20th century though these undertook few alterations to Fane’s original commission. Fane’s association extends to the two pavilions, constructed some 20 years later but completing a balanced and harmonious group.

4.8 The architect Colen Campbell is described by Colvin as ‘one of the outstanding figures in English eighteenth century architecture’15. The associative value of this link is high. The specific architect for the pavilions is not known but the various suggestions (Flitcroft, Morris, James Stuart16) but all were honest to the original Palladian idiom and the two pavilions are considered to draw similar degrees of associative values.

4.9 As a single phase set piece of architectural and artistic composition Mereworth Castle is considered to have relatively little archaeological values. That is, there have been few changes to the building’s form or appearance that would leave evidential trails within the fabric not reflected in other documentary records or archives. The two pavilions are more altered, and they may well embody physical evidence to a sequence of changes over time that gives some degree of archaeological interest.

4.10 The site of the Castle is known to have been that of an earlier moated building, and indeed the immediate surroundings and wider site is considered to have good archaeological value, the area of the western pavilion was cleared of the historic medieval parish church and it is highly likely that archaeological evidence for that may remain to some degree.

Contribution of the Stable buildings as part of the listed building

4.11 The stable buildings were constructed more than 100 years after Mereworth Castle and its two pavilions. There is some associative historic interest in these ancillary building with the renowned 19th century race horse breeder Evelyn Boscawen, 6th Viscount Falmouth who is considered likely to have commissioned the construction of these buildings as part of investment in his equestrian breeding and accommodation at the estate.

15 Colvin,1995, p.210 16 Nicolson cited in https://thecountryseat.org.uk/2012/12/20/finest-country-seats-mereworth-castle-kent/

Site Name | 19

4.12 The buildings are, as to be expected, much simpler with a more vernacular character and material palette of local brick and tile. The main stable building is asymmetrical, probably dictated by function and access, with few ornamentations beyond the slight plinth and treatment of lunette windows in the ends of the main ranges and in the western stable. The eastern structure is entirely utilitarian, simple and practical. The western structure, facing west over open meadows in the western parkland, remains in use as a stable and is in contrast to the main block in its use of stone as well as brick. The southern structure appears very similar albeit with a partially timber framed construction and only one brick face to the north which also features lunette windows.

4.13 Internally the stable divisions and stall fixtures in both the main ‘U’ shaped building and the narrow southern range, appear to have been renewed and replaced in the mid 20th century. This is also the account of former staff on the estate who recall the work being done. They reflect the function of the building as stables but have little inherent aesthetic appeal or quality. Loose box partitions are rough unfinished timber planks, troughs are mass produced and set into concrete walls. The floors are poured concrete. Aside from a few isolated areas of cobble stone flooring, over which the concrete has clearly been poured there appears no evidence of former historic fixtures, fittings or finishes. The quality of the interior stable fittings is simple, robust and without any pretention or ornament, the regular use of concrete is hardwearing but not of innate merit in heritage terms. It is possible that the substantial use of concrete surfacing over the older brickwork may have structural implications to moisture retention or flow through the building. There are hints of the older Victorian character of the building’s interior in the small areas of retained cobble floor surface and the slightly more decorative hinges and plank work of the few retained historic doors. These suggest that later adaptations in the 20th century have eroded a perhaps more ornate or refined earlier set of stable fittings now lost.

4.14 Their contribution to the significance of the main listed buildings is made by the main, southern and western stable block is, in terms of architecture, one of contrast. They reflect specific functions and practical, hardwearing local materials but have none of the high aesthetic qualities of the 18th century listed buildings.

4.15 In historic terms they have illustrative values relating to the expansion of equestrian facilities at Mereworth during the middle years of the 19th century. There

Site Name | 20

is also some association with a later owner of the Mereworth Estate, Viscount Falmouth a noted race horse breeder.

Figure 11: Evelyn Boscawen, viscount Falmouth 1863 © The Trustees of the British Museum ref: 1912,1014.166

4.16 The contribution made by the eastern garage range is low. It is a simple linear structure which although it as a continuous footprint and ostensibly 19th century brickwork character has no internal surviving clues to any historic function.

4.17 Overall, the contribution made by the stables buildings to the significance of the west pavilion of Mereworth Castle, and indeed to the main Mereworth Castle is as an historic indicator of 19th century equestrian uses and in architectural terms by reflecting the varying hierarchy of the wider site, from the primary architectural statement of Mereworth Castle and a range of ancillary buildings constructed within the area to support the activities of one of the estate owners.

Contribution to the Registered Park

4.18 The former stables were constructed in the latter part of the 19th century, expanding what appeared to be a formerly smaller home farm structure which was in the early part of the 19th century (as indicated on the tithe map and apportionment) used for both horse and cattle accommodation.

Site Name | 21

4.19 The buildings are located west and slightly north of the main buildings at the heart of the estate and although they are relatively close, they are not prominent within key approaching views towards Mereworth Castle and its pavilions. They are relatively low, traditional structures which are partly screened by hedging and mature trees that keeps them entirely subservient in views towards and out of the main buildings.

4.20 They provide direct illustration of a specific owners personal interest in race horses and their breeding as well as the prevailing materials and architectural styles of the day. These values are mainly focussed in the exteriors. Interior changes, including the blocking of openings and doorways, particularly on the northern elevation, have reduced the connection of this building to the area to the north and it is now less integrated to that area than it was historically at its construction.

Site Name | 22

5. Heritage Impact Assessment

5.1 With reference to Appendix 1, along with the most important considerations relating to the impact of the proposals on the setting of the designated heritage assets discussed within this Statement (which include, location and siting, form and appearance, effects and permanence17), judgements on the impact of the outline proposals on significance have been set out below.

5.2 The proposals are detailed in drawings and a Design and Access Statement (DAS) prepared by Offset Architects and planning statements are presented by Edgars Planning Consultants, this report should be read alongside these application documents.

5.3 The proposals are partly retrospective to cover works already undertaken and partly to consider further changes to secure a new future use for the stables, which are no longer required for equestrian accommodation. Equestrian use will remain within the western stable. The southern store will be restored, as on going, and used without alteration for additional storage.

5.4 In brief the proposals can be summarised as follows.

Retrospective

• Repair and replacement of elements of failed roof structure utilising suitable timber, hand made clay peg tiles and internal lining and insultation to historic lining pattern (ceiling at collar level).

• Repair and restoration of timber framed wall structure and roof structure to Block 4, southern stable, new roof with suitably matched clay peg tiles.

New elements

• Conversion of main stables to form estate office including document store and meeting room, new plant room, new gun store, new workshop, kitchenette and WCs, and stores.

• Re-opening of blocked historic doorways and restoration of extant doors.

17 Historic England’s guidance on setting GPA3

Site Name | 23

• Re-instatement of historic openings with insertion of windows into historic openings.

• Creation of new single width door internally to facilitate flow through building between WCs and Record store in NW corner.

• Partial removal of timber partitions in north range to create estate office, retention of majority of partitions, all doors, windows and troughs.

• Removal of selected troughs and water basins in western range.

Impact Assessment

Repair and restoration of southern stable and repair and replacement of roof on main stables.

5.5 The works to repair and restore the structural integrity of the southern stable and the partly derelict roof over the main stable has sought to replicate the historic form and material palette in all ways, utilising reclaimed and salvaged brick, tile and timber wherever it was structurally feasible to do so.

5.6 The only modern material introduced is the new water proof membrane chosen has a proven track record of use within historic buildings and is deemed an entirely appropriate choice to secure the long term water proofing of the building beneath the reinstated Kentish clay peg tile roof.

5.7 All buildings require ongoing maintenance and repair, the scope of repairs at this site is by necessity large in scope because of the deteriorated condition of the buildings. But, the work will not change the appearance, character, or legible function of the building. It will preserve the spatial and visual relationships with the listed Western pavilion. For these reasons the retrospective application for repair and restoration work, although it has involved considerable replacement of what was ostensibly 19th century fabric, is considered to be wholly beneficial to heritage values. The work maintains and preserves the illustration of the historic form of the estate and varying functions of this ancillary building added in the 19th century.

Conversion of main stables

5.8 The stables are no longer required for equestrian accommodation. The new use is directly related to the functioning of the estate and is deemed appropriate. It will

Site Name | 24

keep the buildings in use for purposes ancillary to the main listed building and the wider estate.

5.9 The proposals have been designed so that the new uses utilise the existing spaces within the former stables with minimum physical change and with the preservation and retention of features that will continue to directly illustrate the historic use and function of the building preserving legibility of the historic and architectural values both internally and externally.

Re-opening of blocked historic openings.

5.10 Historic openings exist in two types: extant historic doors fixed closed and blocked in brick on one side; and, fully blocked openings now legible in queen closers and change in mortar or lintel position.

Plates 15-16: Blocked openings in the NW corner room. Left, a wide arched opening with clear brick arch. Right, retained 19th century door on heavy strap hinges, blocked in brick on the opposite side within a later loose box.

5.11 Restoration of these blocked openings will restore elements of the original stable’s design and circulation between spaces. This will lead to an enhanced legibility of the 19th century form and appearance, particularly significant are the wide arched openings on the east and west ends of the northern façade (Plate 15), which will restore some sense of link to the landscape on that side as well as the architectural restoration of features that are also matched on the southern elevations of the projecting ranges. Historic maps suggest an access track along this side of the building and greater activity here. Restoration of these openings, as well as the

Site Name | 25

central carriage arch will re-vitalise this façade. Evidence that they were full height and featured doors is presence in the interrupted plinth and stone blocks that took the pintle hinges.

5.12 Some doorways are proposed to be reinstated as windows. The windows will be full height enabling an understanding of the historic door use but facilitating better light within the future proposed use where circulation is still not required. Though this will be a change in function the restored position of openings will still assist in a better understanding of the historic original form of the building.

New door in NW corner

5.13 One new door opening is proposed to give access between the new secure document and archive store and the new kitchen and WC area in the north west corner. This will see the removal of a small area of mid 19th century brickwork. When considering the scale of the building overall, and where the focus of its architectural values lie this minor change will not give rise to any harm to heritage values. The fabric to be removed is mid 19th century in date, not inherently rare or of material or technological interest and does not exhibit any specific features that are intrinsic to architectural or historic interest.

Partial removal of timber loose box partitions in north range.

5.14 The quality of these partitions, assessed as a later 20th century insertion in the building, is plain and unremarkable. The proposed removal of parts of them is not inherently problematic in terms of loss of fabric. The proposal will retain the majority of the partitions in their current position enabling continued legibility of the way the building was divided in the later 20th century. Alongside this the retention within the northern range of all water troughs and adaptation to re-use within the proposed office offers an imaginative solution that will preserve legibility of historic values and functional evidence.

5.15 The design solution presented here is very sympathetic to the historic use and maintaining a clear means to understand historic functions in and alongside the new use. The material to be lost is not of inherent interest or design quality and thus overall there is not erosion of heritage values.

Site Name | 26

Plate 17: Loose box within central range. Partitions on each side will be partly truncated to facilitate movement through the new estate office portion, the trough at the back will be retained and incorporated into a long worksurface with glass top to maintain visibility

Plate 18: northern elevation of the stables from the north east showing the traditional and generally low lying forms. Historically there were three entrances on this side, onto a track along the elevation.

Removal of selected water and feed troughs in western range.

5.16 The troughs are mid 20th century additions of concrete and are deemed to have limited inherent aesthetic appeal. They are to be retained wherever possible, most specifically within the new estate office where imaginative re-use will see them integrated into the spaces (plate 17). With deliberate retention in some parts of the building the removal of these features elsewhere within the structure to facilitate new uses is not thought to erode the legibility overall of the building’s former function or to erode heritage illustrative historic values greatly.

Summary effect on Pavilion west of Mereworth Castles

5.17 The application seeks to regularise a series of restorative and repair works undertaken to date which maintain the overall form and appearance of this building. The new proposals will see minimal external changes, and those that do occur focussed in areas of previously blocked openings that will better reveal and restore thee original historic appearance of this building.

Site Name | 27

5.18 The proposals will not erode the role that this 19th century stables plays in the historic significance of the western pavilion, of which it is considered to form a part of through the provision of section 1.5(b) of the Act. The legibility of the main 18th century structures at the heart of a landscaped estate with ancillary stabling dating to some 100 years later will remain unaffected. In preserving the external form and appearance of the stables the architectural relationships between the listed buildings and these ancillary structures will be entirely preserved.

5.19 There will be no impact to any associative values, nor to any aesthetic values as the physical relationships between these buildings will remain unaltered.

Summary effect on registered park

5.20 The proposed new use is considered sensitive and appropriate, maintaining estate specific functions within an existing historic building that is no longer required for stabling. The re-use of this building enables estate management to be central within the estate without the introduction of new built forms within the sensitive landscape or the setting of the listed Mereworth Castle and the two pavilions.

5.21 The restoration of historic openings in the former stables’ northern façade will improve the appearance of this elevation and increase links with the area of parkland to the north, restoring a minor element of connectivity that was once greater. Because the external form and appearance of the former stables will not substantively change, except for with the positive restoration of openings, the historic role of these buildings as illustrating a 19th century development within the designed landscape will be preserved.

5.22 The restoration of derelict ancillary structures and provision of a new use intimately tied to the management and running of the estate is a positive and enhancing heritage benefit.

Site Name | 28

6. Conclusions

6.1 The stables at Mereworth Castle were constructed in the second half of the 19th century by Evelyn Boscawen, Viscount Falmouth, to support his race horse breeding enterprise. They sit in the location of a smaller range present since the early 19th century and used as an element of estate farm for animal accommodation. In the late 20th century they were adapted and the stabling accommodation changed, much of the interiors date to this period.

6.2 The stables contribute primarily to the historic values of the Pavilion West of Mereworth Castle, which they are considered to form part of through section 1.5(b) of the Act. They illustrate a distinct phase of 19th century development of the estate landscape and facilities for equestrian pursuits by a single owner. Their architectural values are primarily of interest in the contrast to the strongly Palladian earlier buildings of Mereworth Castle and the two Pavilions. They also make a positive if diminutive contribution to the wider registered park’s historic and architectural values, illustrating and giving evidence of the 19th century period in the estate’s history.

6.3 An application affecting the stables seeks to gain retrospective consent for a programme of comprehensive structural repairs and replacement of derelict and at risk parts of the building, particularly the roof elements which were partially collapsed. In addition, permission is sought for the change of use of the stables, no longer needed for equestrian uses, to form a new estate office and associated estate focussed functions such as document stores, a gun room, general storage.

6.4 The designs proposed give rise to positive enhancement and restoration of the overall appearance of the building including the reinstatement of blocked original openings. Internally, efforts have been made to retain many of the stable fixtures and fittings and imaginatively incorporating the into the new uses and the removal of some of these is not considered to erode heritage values as they are relatively modern features with little inherent aesthetic or material quality. This will ensure the former function of the building remains clear and legible into the future preserving heritage values and the contribution that this building makes to the high heritage significance of Mereworth Castle, and the two pavilions east and west of the castle, all of which are Grade I listed buildings.

Site Name | 29

6.5 The above elements also apply to the effect on the registered parkland. The buildings will be restored using traditional materials and techniques and the historic visual relationship that the stables had with the surrounding landscape will be unaffected. The registered parkland will also not be affected by the proposed use, where the estate as a whole will benefit from having centrally located staff and facilities within a sensitively re-purposed historic building.

6.6 No harm is identified to any designated asset within the estate the relevant paragraphs of the NPPF are not engaged and there is considered to be preservation in respect of the decision maker’s duty as set down within the Act. In maintaining the building in a sensitive and traditional way with carefully designed new interventions, and in ensuring the ongoing functioning and viability of a significant historic building that directly contributes to the historic values of the estate and listed buildings within it the proposal can be supported from a heritage perspective.

Site Name | 30

7. Bibliography and references

Standard Sources

https://maps.nls.uk

https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list

www.heritagegateway.org.uk

http://magic.defra.gov.uk

www.british-history.ac.uk/victoria-county-history

The Setting of Heritage Assets: Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3

(Second Edition). Historic England (2017 edition)

Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act, 1990

National Planning Policy Framework, 2019

National Planning Practice Guidance, 2019

Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance, Historic England (2008) Maps:

A topographical map of the county of Kent in twenty five sheets on a scale of two inches to a mile, from an actual survey. 1769 available at: https://www.rct.uk/collection/701700/a-topographical-map-of-the-county-of-kent-in- twenty-five-sheets-on-a-scale-of-two

British Library Ordnance Surveyors’ Drawings Collection: OSD119 Item 276: Addington

Tithe data available from The genealogist.co.uk. Original data: "IR29 Tithe Commission and successors: Tithe Apportionments" The National Archives Online:

https://thecountryseat.org.uk/2012/12/20/finest-country-seats-mereworth-castle-kent/

https://www.thedicamillo.com/house/mereworth-castle/

Other:

Brunskill, R W (1990) ‘Brick Building in Britain’ Victor Gollancz, London

Site Name | 31

Colvin, H (1995, 3rd edition) A biographical dictionary of British Architects 1600-1840 Yale University Press, New Haven and London

Summerson, J (1993, 9th edition) Architecture in Britain 1530-1830 Yale University Press, London.

Site Name | 32

Appendix 1

Scale of Harm (HCUK, 2019)

The table below has been worked up by HCUK Group (2019) based on current policy and guidance. It is intended as simple and effect way to better define harm and the implications of that finding on heritage significance. It draws on various recent appeal decisions and reflects the increasing importance being put on the contribution of setting to significance and the need to create a greater level of clarity within the finding of less than substantial harm (see the NPPF, paragraph 194-196). This has been proving more and more necessary and the table below goes some way to reflect the most recent updates (2019) to the guidance set out within the NPPG18

Scale of Harm

Total Loss Total removal of the significance of the designated heritage asset.

Serious harm that would drain away or vitiate the significance of Substantial Harm the designated heritage asset

High level harm that could be serious, but not so serious as to vitiate or drain away the significance of the designated heritage asset.

Less than Medium level harm, not necessarily serious to the significance of Substantial Harm the designated heritage asset, but enough to be described as significant, noticeable, or material.

Low level harm that does not seriously affect the significance of the designated heritage asset.

Heritage Collective, 2019

It is recognised that not all parts of a heritage asset will necessarily be of equal significance. In some cases, certain aspects or elements could accommodate change without affecting the government’s objectives, which include ‘intelligently managed change’ and which seeks to

18 See NPPG 2019. Section: ‘How can the possibility of harm to a heritage asset be assessed?’. Paragraph 3, under this heading notes that ‘within each category of harm (which category applies should be explicitly identified), the extent of the harm may vary and should be clearly articulated.’

Site Name | 33

ensure decisions are based on the nature, extent and level of significance of those heritage assets affected.

Change is only considered to be harmful where it erodes or negatively affects a heritage asset’s significance. Understanding the significance of any heritage asset (along with any contribution made by its setting) is, therefore, fundamental to understanding the ability for the asset to accept change.

Site Name | 34

Appendix 2 Assessment - Historic England’s Guidance on Setting, (GPA3, 2017)

In assessing the effect of the proposed works to the stables on the setting and significance of designated heritage assets, it is relevant to consider how the following factors may or may not take effect, with particular reference to the considerations in Steps 2 and 3 of GPA3. The following analysis seeks to highlight the main relevant considerations.

Relevant Considerations Mereworth Castle, east pavilion, west pavilion. Grade I

Proximity of the development to the Located some 200m from the closest point of the western asset pavilion to the central courtyard of the main stable block.

Proximity in relation to topography Stables sit west of the main house which looks north over a and watercourses series of manmade ponds and lakes that run east to west through the parkland. The stables face away from the ponds and lakes.

Position of development in relation The development will not change any aspect of key views, which to key views are heavily aligned on the axial points of the main Mereworth Castle, framed by the pavilions, which are inward looking towards a formal front forecourt. The proposals do not substantially affect the external appearance of the stables and thus will not change incidental views through the landscape.

Orientation of the development There will be no change to the alignment or arrangement of the historic stables.

Prominence, dominance and There will be no change to the existing prominence of the conspicuousness former stables.

Competition with or distraction from There will be none as the historic relationship will be the asset maintained.

Dimensions, scale, massing, The proportions of the buildings will not change. proportions

Visual permeability No change.

Materials and design All external materials are entirely sympathetic to the historic form and material palette. Internal design changes have

Site Name | 35

reference to evidence of historic forms and openings and seek to preserve all elements of the historic envelope and relationship with the main listed buildings.

Diurnal or seasonal change No change

Change to built surroundings and No change, the project is primarily restorative with minor spaces internal changes to suit a new use only.

Change to skyline, silhouette none

Change to general character none

Site Name | 36

Appendix 3 - Full List Descriptions

Mereworth Castle Park and Garden

Grade: II*

List Entry Number: 1000938

Date first listed: 01-May-1986

County: Kent

District: Tonbridge and Malling (District Authority)

Parishes : East Peckham, Kings Hill, Mereworth, Wateringbury

County: Kent

National Grid Reference: TQ6654453174

Details

An early to mid C18 landscaped park laid out around a contemporary early C18 Palladian villa house by the architect Colen Campbell, with additional, formal terraced gardens laid out in the mid to late C19 and early C20 around the house.

Site Name | 37

HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT

DESCRIPTION

LOCATION, AREA, BOUNDARIES, LANDFORM, SETTING The registered site of Mereworth Castle lies to the north and south of the main A26, Tonbridge to Maidstone road on the south-east edge of the village of Mereworth, the principal portion containing the house, gardens, and park lying south of the road. The 130ha site, which comprises 4ha of formal gardens around the house, c 10ha of kitchen gardens, orchard and associated Home Farm buildings, and c 116ha of parkland with lakes and woodland, lies in the broad, shallow valley of an eastward-flowing stream tributary of the River Medway, the valley sides sweeping upwards to wooded crests which form the north and south horizons of the site.

The southern, principal area is bounded to the north and in the north-west corner by an internal tree fringe along the A26 and to the east by minor lanes from which the park is separated in the north-east corner by fields and gardens associated with properties on Pizien Well Road. To the south and west, the woodland and grassland of the park merge into Peckham Fields Wood and adjacent farmland. The narrow strip of the site north of the A26 is bounded by orchard and kitchen garden walls, beyond which are further orchards and farmland, while further north, the site is abutted by a golf course on the east side and a housing estate on the northern boundary.

ENTRANCES AND APPROACHES The house, gardens, and park are approached from the A26 to the north, a surfaced drive entering through wrought-iron gates on the northern boundary c 400m north-north-west of the house and following a southerly course across the chain of lakes before striking due east along the north front of the stables and the northern ha-ha wall which encloses the forecourt to the house. The drive turns south to cross the ha-ha on a causeway and passes between a pair of mature cedars to enter the forecourt on the north front of the house which is laid out with an oval grassed turning circle flanked by further lawns abutting

Site Name | 38

the pavilions to east and west. At the causeway, the drive is joined by a second approach drive, which runs due south from wrought-iron gates on the A26, on the axis of the principal, north front of the house. This axial route is shown as the only approach in 1769 (Andrews, Dury and Herbert), but is not shown on subsequent maps again until 1898 (OS). The present, westerly drive is shown on Mudge's map of 1801 and appears then to have existed in parallel with the axial drive from 1898 until the present (1997).

The axial drive also extends north of the road, continuing for some 1.1km to the site boundary on the crest of the ridge. Laid out by John Fane in the early to mid C18 (it is shown as a tree- lined avenue on Andrews, Dury and Herbert's map of 1769), it extended until the late C20 some 350m further north to a lodge (now, 1997, gone). The drive entrance is flanked on its road frontage by a pair of two-storey, three-bay rendered lodges (listed grade II), each with a projecting pedimented porch facing south onto the road. North of the lodges the drive passes through walled orchard land, on the east side of which is the walled kitchen garden, then through the remnants of a further orchard before climbing the last 300m to the boundary as a broad grassed walk flanked to either side by a belt of coppice woodland containing, on the west side, remnants of lines of mature sweet chestnut trees.

PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS Mereworth Castle (listed grade I) stands on level ground towards the centre of the park. Replacing an earlier house on the site it was built in 1723 by Colen Campbell as a copy of Palladio's villa for Paolo Amerigo near Vicenza. Its 27m square, 16.5m high, pale pink-painted stuccoed form, which was surrounded by a moat subsequently infilled c 1860, is surmounted by a hipped slate roof with dome and lantern. To north and south, broad flights of stone steps lead up to its otherwise identical elevations which each have an Ionic portico, entablature, and window surrounds constructed in Portland stone. To its north-east and north-west the villa is flanked by a pair of detached pavilions (listed grade I), added c 1740-50, each of a central cube form with a rendered finish and a low, pyramidal roof and with a deep pedimented Tuscan portico on the east and west elevations facing into the forecourt. The north and south elevations have deep, arcaded loggias. The north-east pavilion contains a room decorated as a shell grotto while adjacent to the west side of the west pavilion are two single-storey brick and timber stable and outhouse wings, the northern wing now (1997) in a ruinous state.

GARDENS AND PLEASURE GROUNDS The formal gardens are laid out on two terraces (shown established on the OS 1st edition map surveyed 1867-8) to the south and east of the house, which are raised on the random-coursed stone wall of a surrounding ha-ha. On the south side, the staircase from the portico descends onto a rectangular upper terrace, enclosed by stone walls surmounted by balustrading, which is laid out to lawn and a central axial lily pool and from which steps lead down into the gardens on the east and west sides of the main terrace. These gardens, laid out, together with those on the upper terrace, by Lady Falmouth from c 1889 until c 1920 (CL 1920), are planted as a parterre with rectilinear patterns of clipped box hedging, lawns, and gravel paths and with a columnar cypress as a focal point in the south- east and south-west corners.

The eastern, raised terrace extends some 210m eastwards from the east side of the forecourt and the east pavilion. From the pavilion's arcaded loggia a gravelled walk, bordered by lawn and flanked by tall, clipped yew hedges, extends 180m along the length of the southern edge of the terrace to terminate at a stone seat within a hedged niche. On the north side of the walk is a series of enclosed gardens which, with the walk, were also laid out by Lady Falmouth. The westernmost of these, reached from the walk down steps beneath an arch in the yew hedge, is laid out as a rectangular sunken lawn enclosed by further yew hedging, that along the east

Site Name | 39

side pierced with a row of clairvoies. An opening on the north side gives access and a vista to the park and the lakes. East of the sunken lawn and enclosed by yew hedging is a 45m square rose garden with a central timber-framed aviary, erected in the mid C20 by Lady Anne Tree, surrounded by rose beds laid out in scroll and heart-shaped patterns cut into lawn. The rose garden is flanked to east and west by narrow, hedged side enclosures, each with a central north/south gravelled path and planted with, in the west garden (adjacent to the sunken lawn), beds of mixed shrubbery and in the east garden, mixed borders and roses trained on low wires. North of the rose garden, the bank above the enclosing ha-ha wall is planted with shrub groups and trees, including several mature conifers. At the far east end of the eastern terrace and partly breaching the eastern ha-ha wall is a rectangular, high-walled enclosure, entered through doors in the west and east walls and containing a sunken rose garden with two tiers of perimeter rose beds and a central lawn, built between 1909 and 1938 (OS).

PARK The park surrounds the house and its terraced gardens on all sides. To the north, the stream flowing eastwards through the park is dammed at the eastern end to form a 0.8km long series of three linear lakes (shown established on Andrews, Dury and Herbert's map of 1769), each linked to the next by late C19 rockwork cascades (OS 1896) and with the central lake crossed by the axial drive on a causeway. From the crossing points of both drives there is a vista westwards over the lakes to St Lawrence's church (built by John Fane to replace the previous church which had stood adjacent to the west pavilion) in Mereworth village. The lake edges are intermittently and lightly fringed with trees including groups of weeping willows and poplar. On the north-east shore of the easternmost lake, above the dam, is a small Chinese- style bridge, erected by Lady Anne Tree in the mid C20 and now in a ruinous state. East below the dam, the stream runs through woodland and carr to the site boundary. The parkland surrounding the lakes to the north-west, north, and north-east is open in character, laid to permanent grass and dotted with a number of groups and clumps of trees planted in the late C20 and with, adjacent to the present drive, a few mature conifers.

To the immediate north-west of the house are the red-brick buildings and yards of the Home Farm, established by the late 1860s (OS 1872), and an adjacent brick and timber-clad indoor tennis court, erected between 1909 and 1938 (OS). West of these the parkland is divided into several hedge-lined fields (established between 1867 and 1896, OS) and now cultivated for a hay crop. Some 70m south-west of the southern terrace is a wooded mound containing a brick-lined icehouse which is depicted on the OS map of 1872.

South of the house the valley slopes rise to form an amphitheatre of open, grassed parkland, the bowl of which was laid out in the mid C18 with a formal hedge or tree-lined enclosure with a central pond. This feature, which is shown on Andrews, Dury and Herbert's map of 1769 and is described by Walpole (CL 1920), is now (1997) gone. The slopes are framed by enclosing ridges planted with belts of mixed woodland, including mature conifers, the belt to the east shown on the map of 1769 as cut by a pattern of formal walks, now gone. One of these formed a vista from the house and park to the Triumphal Arch (listed grade II), a brick building faced with sandstone ashlar situated in the southernmost corner of the site, c 930m from the house. Constructed c 1725, it is now hidden from view and in a dilapidated state. Within the western woodland belt, c 500m south-west of the house, is a rendered, octagonal building, now in a ruinous state, described as a temple by Walpole in 1752 (CL 1920).

KITCHEN GARDEN The kitchen garden lies on the north side of the A26, c 70m to the north of the east lodge. It is c 160m in length and of a roughly rectangular shape which narrows towards the southern end. It is fully enclosed by high red-brick walls (listed grade II), shown established by 1867-8 (OS 1872) and laid out with a series of C20 glasshouses, now (1997) in

Site Name | 40

a dilapidated state. Built against the mid-point of the eastern wall (part of which is late C18) is a mid to late C19 brick and rendered cottage (known as The Bothy, listed grade II) with a thatched roof and two cone-roofed turrets bracketed to the south-east and south-west corners. In the extreme north-east corner of the garden is a single-storey brick gardener's cottage (listed grade II).

REFERENCES

Country Life, 120 (12 June 1920), pp 808-16; (19 June 1920), pp 876-83; (26 June 1920), pp 912-19 P Coats, Great Gardens of Britain (1963), pp 282-7 C Hussey, English Country Houses: Early Georgian, 1715-1760 (1965), pp 58-65 J Newman, The Buildings of England: West Kent and the Weald (1969), pp 403-05 B Jones, Follies & Grottoes (1974), p 156

Maps J Andrews, A Dury and W Herbert, A Topographical Map of the County of Kent, 2" to 1 mile, 1769 W Mudge, Map of Kent, 1" to 1 mile, 1801 C Greenwood, Map of the County of Kent from an actual survey made in the years 1819 and 1820, c 1" to 1 mile, 1821

OS 6" to 1 mile: 1st edition surveyed 1867-8, published 1872 2nd edition published 1898 3rd edition published 1909 1937/8 edition OS 25" to 1 mile: 2nd edition published 1896 3rd edition published 1909 1938 edition

Description written: December 1997 Register Inspector: VCH Edited: November 2003

MEREWORTH CASTLE (MAIN BLOCK), MAIDSTONE ROAD

Grade: I

List Entry Number: 1070675

Date first listed: 01-Aug-1952

Date of most recent amendment: 04-Jul-1986

Statutory Address: MEREWORTH CASTLE (MAIN BLOCK), MAIDSTONE ROAD

County: Kent

District: Tonbridge and Malling (District Authority)

Parish: Mereworth

National Grid Reference: TQ 66895 53230

Details In entry for: TQ 65 SE MEREWORTH MAIDSTONE ROAD (south side)

2/43 Mereworth Castle 1.8.52 (main block) with GV moat walls to north the moat walls shall be omitted to read:

TQ 65 SE MEREWORTH MAIDSTONE ROAD (south side) 2/43 Mereworth Castle (main block) with 1.8.52 moat walls to north

GV I

Site Name | 41

House. Roofed 1723. Designed by Colin Campbell for John Fane, 1736 to become the Earl of Westmorland. Interior plasterwork by Francesco Bagutti and Fresco painting by Francesco Sleter. Based on Palladio's Villa Capra near Vicenza stuccoed in C18 'stone colour' with Portland stone porticos, entablatures and window surrounds. Leaded ribbed dome.

Large square block with 4 identical fronts, excepting the lack of portico steps to east and west. String-course above basement, cornice-band at portico entablature level. Hipped slate roof carrying heavily banded almost hemispherical dome with blind lantern surrounded by high half-columns. Single pedimented and balconied 1st floor windows each side of Hexastyle Ionic porticos. Flight of steps up to north and south porticos. The block was originally moated, parts still visible to north. Garden balustrades to north, connecting with side walls and abutments of portico steps.

Interior: Extremely important and an almost complete survival. Entrance Hall: Barrel-vaulted with plaster busts in shells over side doors and pair of female allegorical figures over arched doorway into central rotunda. Rotunda: 2 storeys and dome with plaster copping. Four major axial and four minor diagonal doorways on both floors, the upper to deep balustraded gallery on carved volute brackets. Cornice under gallery. Sumptuous plasterwork with pairs of female figures, putti and busts in shells over doorways, and rectangular relief panels, portrait busts and foliage drops arrayed on the walls. Axial doors with Ionic fluted doorcases in deep recesses with arched heads containing, east and west eagles with cartouches and wreaths, south, the Fane crest, and north, a bull's head in a coronet. Subsidiary doors below and axial doors above with triangular pediments. Library: Coved vault with central rectangular plaster compartments. Main doorcase with Corinthian half-columns and pediment, subsidiary doors with flat hoods. Shelves standing proud of the walls. West Bed-Chamber: Corner fireplace, compartmented painted and plastered ceiling with allegorical and antique scenes. Modillion cornice work pulvinated frieze. West Dressing Room: 2 storey fireplace with 4 corner volutes supporting mantel. Compartmented painted and plastered ceiling with allegorical and Antique scenes. Modillion (cont'd ) cornice with pulvinated frieze. Long Gallery: Deep cove painted illusionis- tically in the early C18 Venetian style by Francesco Sleter, dated 1732. Central plaster compartments with 5 'quadro riportati' allegorical scenes by Sleter. Modillion cornice with frieze-decoration of masks and wreaths. 3 doorways, with Corinthian half-columned and triangular pedimented surrounds. 2 pedimented chimney-pieces. East Dressing Room: Central rectangular panel to ceiling with allegorical scene and painted decoration in ceiling corners. 2- storey pedimented chimney-piece. Apple floor in geometrical patterns. Modillion cornice with acanthus frieze. East Bedroom: Compartmented painted and plastered ceiling with allegorical and Antique scenes. Corner fireplace. Modillion cornice, scroll and putti relief frieze. Dining Room: Coved ceiling with scrolled plaster supports in corners. 3 compartment plaster ceiling in rectangular surround. Mid C18 rococo fireplace with volute supports.

Sources: Books and journals

Harris, J, The Palladians, (1981), 66-67

Stutchbury, H E , The Architecture of Colen Campbell, (1967), 54-58

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 116, (), 209

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 116, (), 808 876

Site Name | 42

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 116, (), 912

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 116, (), 242

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 116, (), 728

Other

PAVILION TO THE NORTH WEST AND STABLES OF MEREWORTH CASTLE, MAIDSTONE ROAD

Grade: I

List Entry Number: 1070676

Date first listed: 01-Aug-1952

Statutory Address: PAVILION TO THE NORTH WEST AND STABLES OF MEREWORTH CASTLE, MAIDSTONE ROAD County: Kent

District: Tonbridge and Malling (District Authority)

Parish: Mereworth

National Grid Reference: TQ 66862 53285

Details TQ 65 SE MEREWORTH MAIDSTONE ROAD (south side)

2/41 Pavilion to the north west and stables of 1.8.52 Mereworth Castle

GV I

Pavilion Circa 1740-5O possibly by Henry Flitcroft. Rendered walls with stone dressings. Central cube with hipped slate roof topped by blind lantern. Deep Tuscan columned portico to east, arcaded porticos to north and south. Triglyph frieze. No interiors survive. For Literature see Mereworth Castle above. Stables to west, (not seen at time of re-survey).

Sources Books and journals

Harris, J, The Palladians, (1981), 66-67

Stutchbury, H E , The Architecture of Colen Campbell, (1967), 54-58

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 47, (), 808 876

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 47, (), 912

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 47, (), 242

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 47, (), 728

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 47, (), 209

Other

Site Name | 43

Pavilion to the north east of Mereworth Castle, Maidstone Road

County: Kent

District: Tonbridge and Malling (District Authority)

Parish: Mereworth

National Grid Reference: TQ 66942 53276

Details: MEREWORTH MAIDSTONE ROAD (south side) Pavilion to the north east of Mereworth Castle

1.8.52 GV I Pavilion circa 1740-1750 possibly by Henry Flitcroft. Rendered walls with stone dressings. Central cube with hipped slate roof topped by blind lantern. Deep Tuscan columned portico to west, arcaded porticos to north and south. Triglyph frieze. Shell room, restored 1980. South arched portico closed in with remains of decorative fresco, showing central arch with figure, and scroll-work. For literature see Mereworth Castle above.

Sources: Books and journals

Harris, J, The Palladians, (1981), 66-67

Stutchbury, H E , The Architecture of Colen Campbell, (1967), 54-58

'Mereworth Castle A Seat of The Viscount Falmouth' in Country Life, , Vol. 47, (12 June 1920), 808- 816

'Mereworth Castle A Seat of The Viscount Falmouth' in Country Life, , Vol. 47, (19 June 1920), 912-919

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 95, (1940), 242

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 109, (1951), 728

'Country Life' in Country Life, , Vol. 116, (1954), 209

Other

Site Name | 44