Heritage Assessment

HERITAGE ASSESSMENT

LAND AT HARLEY WAY, BENEFIELD, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

MICHAEL DAWSON MPHIL FSA MIFA

15th JUNE 2011

No part of this report is to be copied in any way without prior written consent.

Every effort is made to provide detailed and accurate information, however, CgMs Limited cannot be held responsible for errors or inaccuracies within this report.

HERITAGE ASSESSMENT

LAND AT HARLEY WAY, BENEFIELD, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY: East Northamptonshire District Council and Northamptonshire County Council

SITE CENTRED AT: TL 006 879

MICHAEL DAWSON MPHIL FSA MIFA

15th June 2011

CgMs Consulting 2 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

CONTENTS

Executive Summary

1.0 Introduction and Scope of Study

2.0 Planning Background and Development Plan Framework

3.0 Geology and Topography

4.0 Archaeological and Historical Background, including Map Regression Exercise

5.0 Site Conditions and the Proposed Development

6.0 Summary and Conclusions

Sources Consulted

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1 Site Location Fig. 2 Historic Environment Record data Fig. 3 Historic Environment Record data Fig. 4 Historic Environment Record data Fig. 5 Historic Environment Events & past surveys Fig. 6 RCHM plot of Churchfield Village Fig. 7 The proposed development site Fig. 8 The proposed development site in June 2011

CgMs Consulting 3 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Land at Harley Way, Benefield, Northamptonshire has been considered for its heritage potential.

The proposed development area can be shown to have a high potential for archaeological survival of evidence from the Roman and medieval periods. This is because the development area is almost entirely within an area which has been the deserted medieval village of Churchfield and a Roman period settlement.

Due to the level of archaeological evidence in the study area the development site, therefore, has high potential to yield further archaeological evidence. This report suggests the potential for further evidence should be evaluated by geophysical survey and trial trenching. It is anticipated that the evidence from both medieval and Roman periods will have significantly eroded by ploughing, particularly as the site lies on a slope, and that the magnitude of direct impact, however, will therefore provide an absolute constraint to development.

The indirect impact of the proposed quarry has also been assessed in terms recommended by English Heritage and PPS 5. The report concludes that the proposed development does not lie within the setting of any designated assets and that the visual impact of the development, in particular on Churchfield Farm Grade II, will not intrude into any settings, or affect the significance of any heritage assets.

CgMs Consulting 4 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF STUDY

1.1 This Heritage Assessment has been researched and prepared by Michael Dawson of CgMs Consulting, on behalf of G P Planning.

1.2 The assessment considers the proposed development of a quarry on land south of Harley Way, Benefield. The site is centred at National Grid Reference TL 006 879 (Fig 1).

1.3 In accordance with local and central government guidance on archaeology and planning (PPS 5) this assessment draws together the available archaeological, topographic and land-use information in order to clarify the archaeological potential of the proposed development area.

1.4 The assessment comprises an examination of evidence in the Northamptonshire Historic Environment Record (NHER), considers the results of nearby archaeological investigations, incorporates published and unpublished material and charts historic land-use through a map regression exercise.

1.5 The assessment identifies the potential impact of the proposed development on archaeology as the basis for determining an appropriate mitigation strategy.

CgMs Consulting 5 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

2.0 PLANNING BACKGROUND AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FRAMEWORK

2.1 In March 2010, the Departments of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) jointly published Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment, providing guidance for planning authorities, property owners, developers and others on the conservation preservation and investigation of Heritage Assets.

2.2 Heritage Assets are defined in Annexe 2 of PPS5 as a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape positively identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions and as the valued components of the historic environment.

2.3 In short, government guidance provides a framework which:

Protects nationally important designated Heritage Assets (which include World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Ancient Monuments, Listed Buildings, Protected Wreck Sites, Registered Parks and Gardens, Registered Battlefields or Conservation Areas) Protects Heritage Assets (as defined above) Protects the settings of such designations In appropriate circumstances seeks adequate information (from field evaluation) to enable informed decisions Provides for the excavation and investigation of sites not significant enough to merit in-situ preservation.

2.4 In considering any planning application for development, the local planning authority is bound by the policy framework set by government guidance, in this instance PPS5, by current Development Plan Policy and by other material considerations.

Regional Plan Policy

2.5 The East Midlands Regional Plan comprises the Regional Spatial Strategy for the East Midlands for the period up to 2026. With the introduction of the Local Development Plan Framework (LDF) the RSS had provided regional policies relating to archaeology, however, the government has indicated its intention to revoke Regional Strategies. In considering any planning application for development, therefore, the local planning authority is bound by the policy framework set by government guidance, in this instance PPS5, and by other material considerations.

CgMs Consulting 6 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

3.0 GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY

3.1 Geology

3.1.1 The British Geological Survey indicates that the solid geology of the proposed development site comprises Blisworth limestones. These are pale grey to off-white or yellowish limestones with thin marls and mudstones, fossiliferous, bioturbated peloidal, ooidal and shell-fragmental more-or-less argillaceous packstones and wackestones, subordinate cross-bedded ooidal shell-fragmental grainstones: fauna may include rhynchonellids particularly in the lower part in the south, and may be dominated by oysters, notably in the upper part in the north1.

3.1.2 The soil types are generally clay and gravel, with a subsoil of clay and ironstone.

3.2 Topography

3.2.1 The proposed development area is located in the Lyveden valley on high ground above the east flowing tributary stream of the River Nene, slightly west of the Biggin Fish Pond. The site occupies a sloping valley side above the stream with a former quarry to the east and woodland to the north beyond the Harley Way. The present day topography of the region comprises a series of low ridges north of the River Nene Valley and it is on one of those ridges that Churchfield Farm and the proposed site lie. The development area is located on land which is gently inclined to the south at some 50m - 45m AOD.

1 http://maps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyviewer_google/googleviewer.html accessed 21/6/11

CgMs Consulting 7 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

4.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND (Including Map Regression Exercise)

4.1 Timescales used in this report:

Prehistoric Palaeolithic 450,000 - 12,000 BC Mesolithic 12,000 - 4,000 BC Neolithic 4,000 - 1,800 BC Bronze Age 1,800 - 600 BC Iron Age 600 - AD 43

Historic Roman AD 43 - 410 Saxon/Early Medieval AD 410 - 1066 Medieval AD 1066 - 1485 Post Medieval AD 1486 - 1749 Modern AD 1750 - Present

4.2 Introduction

4.2.1 The report which follows is a consideration of archaeological finds and features within the proposed development area. In addition archaeological and historical evidence within a study area, 500m from the proposed development site, has been taken into account to identify patterns of past activity which might contribute to assessing the proposed development area’s potential to contain significant heritage assets.

4.3 Palaeolithic

4.3.1 No Palaeolithic finds have been found within the proposed development area or within the wider study area.

4.3.2 The presence of Palaeolithic archaeology is notoriously hard to predict. The majority of evidence from the wider region is from stray artefacts with few in-situ sites (Cooper, 2006). Overall, the proposed development area can be defined as having a very low potential.

CgMs Consulting 8 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

4.4 Early Prehistoric (Mesolithic, Neolithic and Bronze Age)

4.4.1 Only one area of early prehistoric activity has been recorded within the study area, a Neolithic site of uncertain character (NHER9424).

4.4.2 In this region the pattern of prehistoric activity suggests the potential for any significant heritage assets from this period at the proposed development site is likely to be slight.

4.5 Iron Age and Roman

4.5.1 Within the study area there is a significant body of evidence from the Iron Age and Roman-British period. South of the proposed development site and across the valley is an area of putative Iron Age settlement (NHER 7771), whilst several Roman period sites are located to the north (NHER2486), east (NHER 2391, 2392, 2393, 2400) and to the west (NHER2487). One site is situated within the proposed development area (NHER 9433).

4.5.2 The character of the Roman period sites has been assessed largely from surface finds which indicate exploitation and processing of the underlying ironstone. At one site to the west there may be a villa (NHER 2487).

4.5.3 The density of Roman period activity in the area, its concentration on ironstone deposits and the location on the south facing valley side suggests that the settlement may also be associated with agricultural enclosures and constitute a series of farmsteads and extraction sites, with small scale iron working comparable with that know from Priors Hall, Corby. The proposed development site which contains known Roman remains will therefore require further evaluation to characterise the deposits and provide a firmer assessment of their significance.

4.6 Anglo-Saxon, Medieval and Early Post-Medieval

4.6.1 Evidence of late Anglo-Saxon period activity has been found within the study area (NHER 2401) to the east of the proposed development site close to the Roman period settlement (NHER2400). The date of this suggests the Roman settlement pattern had disappeared by the 10th century. However, the northern part of the proposed site is occupied by the remains of the deserted medieval village of Churchfield (NHER2402). The village was first recorded in 964 AD and later in the Cartularium Saxonicum in 1129 as Ciricfeld, later still as Chirchefeld in 1189 and 1332. It means simply church

CgMs Consulting 9 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

within a field. Churchfield comprised two manors, one of which came in the 15th century to Tresham of Sywell, the other was owned by a freeholder of Stoke Doyle. The latter comprised in 1465 of one messuage and 60 acres of land. By 1720 a mansion house with Chapel Close adjacent was mentioned, which has been identified with Wakerley Lodge, where a moat was visible in the 19th century. By 1674, however, only one house was recorded in the hearth tax return for Churchfield and the site was recorded as almost completely destroyed by ploughing in the last quarter of the 20th century.2. The village site has been surveyed on several occasions principally by fieldwalking and aerial photographs (ENN 2117, 105198, 2113, 1198, 2116, 2118, 105197, 2115, 2114, 102695). Churchfield lies within Rockingham Forest. During the medieval period the valley was divided between six separate townships which were centred in adjacent valleys: Benefield, Brigstock, Aldwincle, Pilton, Stoke Doyle and Oundle, Churchfield which may have been a small township in its own right within the Lyveden valley itself. In addition there was the Abbot of Peterborough’s grange at Biggin which lay partly in Benefield in the 12th century. The parochial divisions broadly followed the secular but with Churchfield lying in Oundle parish. These parish divisions seem to be ancient for in 1316 the rector of Aldwincle claimed part of Lyveden to be titheable, and tithes of that part of Lyveden lying in Pilton were paid at Pilton church in 1705.

4.6.2 The physical remains of the village comprise pottery scatters (NHER2402/0/0) as well as architectural remains and earthworks close to Churchfield Farm, itself a listed building and probably the last surviving building of the village. The Royal Commission volume (RCHM 1975, 18 site 5) describes the physical remains in 1975 as “The greater part of the site is now under the plough, but the whole area is covered with limestone rubble and pottery dating from the 12th to early 13th century, much of it being the local Lyveden ware. Other finds from the site include tile, oyster shells, bone iron slag and a silver groat of Edward III…”. Although most information about the village derives from survey or documentary evidence a small excavation by Oundle School (1960-64) (ENN 2118) revealed the remains of what the RCHM describe as a substantial domestic building close to the present Churchfield Farmhouse.

4.6.3 With respect to the wider landscape and village hinterland “It is unlikely that a regular open-field system operated in this valley of dispersed settlement. A charter written at Potters Lyveden in 1327 refers to a messuage with three lands in the croft adjacent and parcels in named furlongs. Luzecotes (Luscote) is referred to as an assart. In the late 13th century, rent was paid for an assart at Lyveden. Some of the woods surrounding Lyveden are discussed under Farming Woods (Brigstock: Bailiwick) and

2 The brief description of the site has been taken from the county Historic Environment Record.

CgMs Consulting 10 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

Pilton (Bareshank Wood). Bradshaw Wood formerly next to Wadenhoe Wood has been destroyed (recorded as Bradehauw in 1293 ). Churchfield Wood is part of the belt of wood next to Oundle Wood. It was referred to in a 1395 dispute between the abbot of Peterborough and the rector of Oundle about firewood rights, the abbot trying to limit collection of trees, underwood, shrubs and saplings to 36 acres of wood in a wood called Southawe in the parish of Oundle: beginning from Churchefeldewode descending northwards to the stone boundary at the northern end of sladeweygate alias stanbriggeweye and thence following the valley southwards to another stone boundary set in the middle of Southawe wood and thence...to another stone boundary abutting on Stybbyngclos”.3 Hall notes the status of Churchfield as a separate township until the 16th century Churchfield but that it has been enclosed by 1565 (Hall 1995, 326)..

4.6.4 The extent of evidence at Churchfield within the proposed development area though planned by the RCHM and noted in the HER, remains uncertain in the absence of further evaluation. It is certain that further evaluation will be required by the local authority in respect of a planning application to assess the survival of the medieval remains of Churchfield village.

4.7 Late Post Medieval and Modern (including map regression exercise)

4.7.1 In the 18th century the proposed development area was in agricultural use, and Bridges recorded a single house during this century which was probably Churchfield Farmhouse. The configuration of the present fields and the proposed development site may date from the 16th century enclosure though the appearance of the fields suggests dates from the late 18th or early 19th century.

4.7.2 The first edition OS 1886 shows the proposed development area in part subdivided into two rectangular fields. By 1901 the quarry to the east was already referred to as ‘old quarrying’ reflecting extraction during the late 19th century. The history of the proposed development site throughout the 20th century illustrated by the OS series shows the site to have remained in agriculture throughout.

3 http://resource.rockingham-forest- trust.org.uk/SiteResources/Data/Templates/1simpletextpagedownloads.asp?DocID=773&v1ID=&docidfile= accessed 23/6/11

CgMs Consulting 11 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

5.0 SITE CONDITIONS AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

5.1 Site Conditions

5.1.1 The proposed development area comprises a single large field presently arable farmland surrounded by hedges, and woodland. The land is slightly inclined from higher ground in the north (c.50m AOD) to lower ground (c.45m AOD) east of Churchfield Farm.

5.2 The Proposed Development

5.2.1 The proposed development is detailed in the accompanying planning application documents and is for stone quarrying.

5.2.2 The proposed development site lies within an area which is characterised by post- medieval fields established during, if not earlier, than the 16th century. Some consolidation of earlier enclosures may account for the 18th century or 19th century appearance of the fields.

5.2.3 The historical and archaeological evidence, as well as the map regression exercise, suggests the site has probably been in agricultural use throughout the Post-Medieval period but during the Medieval period it was the site of a now deserted medieval village of Churchfield. Occupied from the 10th to the 16th century the evidence of this settlement is extensive but unquantified (Fig 6).

5.2.4 In addition to the medieval evidence of settlement the site also contains evidence of Roman period activity which probably indicates the presence of a small settlement (NHER 9433).

5.2.5 Because of the high level of archaeological evidence generally from the area, (Figs 2, 3, 4) a programme of further evaluation will be necessary to establish the significance of any heritage assets which exist within the field. This programme should include the following:

5.2.6 Geophysical survey – the area of the proposed quarrying is limestone and an assessment should be made to see if this survey method is appropriate to the geological conditions. If it is, a survey sample size of 100% should be implemented

CgMs Consulting 12 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

across the application site. This survey is intended to provide the evidence base for targeted trial trenching. 5.2.7 Aerial Photograph assessment – intended as a further aid to targeted trial trenching the aerial photographs available in the County Historic Environment record should be assessed and if possible any crop or soil marks plotted. In common with the geophysical survey this procedure is intended to provide the evidence base for targeted trial trenching.

5.2.8 Targeted trial trenching - PPS 5 requires an assessment of the impact of development upon the significance of historic assets as the basis of a local authorities planning decision. Trial trenching should be carried out to characterise the site, to establish the extent of plough damage, the quality of any survival, and assess the date and range of settlement and other activities at the site.

5.2.9 The three techniques above will provide sufficient information on archaeological evidence of all periods from which to determine a planning application.

5.3 The Significance of the Evidence and Policy – Direct Impacts on Below ground Archaeology

5.3.1 The new PPS 5 Planning for the Historic Environment introduces the concept of significance as the basis for assessing impact on the historic environment and historic assets rather than importance previously used as a benchmark in the earlier guidance of PPG 16 Planning and Archaeology. In particular Policy HE 6.2 requires that ‘an assessment of the impact of the proposal should be set out in the application …as part of the explanation of the design concept’.

5.3.2 The Design Concept is set out in the planning application together with application site boundaries.

5.3.3 At present the proposed development site falls within that group of development sites where there is high potential for surviving archaeological evidence for which PPS 5 Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide (DCLG, EH and DCMS 2010) paragraph 103 notes that “If there is a belief that investigating an asset might reveal more about our past, it is said to have an archaeological interest.

5.3.4 In the circumstances at Churchfield Farm the combination of high archaeological potential and the ground conditions suggests that the most appropriate level of evaluation for the potential of heritage assets is to carry out further survey as detailed

CgMs Consulting 13 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

above. This would take place prior to determination but in the ground conditions pertaining at the site would ensure that sufficient information was available to the local authority to establish the direct impact of the quarrying on the significance of the archaeological evidence at Harley Way.

5.4 The Significance of the Evidence and Policy – Indirect Impacts on the Setting of heritage Assets

5.4.1 PPS 5 policy HE 6, dealing with Information Requirements for Applications for Consent Affecting Heritage Assets notes that Local Planning Authorities should require an applicant to provide a description of the significance of the heritage assets and the contribution of their setting to that significance (HE6.1). It goes on to state that the level of detail should be proportionate to the importance of the heritage asset and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on the significance of that asset.

5.4.2 Further guidance on setting is provided in Policy H9 where the test of substantial harm or total lost of significance to heritage asset is identified as a reason for refusal of consent.

5.4.3 The setting of designated assets. PPS 5 has defined setting as ‘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’.

Heritage assets

5.4.4 Churchfield Farm House. The significance of Churchfield Farmhouse lies in its architectural and historic interest. It is described as a 17th century farmhouse with mid 17th century origins, mainly mid 18th and 19th century. Squared coursed limestone with Colleyweston slate roof. Irregular T-shape plan, 2 storeys. Main front is a 3-window range with gabled cross wing breaking forward to left. 19th and 20th century casement windows under wood lintels. 2 openings to ground floor right have 20th century French doors. Lean-to porch, with 20th century door, to left and 20th century conservatory to right. Ashlar gable parapets and kneelers and ashlar stacks at ridge and end. Elevation to left has central gable end of main range with flanking one-window ranges of casements with glazing bars. Rear wing has 20th century extension. Its significance is

CgMs Consulting 14 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

encapsulated in its grade II designation4. The setting of the farmhouse comprises the earthwork remains of the former village and church, the latter probably situated east of the house. The setting is essentially rural, wooded and agricultural land, but in proximity to the Farmhouse is a large assemblage of modern farm sheds and buildings.

5.4.5 Impact on the setting of Churchfield Farmhouse due to quarrying nearby will be affected by the quarry during its lifetime and an area of farmland will be removed to the east. However the quarry will not adversely affect the significance of the architecture of the building, nor its historical survival within the Lyveden Valley. It will not affect any intervisibility, nor impact on vistas or sight lines between this building and any others. The impact of the quarry will not constitute total loss of significance or substantial harm to its significance.

4 See Appendix 2, fort he list description

CgMs Consulting 15 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

6.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

6.1 The area of the proposed quarrying at Harley Way has been considered for its heritage potential.

6.2 In accordance with Local Authority policy and Government policy, as set out in PPS 5 “Planning and the historic environment”, a Heritage Assessment has been undertaken to clarify the archaeological and heritage issues concerning the proposed development area.

6.3 The proposed development area appears to contain significant archaeological evidence from the Roman and medieval periods. During the past four hundred years since the 16th century the site has probably been in agricultural use, part of Churchfield Farm.

6.4 The evidence at the proposed development site, though, remains to be characterised in detail and this assessment recommends further evaluation.

6.5 The potential direct impact on heritage assets cannot yet be assessed particularly in the light of the HER description that the site is ‘almost completely destroyed by ploughing’ (NHER 2402).

6.6 The potential impact on the significance of Churchfield Farmhouse due to development in the neighbouring field affecting the setting of the listed farmhouse is considered to be to be neutral. The development does not intrude into the setting of the assets and will not substantially harm or constitute a total loss of its significance.

CgMs Consulting 16 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

SOURCES CONSULTED

1. General

Northamptonshire Records Office Northamptonshire Historic Environment Record

2. Bibliographic

Bridges J 1791 History of Northamptonshire, Vol II, London:Nichols

Cooper, N, 2006. The Archaeology of the East Midlands, An Archaeological Resource Assessment and Research Assessment. ULAS Mono 13.

Ekwall, E 1960. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Place-names. Fourth Edition. Oxford at the Clarenden Press. Thetford.

English Heritage 2010 The Setting of Heritage Assets: English Heritage Guidance. Consultation Draft, LONDON:English Heritage

Hall D 1995 The Open fields of Northamptonshire, NRS XXXXVIII

Kidd A 2004 Northamptonshire in the 1st Millennium BC, in Tingle (ed) 2004

Parry S.J 2007 Raunds Area Survey: an archaeological study of the landscape of Raunds, Northamptonshire 1985-1994 Oxford:Oxbow.

Page W 1970 Victoria History of the Counties of England, Northamptonshire III London:Oxford University Press

Pevsner N, Cherry B 1998 The Buildings of England Northamptonshire, London:Penguin

RCHM 1975 An Inventory of Archaeological Sites in North East Northamptonshire, Vol II, London:HMSO

Tingle M (ed) 2004 The Archaeology of Northamptonshire, Northamptonshire Archaeology Society

CgMs Consulting 17 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

3. Cartographic

Northamptonshire County 1779 Northamptonshire County 1801

1886 Ordnance Survey 1:2,500 1889 Ordnance Survey 1:10,560 1900 Ordnance Survey 1:2,500 1901 Ordnance Survey 1:10,560 1926 Ordnance Survey 1:2,500 1927 Ordnance Survey 1:10,560 1970 Ordnance Survey 1:2,500 1951, 1958, 1972-5, Ordnance Survey 1:10.560 1972-90 Ordnance Survey 1:10,000

CgMs Consulting 18 MD/12833 MD/12833

Eneld

Barnet

Harrow Haringey Waltham Forest Redbridge Havering Ca Is Hillingdon l Brent md ing Hackney en to Barking n & Newham Dagenham Tower Ealing 3 4 Hamlets

2 Southwark Greenwich

Hounslow Lambeth Bexley Richmond Wandsworth upon Lewisham Thames

Merton Kingston upon Thames Bromley Croydon Sutton

1 Hammersmith & Fulham 2 Kensington & Chelsea 3 City of Westminster Inner London boroughs 4 City of London Outer London boroughs

London Figure 1: Land at Harley Way, Benefield Cheltenham Harley Way Kettering Newark Not to scale Birmingham Illustrative only www.cgms.co.uk Drawn by: MD Site location 3/6/11 Planning & Development Archaeology & Historic Buildings Checked by: © Ordnance Survey maps reproduced with the sanction of controller HM Stationery Office Licence No: AL 100014723 © Ordnance Survey MD/12833

Figure 2: Historic Environment Data

Site Location

Harley Way

London Cheltenham Kettering Newark Birmingham www.cgms.co.uk Planning & Development Archaeology & Historic Buildings

Not to scale Illustrative only

Date printed: Drawn by: MD 3/6/11 Checked by: © Ordnance Survey maps reproduced with the sanction of the controller of HM Stationery Office Licence No: AL 100014723 No: Office Licence HM Stationery the controller of the sanction of with maps reproduced Survey © Ordnance MD/12833

Figure 3: Historic Environment Data

Site Location

Harley Way

London Cheltenham Kettering Newark Birmingham www.cgms.co.uk Planning & Development Archaeology & Historic Buildings

Not to scale Illustrative only

Figure 4: Historic Environment Data

Site Location

Harley Way

London Cheltenham Kettering Newark Birmingham www.cgms.co.uk Planning & Development Archaeology & Historic Buildings

Not to scale Illustrative only

Figure 5: Historic Environment Data - Events & past surveys

Site Location

Harley Way

London Cheltenham Kettering Newark Birmingham www.cgms.co.uk Planning & Development Archaeology & Historic Buildings

Not to scale Illustrative only

Figure 6: RCHM 1975, Churchfield village, Fig 28.

Site Location

Harley Way

London Cheltenham Kettering Newark Birmingham www.cgms.co.uk Planning & Development Archaeology & Historic Buildings

Not to scale Illustrative only

Figure 7: Churchfield - proposed development site

Harley Way

London Cheltenham Kettering Newark Birmingham www.cgms.co.uk Planning & Development Archaeology & Historic Buildings

Not to scale Illustrative only

London Figure 8 Harley Way (Upper) looking westwards Harley Way N Cheltenham towards Churchfield Farmhouse; Kettering Not to scale (Lower) looking northwards across Illustrative only Newark the proposed development site, to Silley Coppice Birmingham Date printed: Drawn by: MD www.cgms.co.uk 3/6/11 Checked by: Planning & Development Archaeology & Historic Buildings © Ordnance Survey maps reproduced with the sanction of controller HM Stationery Office Licence No: AL 100014723 © Ordnance Survey Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

APPENDIX 1 HER Baseline Data

CgMs Consulting 19 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT RECORD (NHER)

HER data within 500m of the proposed development site:

Northamptonshire Description HER No NHER143 Deer Park NHER2391 Roman Ironstone workings NHER2392 Roman activity NHER2393 Roman settlement NHER2396 Medieval tree ring NHER2400 Roman settlement NHER2401 Late Saxon settlement NHER2402 Churchfield deserted medieval village NHER2416 Rectory Manor, Oundle NHER2486 Roma activity NHER2487 Roman settlement NHER5504 Undated activity NHER6328 Possible post medieval industrial site Undated activity – boundaries, pond, ironstone extraction, slag NHER6831 heaps NHER6832 Quarrying NHER6833 Building undated NHER6834 Wakerley Lodge moated site NHER6974 Ridge and furrow NHER7379 Oundle to Cottingham Turnpike NHER7608 Stoke Wood NHER7739 Settlement site NHER7771 Iron Age settlement NHER9134 Benefield Enclosures 1747 & 1826 NHER9136 Post Medieval Wood NHER9137 Post Medieval enclosure NHER9424 Neolithic activity NHER9429 Undated quarrying NHER9433 Roman settlement NHER9434 Romano-British Activity

CgMs Consulting 20 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

APPENDIX 2 Details of listed buildings within 500m of Harley Way Quarry

CgMs Consulting 21 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

© Mr Roger Ashley 31 January 2003 IoE Number: 232726 BENEFIELD, EAST NORTHAMPTONSHIRE, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE Date listed: 11 January 1988 Grade II BENEFIELD, HARLEY WAY TL08NW (South side)4/5Churchfield Farmhouse-II BENEFIELD HARLEY MAY TL08NW (South side) 4/5 Churchfield Farmhouse - II Farmhouse. Mid C17 origins, mainly mid C18 and C19. Squared coursed limestone with Colleyweston slate roof. Irregular T-shape plan. 2 storeys. Main front is a 3-window range with gabled cross wing breaking forward to left. C19 and C20 casement windows under wood lintels. 2 openings to ground floor right have C20 French doors. Lean-to porch, with C20 door, to left and C20 conservatory to right. Ashlar gable parapets and kneelers and ashlar stacks at ridge and end. Elevation to left has central gable end of main range with flanking one-window ranges of casements with glazing bars. Rear wing has C20 extension. Interior not inspected but noted as having remains of open fireplace. Fragment of medieval window head to left of main front is said to have come from Churchfield Church, now demolished, which stood east of farmhouse. Churchfield Farmhouse is said to be the only surviving house of the village of Churchfield.

CgMs Consulting 22 MD/12833 Heritage Assessment Land at Harley Way, Benefield

APPENDIX 3 Ordnance Survey Map Series

CgMs Consulting 23 MD/12833 Historical Mapping Legends

Ordnance Survey County Series 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey Plan 1:10,000 1:10,000 Raster Mapping

Historical Mapping & Photography included:

Mapping Type Scale Date Pg Northamptonshire 1:10,560 1885 2 Northamptonshire 1:10,560 1901 3 Northamptonshire 1:10,560 1927 4 Northamptonshire 1:10,560 1951 - 1952 5 Ordnance Survey Plan 1:10,000 1958 6 Ordnance Survey Plan 1:10,000 1972 - 1975 7 Ordnance Survey Plan 1:10,000 1990 8 10K Raster Mapping 1:10,000 1999 9 10K Raster Mapping 1:10,000 2006 10 10K Raster Mapping 1:10,000 2011 11

Historical Map - Slice A

Order Details Order Number: 35281142_1_1 Customer Ref: 1000/Mike D National Grid Reference: 500680, 288170 Slice: A Site Area (Ha): 0.01 Search Buffer (m): 1000 Site Details Site at, Lower Benefield, Northamptonshire

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 1 of 11 Northamptonshire Published 1885 Source map scale - 1:10,560 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas; these maps were used to update the 1:10,560 maps. The published date given therefore is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas. In the late 1940`s, a Provisional Edition was produced, which updated the 1:10,560 mapping from a number of sources. The maps appear unfinished - with all military camps and other strategic sites removed. These maps were initially overprinted with the National Grid. In 1970, the first 1:10,000 maps were produced using the Transverse Mercator Projection. The revision process continued until recently, with new editions appearing every 10 years or so for urban areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 2 of 11 Northamptonshire Published 1901 Source map scale - 1:10,560 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas; these maps were used to update the 1:10,560 maps. The published date given therefore is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas. In the late 1940`s, a Provisional Edition was produced, which updated the 1:10,560 mapping from a number of sources. The maps appear unfinished - with all military camps and other strategic sites removed. These maps were initially overprinted with the National Grid. In 1970, the first 1:10,000 maps were produced using the Transverse Mercator Projection. The revision process continued until recently, with new editions appearing every 10 years or so for urban areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 3 of 11 Northamptonshire Published 1927 Source map scale - 1:10,560 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas; these maps were used to update the 1:10,560 maps. The published date given therefore is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas. In the late 1940`s, a Provisional Edition was produced, which updated the 1:10,560 mapping from a number of sources. The maps appear unfinished - with all military camps and other strategic sites removed. These maps were initially overprinted with the National Grid. In 1970, the first 1:10,000 maps were produced using the Transverse Mercator Projection. The revision process continued until recently, with new editions appearing every 10 years or so for urban areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 4 of 11 Northamptonshire Published 1951 - 1952 Source map scale - 1:10,560 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas; these maps were used to update the 1:10,560 maps. The published date given therefore is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas. In the late 1940`s, a Provisional Edition was produced, which updated the 1:10,560 mapping from a number of sources. The maps appear unfinished - with all military camps and other strategic sites removed. These maps were initially overprinted with the National Grid. In 1970, the first 1:10,000 maps were produced using the Transverse Mercator Projection. The revision process continued until recently, with new editions appearing every 10 years or so for urban areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 5 of 11 Ordnance Survey Plan Published 1958 Source map scale - 1:10,000 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas; these maps were used to update the 1:10,560 maps. The published date given therefore is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas. In the late 1940`s, a Provisional Edition was produced, which updated the 1:10,560 mapping from a number of sources. The maps appear unfinished - with all military camps and other strategic sites removed. These maps were initially overprinted with the National Grid. In 1970, the first 1:10,000 maps were produced using the Transverse Mercator Projection. The revision process continued until recently, with new editions appearing every 10 years or so for urban areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 6 of 11 Ordnance Survey Plan Published 1972 - 1975 Source map scale - 1:10,000 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas; these maps were used to update the 1:10,560 maps. The published date given therefore is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas. In the late 1940`s, a Provisional Edition was produced, which updated the 1:10,560 mapping from a number of sources. The maps appear unfinished - with all military camps and other strategic sites removed. These maps were initially overprinted with the National Grid. In 1970, the first 1:10,000 maps were produced using the Transverse Mercator Projection. The revision process continued until recently, with new editions appearing every 10 years or so for urban areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 7 of 11 Ordnance Survey Plan Published 1990 Source map scale - 1:10,000 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas; these maps were used to update the 1:10,560 maps. The published date given therefore is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas. In the late 1940`s, a Provisional Edition was produced, which updated the 1:10,560 mapping from a number of sources. The maps appear unfinished - with all military camps and other strategic sites removed. These maps were initially overprinted with the National Grid. In 1970, the first 1:10,000 maps were produced using the Transverse Mercator Projection. The revision process continued until recently, with new editions appearing every 10 years or so for urban areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 8 of 11 10k Raster Mapping Published 1999 Source map scale - 1:10,000 The historical maps shown were produced from the Ordnance Survey`s 1:10,000 colour raster mapping. These maps are derived from Landplan which replaced the old 1:10,000 maps originally published in 1970. The data is highly detailed showing buildings, fences and field boundaries as well as all roads, tracks and paths. Road names are also included together with the relevant road number and classification. Boundary information depiction includes county, unitary authority, district, civil parish and constituency.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 9 of 11 10k Raster Mapping Published 2006 Source map scale - 1:10,000 The historical maps shown were produced from the Ordnance Survey`s 1:10,000 colour raster mapping. These maps are derived from Landplan which replaced the old 1:10,000 maps originally published in 1970. The data is highly detailed showing buildings, fences and field boundaries as well as all roads, tracks and paths. Road names are also included together with the relevant road number and classification. Boundary information depiction includes county, unitary authority, district, civil parish and constituency.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 10 of 11 10k Raster Mapping Published 2011 Source map scale - 1:10,000 The historical maps shown were produced from the Ordnance Survey`s 1:10,000 colour raster mapping. These maps are derived from Landplan which replaced the old 1:10,000 maps originally published in 1970. The data is highly detailed showing buildings, fences and field boundaries as well as all roads, tracks and paths. Road names are also included together with the relevant road number and classification. Boundary information depiction includes county, unitary authority, district, civil parish and constituency.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v42.0 01-Jul-2011 Page 11 of 11 www.cgms.co.uk

Planning & Development, Archaeology and Historic Buildings