Lower Barn, Througham Slad

Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Statement of Significance & Impact Assessment.

Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Contents.

1.0 Introduction:...... Page 1 2.0 Planning Policy Context:…...... Page 3 3.0 Method of Apportioning Significance:...... Page 9 4.0 Designations:………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Page 15 5.0 Statement of Significance:………………………….………………………………….…………… Page 19 6.0 Significance Matrix:………………………………………………………………………………………… Page 27 7.0 Phasing/Significance Plan:………………………………………………………..………………. Page 29 8.0 Reconstruction of South-West Front:….………………………………….………. Page 31 9.0 Impact Assessment:…….……………….………………...………………………….………………………… Page 33 10.0 Conclusion:…………………………………………………………………….……………………………………. Page 37

Justin Ayton Ltd. Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

List of Illustrations.

Figure 1 Extract from 1885-1894, 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey map: Througham Slad Manor; Lower Barn; lane...... 15 Figure 2 View East along lane: Lower Barn on left behind lower wall; Througham Slad Manor behind higher wall to right...... 15 Figure 3 View facing west from entrance though boundary wall to Lower Barn, showing Througham Slad Manor behind higher wall opposite...... 16 Figure 4 South-west front, from the lane...... 19 Figure 5 Detail of 1884, 1:2,500 Ordnance Survey Map...... 20 Figure 6 Detail of 1903, 1:2,500 Ordnance Survey Map...... 20 Figure 7 Detail of 1922, 1:2,500 Ordnance Survey Map...... 20 Figure 8 Detail of 1980, 1:2,500 Ordnance Survey Map...... 20 Figure 9 Lower Barn, from the east...... 21 Figure 10 Junction of Lower Barn to remains of adjacent range; stonework suggesting that Lower Barn was a secondary phase...... 21 Figure 11 Surviving immured post & staddle stone on south-west front adjacent to door to stable 2...... 21 Figure 12 Rear wall of stable 1, showing historic lime plaster over unmortared rubble...... 22 Figure 13 Front wall of stable 2, showing modern construction of front wall & internal partitions...... 22 Figure 14 Historic stone wall separating stable 3 from the tack room...... 22 Figure 15 Roof structure looking west from stable & bay 3...... 23 Figure 16 Projecting stone shelf to rear wall in stable 2...... 23 Figure 17 South-west front of western bay/tack room, with straight joints suggesting that this was also open-fronted...... 24 Figure 18 View west: Lower Barn to right; Througham Slad Manor behind outbuilding on higher ground...... 24 Figure 19 Lower Barn from lane, behind boundary walls & gate...... 25 Figure 20 View towards Lower Barn from entrance to Througham Slad Manor...... 25 Figure 21 Existing site plan...... 33 Figure 22 Proposed site plan...... 33 Figure 23 Propsoed south elevation...... 34 Figure 24 Propsoed north elevation...... 34 Figure 25 Proposed ground-floor plan...... 34

Justin Ayton Ltd. Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

1.0 Introduction.

Background. then assessing the impact of any proposal upon that 1.1 Lower Barn forms part of a group of traditional, but now significance (page 2). much-altered agricultural buildings to the east of Througham 1.6 Accordingly, the structure of this document falls into two parts. Slad Manor/Farmhouse, from which they are distinctly The first part assesses the evolution & significance of the separated by a lane & stone-walled boundaries, but with which building. The second part then assesses any potential impact they were historically, functionally associated. of the proposals upon that significance.

1.2 The current modest proposals ….

Purpose of this Statement. 1.3 This Statement of Significance/Impact Assessment was commissioned in order to accompany the proposals in line with the National Planning Policy Framework (N.P.P.F.) &

the associated Planning Practice Guidance (P.P.G.).

1.4 The N.P.P.F. states that: “The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance & no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.” (Paragraph 128).

1.5 Historic England’s Managing Significance in Decision- Taking in the Historic Environment advises that it is first necessary to understand the significance of an asset, before

- Page 1 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

- Page 2 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

2.0 Planning Policy Context.

Legislation. National policy. Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act, National Planning Policy Framework (N.P.P.F.). 1990. 2.3 The N.P.P.F. states that: “In determining planning applications, 2.1 The principal legislation concerning the historic environment local planning authorities should take account of … the remains the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation desirability of sustaining & enhancing the significance of Areas) Act, 1990. This draws attention to the importance of heritage assets & putting them to viable uses consistent with seeking to preserve listed buildings, their setting, & “any features their conservation.” (Paragraph 192). of special architectural or historic interest” which they possess in the determination of planning applications (Section 66(1)). It 2.4 It also identifies both listed buildings, & conservation areas as also states that the listing includes “any object or structure “designated heritage assets” (Annex 2: Glossary). within the curtilage of the building which, although not fixed to the building, forms part of the land & has done so since before 1st July 1948” (Section 1(5(b))).

2.2 The Act is supplemented by Government guidance, currently as laid out in the National Planning Policy Framework & the associated Planning Practice Guidance.

- Page 3 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Local policy. archaeology of national significance, & the many buildings that are Listed as having special architectural or historic Stroud Local Plan, June 2015. interest 3.1 The Stroud Local Plan was formally adopted on the 19th of November 2015; & contains a policy for the historic B. The stone, bronze, iron age and roman settlements & remains; environment & assets. the medieval settlements including Berkeley Castle; historic houses; historic parks; gardens & villages Policy ES10 – Valuing our historic environment & assets: C. The townscapes of the larger towns such as Stroud where the “Stroud District’s historic environment will be preserved, protected or industrial heritage influenced its historic grain, including its enhanced, in accordance with the principles set out below: street layouts & plot sizes D. The District’s historic market towns & villages, many with 1. Any proposals involving a historic asset shall require a description designated conservation areas, such as Berkeley, Wotton of the heritage asset significance including any contribution made Under Edge, Minchinhampton, Painswick & Dursley. by its setting, & an assessment of the potential impact of the proposal on that significance, using appropriate expertise. This can 3. Proposals will be supported which protect &, where appropriate, be a desk-based assessment & a field evaluation prior to enhance the heritage significance & setting of locally identified determination where necessary & should include the heritage assets, such as buildings of local architectural or historic Gloucestershire Historic Environment Record. interest, locally important archaeological sites and parks & gardens 2. Proposals & initiatives will be supported which conserve &, where of local interest. appropriate, enhance the heritage significance & setting of the 4. Proposals will be supported which protect &, where appropriate, District’s heritage assets, especially those elements which enhance key views & vistas, especially of the spires & towers of contribute to the distinct identity of the District. historic churches & mills.

These include: 5. Any harm or loss would require clear & convincing justification to A. The 68 sites of national archaeological importance (which are the relevant decision-maker as to why the heritage interest should designated as Ancient Monuments), any undesignated be overridden.

- Page 4 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

A full programme of work shall be submitted with the application, National guidance. together with proposals to mitigate any adverse impact of the proposed Planning Practice Guidance (P.P.G.). development, & where appropriate, be implemented through measures 2.5 The P.P.G. advises that: “Conservation is an active process of secured by planning condition(s) or through a legal agreement.” maintenance & managing change … In the case of buildings, generally the risks of neglect & decay of heritage assets are best addressed through ensuring that they remain in active use that is consistent with their conservation. Ensuring such heritage assets remain used & valued is likely to require sympathetic changes to be made from time to time.” (Conserving & Enhancing the Historic Environment, Paragraph 002).

2.6 Paragraph 020 of the historic environment sections clarifies that public benefit should flow from development, however:

“… benefits do not always have to be visible or accessible to the public in order to be genuine public benefits.

Examples of heritage benefits may include:

• sustaining or enhancing the significance of a heritage asset & the contribution of its setting

• reducing or removing risks to a heritage asset

• securing the optimum viable use of a heritage asset in support of its long term conservation.”

- Page 5 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

2.7 In addition, Historic England have produced 3 Historic 2.11 It also identifies stages by which to assess proposals; these Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Notes: include.

Note 1: The Historic Environment in Local Plans; • Understand the significance of the affected assets Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in • Understand the impact of the proposal on that significance the Historic Environment; 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets: Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets. 2.12 The Setting of Heritage Assets replaces the earlier English 1: The Historic Environment in Local Plans: Heritage guidance on setting, & advises on assessing its nature, 2.8 The Historic Environment in Local Plans primarily relates extent & significance, & the potential impact of proposals upon to consideration of the historic environment in the formulation it. of local plans & policy. 2.13 The document advocates a ‘Staged Approach to Proportionate 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Decision-Taking’, in order to reasonably assess the potential Historic Environment: impact of proposals.

2.9 Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the 1. Identifying the heritage assets affected & their settings; Historic Environment gives advice to LPAs & applicants on 2. Assessing whether, how & to what degree these settings make a assessing the significance of heritage assets, & the impact of contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s) or the proposals upon that significance. It also refers to the use of ability to appreciate that significance; Conservation Principles in such assessments. 3. Assessing the effect of the proposed development on the significance of the asset(s) or on the ability to appreciate that 2.10 The note advises that it is not just important to understand the significance. ‘nature’ & ‘level’ of any significance, but also its ‘extent’ (paragraphs 8, 9 & 10); as this can lead to: “a better understanding of how adaptable the asset may be”.

- Page 6 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Conservation Principles. b. The proposal would not materially harm the values of the place, which, where appropriate, would be reinforced or further 2.14 Conservation Principles was published in 2008 by Historic revealed; England (then English Heritage), but remains valid, & is referred c. The proposals aspire to a quality of design and execution which to in the Advice Note 2. may be valued now and in the future;

2.15 When dealing with elements of restoration, Conservation d. The long-term consequences of the proposals can, from Principles advises that: experience, be demonstrated to be benign, or the proposals are designed not to prejudice alternative solutions in the future.” (paragraph 138). “Restoration to a significant place should normally be acceptable if:

1. The heritage values of the elements that would be restored Making Changes to Heritage Assets. decisively outweigh the values of those that would be lost. 2.17 Historic England’s Advice Note 2: Making Changes to 2. The work proposed is justified by compelling evidence of the Heritage Assets, published in February 2016, provides advice evolution of the place, and is executed in accordance with that upon repair, restoration, & alteration of heritage assets. evidence.

3. The form in which the place currently exists is not the result of a historically-significant event.

4. The work proposed respects previous forms of the place.

5. The maintenance implications of the proposed restoration are considered to be sustainable.” (paragraph 126).

2.16 On new works, Conservation Principles advises that:

“New work or alteration to a significant place should normally be acceptable if:

a. There is sufficient information comprehensively to understand the impact of the proposal on the significance of the place;

- Page 7 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

- Page 8 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

3.0 Method of Apportioning Significance.

3.1 The concept of ‘significance’ was originally based in the attempt Architectural Interest: to replace the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation 3.4 ‘To be of special architectural interest a building must be of Areas) Act, 1990 (which placed emphasis upon the ‘character’ importance in its design, decoration or craftsmanship. Special & ‘special interest’ of listed buildings). However, significance interest may also apply to particularly significant examples of was revived, first in the Planning Policy Statement 5; building types or techniques (e.g. buildings displaying Planning & the Historic Environment, & more recently in technological innovation or virtuosity) and significant plan the N.P.P.F. forms. Engineering and technological interest can be an important consideration for some buildings. For more recent The Act itself retains the concept of ‘special architectural or 3.2 buildings in particular, the functioning of the building (to the historic interest’, although Historic England’s Managing extent that this reflects on its original design and planned use, Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic where known) will also be a consideration. Artistic distinction Environment clarifies that ‘A variety of terms are used in can also be a factor relevant to the architectural interest of designation criteria (for example … special interest for listed buildings and objects and structures fixed to them.’ buildings and conservation areas), but all of these refer to a heritage asset’s significance’ (paragraph 4). Historic Interest: 3.5 ‘To be able to justify special historic interest a building must Principles of Selection for Listed Buildings. illustrate important aspects of the nation’s history and / or have 3.3 The concepts of special architectural & historic interest are closely substantiated historical associations with nationally explained in paragraph 16 of the Department for Digital, important individuals, groups or events; and the building itself Culture, Media & Sport’s Principles of Selection for Listed in its current form will afford a strong connection with the Buildings (November 2018): valued aspect of history.’

- Page 9 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Conservation Principles. Aesthetic Value: 3.6 The importance of significance is reiterated in Historic 3.9 ‘Aesthetic Value’ relates to the sensory & intellectual stimulation England’s publication Conservation Principles, which that is drawn from the asset, & as such includes both attempts to define significance by breaking it down into four intellectually designed architectural or artistic value, & separate heritage values: unplanned, but fortuitous aesthetic appeal, including the ‘patina of age’. This broadly overlaps with Architectural Interest. • Evidential Value. • Historical Value. Communal Value: • Aesthetic Value. 3.10 ‘Communal Value’ derives from the meanings, collective • Communal Value. experience or memories that people & communities derive from a place, & thus by definition is usually less applicable to Evidential Value: heritage assets that are of a more private nature. 3.7 ‘Evidential Value’ relates primarily to the capacity of the heritage asset in question to yield evidence about past human 3.11 In terms of then assessing significance, Conservation activity. This is generally more applicable to archaeology than Principles identifies a number of key considerations: buildings, although it can arguably also relate to the • Understand the fabric & evolution of the place. fragmentary remains of a building’s earlier form. • Identify who values the place & why they do so. • Relate identified heritage values to the fabric of the place. Historical Value: • Consider the relative importance of those identified values. • Consider the contribution of associated objects & collections. 3.8 ‘Historical Value’ is generally illustrative of past people, events • Consider the contribution made by setting & context. & aspects of life. Thus, the design of a window, by directly • Compare the place with other places sharing similar values. reflecting both the aesthetic trends & the industrial innovations • Articulate the significance of the place. of the time, can also be of historical value. This corresponds to 3.12 ‘Understand the fabric & evolution of the place’ entails looking but is somewhat broader than Historic Interest. at the origins of the place, how it has evolved, its form &

- Page 10 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

condition, considering both at physical & documentary including assessing whether a space has a greater value for evidence. being part of a larger entity.

3.13 ‘Identifying who values the place, & why they do so’ entails 3.18 ‘Compare the place with other places sharing similar values’ looking at the values placed on the asset by owners, allows an informed comparative judgement of the strength of communities & specialists. the values to be made, although reiterating that designation itself is clear indicator of the importance of a place. 3.14 ‘Relate heritage values to the fabric of the place’ relates primarily to built assets but does also include spatial & temporal 3.19 ‘Articulate the significance of the place’ is done through a aspects & advises that whilst elements that would be impacted Statement of Significance which is a summary of the values of upon by a proposal should be looked at in detail, they also the place, their strength, nature & extent. need to be considered in relation to the place as a whole. Historic Environment Good Practice 3.15 ‘Consider the relative importance of those identified values’. Advice in Planning; Note 2. Sometimes sustaining one identified value can harm another, & 3.20 In March 2015 Historic England published the Historic in such cases understanding the relative contribution of each to Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Notes. the significance should help in coming to a balanced view. Note 2 provides particular advice upon assessing significance, & identifies 3 different aspects of significance to be considered: 3.16 ‘Consider the contribution of associated objects & collections’ • The nature of the significance; entails assessing the contribution made by, for example, • The extent of the significance; collections to a building, machinery to a factory, or statuary to • The level of significance. a garden. The Nature of the Significance: 3.17 ‘Consider the contribution made by setting & context’ entails 3.21 ‘The nature of the significance’ can vary according to the nature considering both the setting, as established in the NPPF, & of the site & its particular sensitivities. context, which embraces the relationship between spaces

- Page 11 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

The Extent of the Significance: Rarity Value: 3.22 ‘The extent of the significance’ assesses where the significance 3.26 The rarer an asset or a part of an asset is (e.g.: if it is one of the lies, & thus leads to a better understanding of how adaptable an last surviving examples of its type), proportionally the more asset may be. important any inherent significant that it may have becomes.

The Level of Significance: Intrinsic Quality: 3.23 The resultant ‘level of significance’ provides the essential guide 3.27 The significance that rests in the asset or the part of an asset in to how policy should be applied in terms of seeking not to question itself, without regard to other assets or parts of the harm the asset. asset (e.g.: an exceptionally finely carved piece of joinery may have great artistic value, regardless of its context). Method of Apportioning Values. 3.24 There are a number of criteria that are of relevance when Extrinsic Relevance: considering heritage value & significance, such as: 3.28 The significance that rests in the asset or the part of the asset in question’s relationship to other assets or parts of the asset (e.g.: • Age. • Rarity value. a nineteenth-century fireplace may be of little intrinsic value, • Intrinsic quality. but as an integral part of an important wider internal decorative • Extrinsic relevance. scheme, may nonetheless have considerable significance). • Typicality. Typicality: • Exceptionality. 3.29 The significance of an asset can increase if it is seen as Age: absolutely representative or characteristic of its type (such as 3.25 The older an asset, or a part of an asset is, the more likely that an eighteenth-century terraced house having an intact & it will be considered to be of value & significance. This is to a quintessential plan-form). degree related to, but not always synonymous with rarity value.

- Page 12 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Exceptionality: 3.30 Conversely, the significance of an asset can also increase if it is seen as being unusual & uncharacteristic of its type (such as an Elizabethan building that has hidden Catholic iconography, &

thus represents a curious or important counter-trend).

- Page 13 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

- Page 14 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

4.0 Designations.

4.1 Lower Barn lies within close proximity to Througham Slad Manor, which was listed grade II* (identified as ‘Througham Slad Farmhouse including 2 Walled Courtyards with Gate Pier’) on the 28th of June 1960.

4.2 The barn has previously been considered to be within the historic curtilage of Througham Slad Manor, despite being separated from it by a lane, the high boundary wall of the manor to the south of the lane, & a typical field-boundary height drystone wall to the north of the lane.

Figure 2 View East along lane: Lower Barn on left behind lower wall; Througham Slad Manor behind higher wall to right. 4.3 Historic England’s published guidance, Listed Buildings and Curtilage (February 2018), clarifies that the degree of physical separation is an important consideration, & the illustrative examples 2.2 & 2.3 both indicate that separation by a farm track or lane with associated boundary walls is likely to exclude Figure 1 Extract from 1885-1894, 1:10,560 Ordnance Survey map: Througham Slad Manor; Lower Barn; lane. the outbuildings from the curtilage of listed farmhouse.

- Page 15 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Figure 3 View facing west from entrance though boundary wall to Lower Barn, showing Througham Slad Manor behind higher wall opposite. 4.4 Consequently, given the degree of physical separation from Througham Slad Manor by a lane & two walls, Lower Barn is unlikely to fall within its curtilage; however, though proximity & historical, functional association, it would fall within its setting, & would probably be worthy of consideration as a non- designated heritage asset in its own right.

- Page 16 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

- Page 17 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

- Page 18 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

5.0 Statement of Significance.

5.2 The range of outbuildings has been compromised in the latter 20th century. The central part of the linear range has been demolished, leaving the two ends as isolated fragments. However, the eastern gable of this range survives as the western end of Lower Barn, & shows that, following the terracing of the yards, this range was at a higher level, & whilst it adjoined Lower Barn, it is neatly finished with quoins, which Lower Barn abuts, suggesting that Lower Barn was a secondary phase.

5.3 The first edition map (1884) identifies the longer range as an open-fronted shelter shed, although the depiction of Lower Barn is unclear; however, the 1903, 1922 & 1980 maps all clearly identify that Lower Barn was also a characteristic, Figure 4 South-west front, from the lane. agricultural open-fronted shelter shed. 5.1 Lower Barn comprises the eastern end of a former linear range of shelter sheds, separated from, but facing towards Througham 5.4 This is confirmed by the building itself. The eastern gable & the Slad Manor/Farmhouse. Their physical proximity, & the fact rear (north) wall are constructed from unmortared rubble, with that they remained in the same ownership into the 21st century a plastered internal face (although the former & parts of the (according to the planning history of Througham Slad Manor), latter have been lined internally with concrete blockwork. indicates that despite their clear physical separation by the lane, 5.5 However, the south front is entirely constructed from concrete there was an historical, functional interrelationship between the blockwork faced in mortared stone, & one of the original timber former farmhouse & the agricultural buildings. posts survives, immured, in situ.

- Page 19 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Figure 5 Detail of 1884, 1:2,500 Ordnance Survey Map. Figure 7 Detail of 1922, 1:2,500 Ordnance Survey Map.

Figure 6 Detail of 1903, 1:2,500 Ordnance Survey Map. Figure 8 Detail of 1980, 1:2,500 Ordnance Survey Map.

- Page 20 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Figure 9 Lower Barn, from the east.

Figure 10 Junction of Lower Barn to remains of adjacent range; stonework Figure 11 Surviving immured post & staddle stone on south-west front suggesting that Lower Barn was a secondary phase. adjacent to door to stable 2.

- Page 21 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

5.6 The interior of the barn is currently divided into four separate spaces. The walls that divide the eastern three (stables 1-3) are modern, concrete block walls that only rise to eave level; however, the partition to the western bay (tack room) is rubblestone & rises to the level of, & supports the purlins, & is clearly historic & integral to the structure of the barn.

Figure 13 Front wall of stable 2, showing modern construction of front wall & internal partitions.

Figure 12 Rear wall of stable 1, showing historic lime plaster over unmortared rubble. 5.7 The roof trusses divide the three stables into five bays; each truss would historically have rested on a timber post & staddle

stone, thus giving a five-bay elevation. Figure 14 Historic stone wall separating stable 3 from the tack room.

- Page 22 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

5.8 The roof structure itself comprises simple triangular trusses However, due to the stored debris, it is unclear whether the supporting a single row of purlins & common rafters. The historic plaster in stable 1 continues down to the ground or timbers appear machined, suggesting a 19th century date. finishes at the height of the shelf.

Figure 15 Roof structure looking west from stable & bay 3. Figure 16 Projecting stone shelf to rear wall in stable 2. 5.9 In stables 2 & 3 there is a projecting stone shelf to the base of 5.10 The western bay, the present tack room was always distinct the rear wall; this is clearly historic. This shelf does not appear from the eastern part of the building, with no evidence of any to exist in stable 1, although at the time of inspection there was direct intercommunication. much debris against the rear wall. It is likely that this shelf did 5.11 The front elevation retains straight joints, both to the east (the originally continue into stable 1 as the dividing wall is modern partition) & to the west, suggesting that this was also historically & does not correspond to the original articulation of bays. open-fronted.

- Page 23 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Context.

Figure 17 South-west front of western bay/tack room, with straight joints suggesting that this was also open-fronted. Figure 18 View west: Lower Barn to right; Througham Slad Manor behind 5.12 Internally the western bay has been entirely lined with concrete outbuilding on higher ground. blockwork; however, there is a projecting, low-level shelf to the 5.13 Lower Barn is visible from the lane, although due to the rear wall, & to the western gable; it is possible that this concrete- topography, it is mostly the roof that is visible, except through block shelf may enclose an historic stone shelf similar to that in the gateway. From Lower Barn, one of the outbuildings of stables 2 & 3. Througham Slad Manor is visible on the hill behind a high boundary wall, but the main part of the house is not visible.

- Page 24 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Significance. Significance. Intrinsic Significance. 5.14 Lower Barn appears to be 19th-century & comprises a secondary phase of a range of agricultural buildings, from which, in the latter-20th century is has been severed. Whilst the fundamental structure of Lower Barn appears to survive in its historic, 19th century form, the appearance of the front (south- west) elevation & the interior has been radically altered by its conversion from a traditional, agricultural shelter shed, to a modern stable (of quite different appearance to a traditional

Figure 19 Lower Barn from lane, behind boundary walls & gate. stable).

5.15 Whether as a curtilage-listed structure, or as a non-designated heritage asset, the building is of little Evidential Value (this value being related more to archaeological sites & ruins that to intact buildings).

5.16 The building does have some moderate Historical Value, as a characteristic shelter shed, forming part of a group of agricultural buildings, functionally associated with Througham Slad Manor/Farmhouse; however, this is limited by the level of alteration that has occurred, both to the group as a whole, & to Lower Barn itself.

Figure 20 View towards Lower Barn from entrance to Througham Slad Manor.

- Page 25 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

5.17 The alteration of the building from a traditional, rural shelter 5.21 However, this positive contribution has been diminished by the shed to a modern row of stables has also severely 20th-century conversion of this traditional rural building type compromised the building’s Aesthetic Value; although these into an overtly modern form of stable. changes would be easily reversible, thus potentially increasing 5.22 Thus, Lower Barn does make a moderate positive contribution its Aesthetic Value. to the setting & significance of Througham Slad Manor, 5.18 Given the simple form of the building, & its location, it is of although this contribution is limited by the (potentially limited Communal Value. reversible) 20th-century alterations.

Contribution to the Setting & Significance of Througham Slad Manor/Farmhouse.

5.19 The significance of Througham Slad Manor rests primarily in its

architectural history & evolution, from the 16th century, to works by Norman Jewson in the 1930s; however, its historical function as a farmhouse, however high its status, also contributes towards its significance.

5.20 The presence of traditional agricultural buildings within close proximity to Througham Slad Manor, & historically, functionally associated with it, reinforces the traditional, agricultural character of the setting, & thus does contribute positively to the setting & significance of the listed building, even though there is no direct intervisibility between the two.

- Page 26 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

6.0 Significance Matrix (Intrinsic & Contribution to Througham Slad Manor).

Evidential Value. Historical Value. Aesthetic Value. Communal Value. Overall Significance.

19th century. Low Moderate Low/moderate Low Low/moderate (potentially moderate (potentially moderate if if 20th century works 20th century works reversed) reversed)

20th century. Low Low Low Low Low

- Page 27 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Low/moderate significance. 19th century. Low Significance. Late-20th century.

- Page 28 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

7.0 Phasing/Significance Plan.

Bay 1 Bay 2 Bay 3 Bay 4 Bay 5

Stable 3. Tack Room. Stable 1. Stable 2.

- Page 29 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

- Page 30 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

8.0 Reconstruction of South-West Front.

- Page 31 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

- Page 32 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

9.0 Impact Assessment.

Proposal. 9.2 The new addition would be contemporary in design, but it 9.1 The current proposal is to convert the former shelter shed into would be of a considerably smaller footprint that the stables & a small dwelling. The generic, prefabricated modern stables to would be positioned to respect the linear form of the historic the east of the site would be removed, & a modest addition building, it would also be subordinate to the existing structure extension would be added onto the eastern end of the shed. as it would use the topography of the site to step down.

Figure 21 Existing site plan. Figure 22 Proposed site plan.

- Page 33 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

9.3 On the south front of the it is proposed to remove the modern, 9.6 The new extension would be separated from the historic stone-faced concrete block wall & to restore the historic shelter shed by a narrow, fully glazed link. The extension itself configuration as a shelter shed, with the five bays to the east would comprise a simple, modest addition, stepped down divided elevationally by timber posts on staddle stones; the from the parent building, with elevations that, although modern stone infill of the western bay would also be removed, contemporary, subtly echo a traditional shelter-shed form. expressing the historic opening & the one original stone partition.

Figure 24 Proposed north elevation.

Figure 23 Proposed south elevation. 9.4 On the north elevation it is proposed to create some modest, honestly contemporary openings in order to benefit from the northern views; but otherwise, this elevation would remain simple & legibly the rear of the building.

9.5 The cement board roofing would be replaced with natural blue Figure 25 Proposed ground-floor plan. slates; these were commonly used on such functional structures in the Cotswolds in the 19th-century.

- Page 34 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

Impact upon Significance. Contribution to the Setting & Significance of Througham Slad Manor/Farmhouse. Intrinsic Significance. 9.11 Lower Barn’s principal contribution to the setting & significance 9.7 As Lower barn is of little Evidential Value, this value would be of Througham Slad Manor is as an historically, functionally unaffected by the current proposals. associated agricultural outbuilding that reinforces the 9.8 The historic legible relationship of Lower Barn to Througham traditional, agricultural character of the setting, & thus does Slad Manor, which makes a moderate contribution to the contribute positively to the setting & significance of the listed building’s intrinsic Historical Value, would not be eroded, building, even though there is no direct intervisibility between indeed the removal of the later south wall & the reinstatement the two. of a series of posts would make the barn more legible as a 9.12 The removal of the uncharacteristic modern south front, & its traditional agricultural outbuilding, thereby actively if modestly restoration, following the clear & definitive evidence of the further enhancing the building’s Historical Value. building, to a traditional & absolutely characteristic shelter-shed 9.9 Lower Barn’s Aesthetic Value would also be very considerably form would enhance & further reveal the agricultural character enhanced by the proposed works to the south front which of Lower Barn, thereby sustaining, & even enhancing the would restore its legibility as a traditional, characteristic shelter agricultural character of the setting that contributes positively shed. The proposed extension would be a subtle addition, to the significance of Througham Slad Manor. smaller, more discretely placed, & more sympathetic than the 9.13 The proposed extension, whilst contemporary, respects the existing prefabricated, mass-produced stables. linear form & traditional articulation of the building, & would be 9.10 As Lower Barn is of limited Communal Value, this would be lower, smaller & more visually discrete than the existing unaffected by the proposals. prefabricated stables, whose removal would also be an enhancement.

- Page 35 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

- Page 36 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

10.0 Conclusion.

10.1 Lower Barn comprises the eastern end of a group of formerly shelter shed. This would be a considerable enhancement to the agricultural outbuildings formerly associated with, & within the building’s intrinsic Historical & Aesthetic Value & significance, as setting of Througham Slad Manor. Map regression shows a well as the contribution that it makes to the setting & significance continuous range of shelter sheds, which stepped down the hill; of Througham Slad Manor. this range was broken by the demolition of the central portion 10.4 The proposed works would also entail the removal of the bland, in the mid/late 20th century. The masonry to the eastern end of modern stables, which break the linear form of the historic Lower Barn suggests that it is not contemporary with the range building & which are closer to, & more visible from the lane, & that it formerly abutted but was a subsequent addition. their replacement with a smaller & far more discretely-placed 10.2 The form of the building is traditional, & the roof structure would extension, which would respect the linear form of the historic appear to suggest a 19th-century date. In the latter 20th-century building, stepping the ridge & eaves down so that the addition the building was converted into stables, with the infilling of the would respect the historic building’s primacy. The architectural characteristic open frontage with a concrete block wall, faced design of this modest addition is contemporary, but subtly externally in stone, & the erection of a range of prefabricated echoes the traditional articulation of a characteristic shelter shed. stables at a right-angle to the linear form of the historic structure. 10.5 Consequently, the current proposal has been carefully designed 10.3 The current proposal, which has evolved in the light of the to sustain & where possible enhance the intrinsic significance of assessment of the architectural history & evolution of the Lower Barn, & the wider contribution that it makes to the setting building, seeks to reverse the unsympathetic 20th-century & significance of Througham Slad Manor. As such, the proposal changes by restoring the south frontage in line with the clear accords with national policy as laid out in Section 16 of the evidence of the building itself, revealing the currently somewhat National Planning Policy Framework, & local policy as laid amorphous structure as a characteristic & traditional linear out in the Stroud Local Plan, particularly Policy ES10, & it is hoped that the proposal will be welcomed & supported.

- Page 37 - Lower Barn, Througham Slad.

- Page 38 -

Justin Ayton was English Heritage’s Historic Buildings Inspector for Bristol & Gloucestershire from 2004 until early 2013, before which he was a Conservation & Design Officer for the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea; Justin received a degree in History of Art & Heritage Management from the University of Buckingham in 1997, & an M.A. in Architectural History from the Courtauld Institute of Art in 1998.