Castle Estate, Clyro

Heritage Impact Assessment

Prepared by: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd

On behalf of: Powys County Council

July 2019 Report Reference edp5112_r001a

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Contents

Non-technical Summary

Section 1 Introduction ...... 1

Section 2 Legislation and Planning Guidance ...... 5

Section 3 Methodology...... 13

Section 4 Existing Information ...... 17

Section 5 Conclusions ...... 29

Section 6 References ...... 31

Images

Images EDP 1 - 5

Appendix

Appendix EDP 1 SUMO Geophysics Geophysical Survey Report, September 2018

Plans

Plan EDP 1 Heritage Assets (edp5112/d001b 19 July 2019 PD/HS)

Plan EDP 2 1839 Tithe Map (edp5112/d002b 19 July 2019 PD/HS)

Plan EDP 3 1889 First Edition Ordnance Survey Map (edp5112/d003b 19 July 2019 PD/HS)

Plan EDP 4 1974 Ordnance Survey Map (edp5112/d004b 19 July 2019 PD/HS)

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

This version is intended for electronic viewing only Report ref: edp5112_r001 Author Formatted Peer Review Proofed by/Date 001_DRAFT HS FD RS - 001a RS - RS GL 190719

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

This page has been left blank intentionally

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Non-technical Summary

S1 This Heritage Impact Assessment has been prepared by The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd (EDP), on behalf of Powys County Council, to inform the potential for future housing development on land at Castle Estate, Clyro.

S2 It is concluded that the site does not contain any designated ‘historic assets’, such as scheduled monuments, listed buildings, or historic parks and gardens, where there would be a presumption in favour of physical retention or preservation in situ.

S3 The assessment has considered effects on the significance of the Clyro Castle Scheduled Monument, the Grade II* listed Church of Saint Michael’s and All Angels, and Clyro Conservation Area, through change within their setting in accordance with Cadw’s Setting of Historic Assets in Wales (published on 31 May 2017). It has also considered the site’s archaeological potential with reference to available historic environment data and the results of a geophysical survey.

S4 The assessment has identified that the three parts of the site (A, B and C on Plan EDP 1) vary in terms of their contribution to the significance of Clyro Castle. Parcel C is not considered to make any specific contribution to the significance of the castle. Neither does Parcel A, although the land parcel sits within a view corridor between the castle and Saint Michael’s and All Angels Church across the Clyro Conservation Area. This visual link between the localities’ key medieval monuments is considered to represent an element of the setting of these assets, which contributes to their respective significances. Development of a height below the current skyline would not be considered to interfere with this view corridor.

S5 Parcel B is located on the lower slopes of the mound on which the castle earthworks lie, and due to this proximity, and possible association with the castle’s archaeology, is considered to represent a part of its setting which contributes to its significance to a small degree.

S6 Notwithstanding Parcel A’s position in relation to the view-corridor described above, the assessment concludes that the none of the parcels form part of the setting of the Grade II* listed Church of Saint Michael’s and All Angels, that contribute to the asset’s significance.

S7 Regarding the Clyro Conservation Area, neither Parcels A or B are considered to make any specific contribution to the conservation area’s special interest. Neither does Parcel C, although this land is situated on a street that contains historic buildings which represent an aspect of the conservation area’s setting which contributes to its special interest. As such, it is advisable that development of this parcel should respect the street’s historic character, in order to preserve this contribution, and not detract from it (in accordance with PPW Wales).

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

S8 It is assessed that the modern housing to the south-east of the A483, is neutral in terms of its influence on the character and appearance of the special interest of the conservation area, and thus the development of Parcel A for housing of a similar character, would also represent a neutral aspect of the conservation area’s setting.

S9 Regarding archaeology, a geophysical survey undertaken across Parcels A and B did not identify any archaeological remains, and it is also evident that all three parcels have been subject to post-medieval and modern disturbance. As such, with refence to HER and NMRW data, it is considered that there is only a low potential for prehistoric or Roman period remains within the three parcels that make up the site, and a moderate-low potential for medieval period remains, either related to Clyro castle or the village.

S10 With regard to the future development of Parcel A, the assessment concurs with advice issued by CPAT, who identified a potential for unrecorded medieval remains and have requested that archaeological monitoring in the form of a watching brief take place, should development occur within this part of the site.

S11 With regard to Parcel B, it was stated by CPAT that, in order to preserve the setting of the castle and any associated archaeology within this area, closest to the monument, proposals should be minimal with little or no ground reduction and sparse structures. It is our conclusion that whilst this area is within the setting of the castle, it only contributes to its significance to a small degree, and development, that respects and responds to the castle’s setting should be acceptable. Also, evidence, including from geophysics, does not indicate anything more than a low-moderate potential for medieval period archaeological remains in this part of the site. As such, mitigation of impact on archaeology by recording should be acceptable.

S12 As such, it is assessed that low impact development, such as for a children’s playground, resulting in some change to the appearance of this field, and limited below ground impacts should be seen to accord with planning policy, in that the effect on the significance of the castle will be minimal, and that significant archaeological remains are unlikely to be affected.

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Section 1 Introduction

1.1 This report has been prepared by The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd (EDP), on behalf of Powys County Council, to inform the potential for future residential development on land at Castle Estate, Clyro.

1.2 The first aim of this assessment is to identify and assess possible changes within the setting of designated historic assets resulting from the proposed development of the site, and to determine whether, and to what extent, those changes will affect their heritage significance. The assessment has been carried out in accordance with the guidance set out in Cadw’s Setting of Historic Assets in Wales (published on 31 May 2017).

1.3 The second aim of this assessment is to provide comment on the site’s archaeological potential (in accordance with the requirements of Planning Policy Wales (Edition 10), Technical Advice Note 24 (TAN 24) and local planning policy). This will consider a selection of available historical and archaeological resources for the site and is intended to discuss the potential for significant archaeology to be existing within the site.

1.4 Following best practice and guidance, desktop sources have been checked and augmented through the completion of a walkover survey, undertaken in August 2018.

Location, Boundaries and Topography

1.5 The site has a combined area of c. 0.8 hectares (ha), consisting of three separate parcels measuring c.0.36ha (Parcel A), c.0.42ha (Parcel B) and c.0.04ha (Parcel C), as shown on Plan EDP 1. The land is located within the village of Clyro, to the south-east of the village centre and the A438. The parcels of the site are separated from each other by modern 20th century development, and by the Castle Estate Road. Clyro Castle Scheduled Monument (RD066) is located directly to the south west of Parcel B.

1.6 The largest parcel is the easternmost Parcel B which is bounded by modern residential development to the north-west, agricultural land to the south-east, the boundary of Clyro Castle Scheduled Monument to the south-west and Castle Estate Road and further residential development to the north. The land is currently an area of open space surrounded by trees and hedging to the west, south and east and wire fencing to the north, it is not in public use. The land declines steeply from c.105m above Ordnance Datum (aOD) in the south, to c.97m aOD in the north of the parcel.

1.7 The next largest parcel of land is the northernmost Parcel A, this is bounded by the A438 to the north-west and modern residential development to the north-east, south-west and south-east. The parcel is currently in use as a public playing field. It is mostly amenity grassland but includes a play area and access road in the south east corner. This parcel

1 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

of the site is relatively flat but does vary slightly in level from c.98m aOD in the south to c.100m aOD in the north.

1.8 The smallest parcel of land is the south-westernmost Parcel C. This is bounded by residential development to the north-west and north-east, Castle Estate road to the south- east, beyond which is Clyro Castle, and the B4351 to the south-west, beyond which is further housing. The parcel is currently in use as an allotment and includes five garages in the south east corner of the parcel. The land within this parcel is level and sits at c.102m aOD.

1.9 The wider landscape of Clyro village is low-lying with the Clyro Brook passing through the north of the village. Land to the north of Clyro inclines steeply to c.190m aOD. To the south the land gradually drops down to the broad valley of the River Wye.

Geology

1.10 The solid geology within all three parts of the site consists of the Raglan Mudstone Formation, which was formed in an environment dominated by rivers. The superficial deposits within the site are recorded as Hummocky Glacial Deposits, laid down when the local environment was dominated by ice age conditions (www.bgs.ac.uk).

Proposed Development

1.11 It is proposed to develop Parcel A for housing, with Parcel B as a public open space and play area. Access to the buildings in Parcel A would be from Castle Estate Road and Kilvert View. Parcel C is an optional site for further housing development.

Planning background and consultation

1.12 Clwyd-Powys Archaeological Trust (CPAT), the archaeological advisor to Powys County Council, provided comment on the site’s archaeology in March 2017 and June 2018. The comments highlighted the following with regard to the site’s archaeological potential:

• Although the site is within the medieval historic core (as defined by the CPAT Historic Environment Record (HER)), the boundaries of the core are quite generous and there is no evidence to suggest that any part of the medieval village was located within the site. Indeed, historic mapping shows the majority of the site to be an orchard and the historic core of the village to be centred around the church;

• A watching brief was undertaken on a development site immediately to the east of the site and no significant archaeology was found;

• The proposed northern plot (Parcel A) has already been landscaped to some extent in preparation for the playground area; and

2 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

• Setting and visibility issues for the scheduled castle would be limited by the tree cover on the motte and the intervening modern development.

1.13 Following the geophysical survey at the site in August 2018, further consultation advice was sought from Mark Walters at CPAT. It was concluded by Mark that, due to the modern interference within the survey results, and therefore ambiguity in terms of the site’s archaeological potential, if an application was made to develop the site, it would be necessary to carry out an archaeological watching brief, during construction, which would serve to mitigate impacts upon any archaeological remains present within Parcel A of the site . Mark stated that: ‘I think we would just require a watching brief condition as a precaution here if any development is proposed.’

1.14 Due to the proximity of Parcel B of the site to the scheduled Clyro Castle, it was stated that proposals would need to be minimal in terms of their below ground impact, i.e. ‘using a grass surface with no significant ground reduction and sparse structures associated with a playground.’ It was recommended that further advice would also need to be sought from Cadw regarding effects on the setting of the scheduled monument.

3 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

This page has been left blank intentionally

4 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Section 2 Legislation and Planning Guidance

Planning Policy Background

2.1 This section sets out existing legislation and planning policy, governing the conservation and management of the historic environment, of relevance to this application.

Legislation

2.2 In March 2016, the Historic Environment (Wales) Act came into force. Whilst providing a number of new provisions to existing legislation, the changes do not specifically affect the planning process, or the way archaeology and heritage is assessed.

Listed Buildings and Conservation areas

2.3 The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 is the primary legislative instrument addressing the treatment of listed buildings and conservation areas through the planning process in Wales.

2.4 Section 66(1) of the 1990 Act concerns listed buildings and states that:

‘...in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses’.

2.5 The ‘special regard’ duty of the 1990 Act has been tested in the Court of Appeal and confirmed to require that ‘considerable importance and weight’ should be afforded by the decision maker to the desirability of preserving a listed building along with its setting. The relevant judgement is referenced as ‘Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Ltd v East Northants DC, English Heritage and National Trust’ (2014) EWCA Civ 137.

2.6 However, it must be recognised that s66(1) of the 1990 Act does not identify that the local authority or the Secretary of State must preserve a listed building or its setting; and neither does it indicate that a development that does not preserve them is unacceptable and should therefore be refused.

2.7 This point is made very clearly in Paragraph 54 of the judgement regarding ‘Forest of Dean DC v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government’ (2013), which identifies that:

5 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

‘…Section 66 (1) did not oblige the inspector to reject the proposal because he found it would cause some harm to the setting of the listed buildings. The duty is directed to ‘the desirability of preserving’ the setting of listed buildings. One sees there the basic purpose of the ‘special regard’ duty. It is does not rule out acceptable change. It gives the decision-maker an extra task to perform, which is to judge whether the change proposed is acceptable. But it does not prescribe the outcome. It does not dictate the refusal of planning permission if the proposed development is found likely to alter or even to harm the setting of a listed building’.

2.8 In other words, it is up to the decision maker (such as a local authority) to assess whether the proposal which is before them would result in ‘acceptable change’.

2.9 Section 72(1) of the 1990 Act sets out the statutory duty for a decision-maker where a proposed development would have an impact on the character and appearance of a conservation area, and as such only applies to the area within a conservation area designation. This states that: ‘...with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation area, of any powers under any of the provisions mentioned in subsection (2), special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area’.

2.10 As far as Section 72(1) of the 1990 Act is concerned, it has previously been established by the Courts (‘South Lakeland DC v Secretary of State for the Environment’, [1992] 2 WLR 204) that proposed development which does not detract from the character or appearance of a conservation area is deemed to be in accordance with the legislation. In other words, there is no statutory requirement to actively ‘enhance’.

2.11 The preservation of the setting of a conservation area is not a statutory duty, instead being a planning policy matter only.

Archaeology

2.12 The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 addresses the designation and management of scheduled monuments, providing for the maintenance of a schedule of monuments (and archaeological remains) which are protected.

2.13 The designation of archaeological and historic sites as scheduled monuments applies only to those that are deemed to be of national importance and is generally adopted only if it represents the best means of protection.

2.14 The 1979 Act does not address the concept of ‘setting’, just their physical remains and, therefore, for scheduled monuments the protection of ‘setting’ is a matter of policy only.

2.15 In Wales, the written consent of the Welsh Minister is required for development that would impact upon a scheduled monument, and applications for Scheduled Monument Consent are submitted to Cadw, the Welsh Government’s Historic Environment Service.

6 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

National Planning Policy

2.16 National planning guidance, concerning the treatment of the historic environment across Wales, is detailed in Section 6.1 of Chapter 6 Distinctive and Natural Places of Planning Policy Wales Tenth Edition, published in December 2018 (PPW 2018).

2.17 At Paragraph 6.1.2, it identifies the historic environment as comprising individual historic features, such as archaeological sites, historic buildings and historic parks, gardens, townscapes and landscapes, collectively known as ‘historic assets’.

2.18 At Paragraph 6.1.6 the Welsh Government’s specific objectives for the historic environment are outlined. Of these, the following are of relevance to the current assessment. These seek to ‘conserve archaeological remains, both for their own sake and for their role in education, leisure and the economy’; ‘preserve or enhance the character or appearance of conservation areas, whilst the same time helping them remain vibrant and prosperous’; and ‘safeguard the character of historic buildings and manage change so that their special architectural and historic interest is preserved’.

2.19 At Paragraph 6.1.7, it is stated that:

‘It is important that the planning system looks to protect, conserve and enhance the significance of historic assets. This will include consideration of the setting of an historic asset which might extend beyond its curtilage. Any change that impacts on an historic asset or its setting should be managed in a sensitive and sustainable way.’

2.20 As such, with regard to decision making, it is stated that: ‘Any decisions made through the planning system must fully consider the impact on the historic environment and on the significance and heritage values of individual historic assets and their contribution to the character of place.’

2.21 Regarding listed buildings PPW 2018 states, at Paragraph 6.1.10, that:

‘...there should be a general presumption in favour of the preservation of a listed building and its setting, which might extend beyond its curtilage’ and then adds that ‘For any development proposal affecting a listed building or its setting, the primary material consideration is the statutory requirement to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building, or its setting, or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses’.

2.22 It then adds that: ‘The aim should be to find the best way to protect and enhance the special qualities of listed buildings, retaining them in sustainable use’.

2.23 Regarding conservation areas, it is stated at Paragraph 6.1.14 that: ‘There should be a general presumption in favour of the preservation or enhancement of the character or appearance of conservation areas or their settings.’

2.24 Paragraphs 6.1.15 and 6.1.16 state that:

7 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

‘There will be a strong presumption against the granting of planning permission for development, including advertisements, which damage the character and appearance of a conservation area or its setting to an unacceptable level. In exceptional cases the presumption may be overridden in favour of development deemed desirable on the grounds of some other public interest’, and that: ‘Preservation or enhancement of a conservation area can be achieved by a development which either makes a positive contribution to an area’s character or appearance, or leaves them unharmed.’

2.25 It is apparent the PPW does not state that any damage to the character and appearance of a conservation area would result in the refusal of planning permission. It is only damage that is of an ‘unacceptable level’ which would result in a strong presumption against the granting of planning permission. The required judgement is concerned with what constitutes an ‘unacceptable’ level of harm not whether there is any harm at all.

2.26 Regarding archaeological remains, PPW states at Paragraph 6.1.23, that: ‘The conservation of archaeological remains and their settings is a material consideration in determining a planning application, whether those remains are a scheduled monument or not.’

2.27 It then adds at Paragraph 6.1.24 that:

‘…Where nationally important archaeological remains are likely to be affected by proposed development, there should be a presumption in favour of their physical protection in situ. It will only be in exceptional circumstances that planning permission will be granted if development would result in a direct adverse impact on a scheduled monument (or an archaeological site shown to be of national importance).’ At Paragraph 6.1.25 it states that: ‘In cases involving less significant archaeological remains, planning authorities will need to weigh the relative importance of the archaeological remains and their settings against other factors, including the need for the proposed development.’

2.28 Paragraph 6.1.26 recommends that:

‘…Where archaeological remains are known to exist or there is a potential for them to survive, an application should be accompanied by sufficient information, through desk- based assessment and/or field evaluation, to allow a full understanding of the impact of the proposal on the significance of the remains. The needs of archaeology and development may be reconciled, and potential conflict very much reduced, through early discussion and assessment.’

2.29 In situations where planning approval would result in archaeological remains being destroyed, at Paragraph 6.1.27, PPW 2018 states the following regarding the planning authorities’ obligations:

‘If the planning authority is minded to approve an application and where archaeological remains are affected by proposals that alter or destroy them, the planning authority must be satisfied that the developer has secured appropriate and satisfactory provision for

8 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

their recording and investigation, followed by the analysis and publication of the results and the deposition of the resulting archive in an approved repository. On occasions, unforeseen archaeological remains may still be discovered during the course of a development. A written scheme of investigation should consider how to react to such circumstances or it can be covered through an appropriate condition for a watching brief. Where remains discovered are deemed to be of national importance, the Welsh Ministers have the power to schedule the site and in such circumstances scheduled monument consent must be required before works can continue.’

2.30 Finally, also of relevance to the current application, Paragraph 6.1.28 is concerned with Historic Environment Records (HERs). This states that:

‘The statutory historic environment records for each local authority area are managed and kept up-to-date by the Welsh Archaeological Trusts on behalf of the Welsh Ministers. These records must be used as a key source of information in making planning decisions affecting the historic environment. Advice on their use in decision making should be sought from the Trusts.’

Technical Advice Note 24 (TAN 24)

2.31 Additional guidance for archaeology in Wales is set out in ‘Technical Advice Note 24: The Historic Environment’ (Welsh Government, 2017).

2.32 TAN 24 provides ‘guidance on how the planning system considers the historic environment during development plan preparation and decision making on planning applications.’

2.33 It clarifies the polices and distinctions made in PPW. A definition for a ‘historic asset’ is given as: ‘An identifiable component of the historic environment. It may consist or be a combination of an archaeological site, a historic building or area, historic park and garden or a parcel of historic landscape. Nationally important historic assets will normally be designated.’

2.34 Of particular relevance to this application are: Section 5, which deals with listed buildings, although it is predominantly concerned with direct effects on their fabric, rather than any indirect effects on setting; and Section 6, which is concerned with Conservation Areas.

2.35 Indirect effects through changes within the settings of designated heritage assets are covered by TAN 24 at Paragraphs 1.23 to 1.29. These paragraphs define the setting of an historic asset as:

‘…the surroundings in which it is understood, experienced, and appreciated embracing present and past relationships to the surrounding landscape. 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. Setting is not a historic asset in its own

9 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

right but has value derived from how different elements may contribute to the significance of a historic asset.’

2.36 Tan 24 also provides advice on factors to consider when assessing effects on setting. Paragraph 1.26 identifies that it is:

‘…for the applicant to provide the local planning authority with sufficient information to allow the assessment of their proposals in respect of scheduled monuments, listed buildings, conservation areas, registered historic parks and gardens, World Heritage Sites, or other sites of national importance and their settings.’

2.37 Paragraph 1.29 goes on to state that:

‘The local planning authority will need to make its own assessment of the impact within the setting of a historic asset, having considered the responses received from consultees as part of this process. A judgement has to be made by the consenting authority, on a case-by-case basis, over whether a proposed development may be damaging to the setting of the historic asset or may enhance or have a neutral impact on the setting by the removal of existing inappropriate development or land use.’

2.38 Section 4 of TAN 24 is concerned with archaeological remains and is thus also relevant to the current assessment. Key points of advice, derived from the guidance, regarding archaeological remains and the development process, are as follows:

• The importance of pre-application discussion is stressed in order to reconcile the needs of archaeology and development between the applicant, the local planning authority, their archaeological advisors and, in cases where scheduled monuments may be affected, Cadw;

• Applicants are encouraged to make an enquiry with the body with responsibility for the relevant historic environment record and seek advice from the local planning authority’s archaeological advisor at an early stage in considering their development proposal;

• Where archaeological remains are known to exist, or considered likely to exist, and a study has not already been undertaken by the applicant, the local planning authority should ask an applicant to undertake a desk-based archaeological assessment and, where appropriate, an archaeological evaluation. These should be done by a qualified and competent expert to the appropriate standard. The reports of these investigations will form part of the planning application. Applicants should show they have modified their development proposals to minimise any negative impact on the identified archaeological remains, and how they intend to mitigate any remaining negative impacts; and

• The case for the preservation of archaeological remains that are not considered to meet the criteria for national importance (see Annex A.2), must be assessed on the individual merits of each case. The local planning authority must take into account

10 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

relevant policies and material considerations, and will need to weigh the significance of the remains against the benefits of and need for the proposed development.

2.39 Regarding the preservation, recording and understanding of archaeological evidence, the guidance contains the following points of advice:

• Measures can be taken to minimise the impact of a development proposal on identified archaeological remains and allow their preservation in situ;

• Having considered all policies and other material considerations and the need for the development, the local planning authority may decide that the significance of the archaeological remains is not sufficient to justify their physical preservation. In these cases, the local planning authority must satisfy itself that the necessary and proportionate arrangements for the excavation and recording of these archaeological remains are secured, and the results of this archaeological work are properly analysed and published; and

• Any programme of archaeological excavation and recording should precede the start of work on the development, unless there are exceptional circumstances which prevent this from occurring.

2.40 Regarding unexpected archaeological discoveries, the guidance states the following:

‘Where unexpected archaeological discoveries are considered to be of national importance, the Welsh Ministers have the power to schedule the site (see Annex A). In the event of scheduling, the developer must seek separate scheduled monument consent before work can continue. It is also open to the local planning authority and the Welsh Ministers to revoke or modify a planning permission under these circumstances, in which case there is provision for the compensation of the developer for loss of value and expenditure incurred.’

Local Planning Policy

2.41 Following the Examination in Public of the Powys Local Development Plan and the receipt of the Inspector’s Report, the council adopted the LDP on 17 April 2018 and it was put into operation immediately. The plan sets out the council’s policies for the development and use of land within the county of Powys (except the Brecon Beacons National Park) from 2011 up to the year 2026.

Strategic Policy SP7 - Safeguarding of Strategic Resources and Assets

2.42 The purpose of Policy SP7 is to safeguard strategic resources and assets in the county. Strategic resources and assets in terms of the historic environment include:

‘Historic environment designations, including:

11 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

i. Registered Historic Landscapes;

ii. Registered Historic Parks and Gardens;

iii. Scheduled Ancient Monuments and other archaeological remains;

iv. Listed Buildings and their curtilages; and

v. Conservation Areas. AND the setting of designations.’

2.43 Scenarios as to the protection of assets are also discussed within this policy:

‘Only development proposals that will not have an unacceptable impact on the asset / resource and the purposes for which it is safeguarded should be permitted. For example, it may not be appropriate to permit new housing or a school in close proximity to an MOD training area as such establishments can create pressure to limit the activities and other use of MOD land.

The potential cumulative impacts of existing and proposed development(s) should be carefully considered. Resources and assets may offer multiple benefits, the Offa's Dyke Path for example, contributes to historic, recreational, tourism and visual / landscape assets. Offa’s Dyke is a nationally important archaeological monument, part of which is designated as a Scheduled Ancient Monument, and other parts are unscheduled sections. The route of the Offa’s Dyke Path National Trail also follows along or near sections of the monument as it passes through the Plan area. The safeguarding to be applied under Policy SP7, in combination with the protection afforded at the national level to Scheduled Ancient Monuments, and in respect of archaeology generally, will serve to protect this asset and its setting. The policy seeks to safeguard archaeological remains, whether scheduled or not, and their settings, in line with national legislation, policy and guidance.’

Policy DM13 – Design and Resources

2.44 Policy DM13 ensures that developments demonstrate good quality, sympathetic design. Points 2 and 3 state:

2. The development contributes towards the preservation of local distinctiveness and sense of place.

3. Any development within or affecting the setting and/or significant views into and out of a Conservation Area has been designed in accordance with any relevant adopted Conservation Area Character Appraisals and Conservation Area Management Plans, or any other relevant detailed assessment or guidance adopted by the Council.

2.45 These adopted planning policies, at the national and local levels, have been taken into account in the preparation of this assessment.

12 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Section 3 Methodology

Archaeological Assessment Methodology

3.1 This report has been produced in accordance with the Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment issued by the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA, 2014) and Heritage Impact Assessment in Wales (Cadw, 2017). These guidelines provide a national standard for the completion of desk-based assessments and heritage impact assessments.

3.2 In order to supplement the assessment, historic environment information from documentary, cartographic and aerial photographic sources was consulted. The major repositories of information comprised:

i. Cadw’s Historic Environment Service, for information on designated heritage assets;

ii. Data derived from the Clywd-Powys Archaeological Trust Historic Environment Record (HER);

iii. Data derived from the National Monuments Record of Wales (NMRW), held by the Royal Commission for the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales (RCAHMW);

iv. Historic maps, derived from readily available online sources;

v. Aerial photographs held by the Central Register of Aerial Photography for Wales (CRAPW) at Cardiff;

vi. The Historic Wales online portal; and

vii. A site walkover survey carried out in August 2018.

3.3 This report provides a synthesis of relevant information for the site derived from a search area extending up to 1km from the site parcels hereafter known as the ‘study area’, to allow for additional contextual information regarding its archaeological interest or potential to be gathered and understood.

3.4 The assessment of the significance of designated heritage assets within the general vicinity of the site, makes reference to the four ‘heritage values’ identified by Cadw within their Conservation Principles for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment in Wales document (Cadw, 2011).

3.5 These consist of:

13 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

• The asset’s evidential value, which is defined as those elements of the historic asset that can provide evidence about past human activity, including its physical remains or historic fabric;

• The asset’s historical value, which is defined as those elements of an asset which might illustrate a particular aspect of past life or might be associated with a notable family, person, event or movement;

• The asset’s aesthetic value, which is defined as deriving from the way in which people draw sensory and intellectual stimulation from the historic asset; and

• The asset’s communal value, which is defined as deriving from the meanings that an historic asset has for the people who relate to it, or for whom it figures in their collective experience or memory.

Setting Assessment Methodology

3.6 In addition to the potential for direct impacts on the fabric of an asset, when assessing the impact of proposals on designated historic assets, it is important to ascertain whether change within its ‘setting’ would lead to a loss of ‘significance’. This assessment is made according to Cadw’s guidance Setting of Historic Assets in Wales (published on 31 May 2017).

3.7 In simple terms, setting ‘includes the surroundings in which it is understood, experienced and appreciated, embracing present and past relationships to the surrounding landscape’ (Cadw, 2011). It must be recognised from the outset that ‘setting’ is not a heritage asset and cannot itself be harmed. The guidance states that the importance of setting ‘lies in what it contributes to the significance of a historic asset.’

3.8 As such, when assessing the indirect impact of proposals on designated heritage assets, it is not a question of whether their setting would be affected, but rather a question of whether change within the asset’s ‘setting’ would lead to a loss of ‘significance’.

3.9 Set within this context, where the objective is to determine the potential for development to have an adverse effect on designated heritage assets beyond the boundary of a development site, it is necessary to first define the significance of the asset in question - and the contribution made to that significance by its 'setting', in order to establish whether there would be a loss, and therefore harm. The guidance identifies that change within a heritage asset's setting need not necessarily cause harm to that asset - it can be positive, negative or neutral.

3.10 Cadw’s guidance (Cadw, 2017) sets out a four-stage approach to the identification and assessment of setting effects; i.e.:

• Stage 1: Identify the historic assets which might be affected;

14 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

• Stage 2: Define and analyse the setting, to understand how it contributes to the asset’s heritage significance;

• Stage 3: Evaluate the potential impact of development; and

• Stage 4: Consider options to mitigate or improve that potential impact.

3.11 The assessment outlined below considers Stages 1 ,2 and 3 of this process, as it relates to the scheme to develop the site, as outlined in Plan EDP 1.

15 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

This page has been left blank intentionally

16 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Section 4 Existing Information

Introduction

4.1 The site does not contain any designated ‘historic assets’, such as scheduled monuments, listed buildings, or historic parks and gardens, where there would be a presumption in favour of physical retention or preservation in situ. Nor is the site located within a conservation area.

4.2 As previously described, the potential for the proposed development of the site to change the settings of designated historic assets within the wider area has been assessed following the Cadw guidance (Cadw 2017). Stage 1 of the assessment process sought to identify any historic assets which might be affected.

4.3 The largest parcel of the site (Parcel B) is situated c. 5m from the north eastern boundary of the Clyro Castle Scheduled Monument (RD066), which is separated from the site by a buffer of woodland. As such, the monument will be physically unaffected by the proposed development of the site. The potential for effects on the significance of the monument, due to change to its setting are discussed further below.

4.4 Other designated assets within the site’s vicinity include the Clyro Conservation Area, which contains 14 Grade II listed buildings and two Grade II* listed buildings, the edge of which is located c.25m north of the site. Due to the close proximity of the conservation area to the site, it, and the listed buildings therein, have also been considered, as potentially susceptible to an effect on their settings.

4.5 Four listed buildings, are located outside of the conservation area, within 1km of the site. These have also been considered.

4.6 Clyro Court Chambered Tomb Scheduled Monument (RD203) is located c.450m south of the site. There is no intervisibility between the site and this monument, and a lack of any apparent historical association between it and the land within the site. As such, effects on this monument will not be discussed any further within this report.

Clyro Castle Scheduled Monument (RD066)

4.7 The first specific mention of Clyro Castle is in 1397 when the area was ruled by the Norman lords, the Beauchamps. although it may be that the castle was founded as early as 1070, as a twin to the castle at Hay-on-Wye (Salter, 2001). The castle was built on a natural hill which was built-up into a larger mound to accommodate the structure. Clyro was one of the many castles fortified in the early 15th century against Owain Glyndwr in his revolt against the English. It is thought that the castle then fell into decay in the 16th century. Buried remains of the castle were uncovered in the early 19th century.

17 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

4.8 In the present day, the visible earthworks of the castle comprise an oval scarped, ditched and counterscarped enclosure measuring c.65m by c.57m. The entrance to the mound is south-west facing and was possibly adapted from a natural eminence.

4.9 When it was built, the castle would have occupied a commanding position within the landscape surrounding Clyro and would certainly have been contemporary with the Grade II* listed Church of Saint Michael’s and All Angels which was also built in the 14th century. It is probable that a village formed around the church in the present-day village centre. A number of buildings within the village date to at least the 15th century.

4.10 The castle was built with a defensive purpose, as evidenced by the surrounding enclosure and former curtain wall, the remains of which form a continuous heap of fallen stone following the edge of the mound. Aside from piles of rubble, there are no above ground remains of the castle.

4.11 The castle’s significance is chiefly derived from the evidential value inherent in the earthwork and archaeological remains associated with it. These remains contain a considerable degree of information on the structure of the castle and on medieval construction techniques, and medieval material culture in general.

4.12 The castle also has a high degree of historic value, derived from its illustration of the medieval history of the locality, related to the wider medieval history of the Welsh marches and with the origins of Clyro.

4.13 Consisting of earthworks and rubble shrouded in dense woodland, the castle has very little aesthetic value, and its communal value is related to it representing a local historic landmark, rather than any ongoing modern use. For example, the castle is not easily visited due to the dense woodland that surrounds it, and thus is not open to the public as a tourist attraction.

The setting of the castle and its contribution to its significance

4.14 As referenced in Cadw’s guidance, The Setting of Historic Assets in Wales (Cadw, 2017); the setting of a historic asset is ‘the surroundings in which it is understood, experienced and appreciated’. As the castle is completely covered with a dense stand of trees, it is experienced, from within the village of Clyro, and beyond, as a tree covered mound. The castle earthworks and stone rubble, which define its appearance as a medieval castle, are not visible (Image EDP 1). As such, the enshrouding tree cover is considered to represent an aspect of the castle’s setting, which diminishes the experience of it from elsewhere, screening views of the earthworks, and reducing the degree to which the monument is experienced as the remains of a castle. Without prior knowledge of the nature of the monument, to an observer it is not experienced as a ruined castle. Given this effect, the tree cover is considered to represent a negative aspect of the monument’s setting, that reduces its significance.

4.15 The castle’s topographic situation, located on a natural mound overlooking the river valley, is of relevance to its historic interest, in that the castle would have been designed

18 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

to dominate the communication route along the river, with far reaching views and a strong defensive position. This topographic aspect is of relevance to the castle’s significance, although as described above, the castle’s wooded surroundings restrict any present day views from the castle mound, and the remains of the castle are not visible in relation to the wider valley topography. As such, although the castle’s topographic position, on a mound, makes a contribution to its significance, the reduced visibility of the monument restricts any attempt to fully appreciate this aspect of its setting.

4.16 The castle has a strong historical association with the historic core of the village at Clyro, most notably with the church, which is the village’s most prominent medieval asset. A line of visibility exists between the two assets, and although the castle is experienced as a tree covered mound, it is possible to perceive a contextual link between medieval castle and church, and the surrounding settlement, a link which would have been key to the local power structure in the medieval period. Given this association, the church and surrounding historic core of the village (as represented by the conservation area) is considered to represent an aspect of the castle’ setting which contributes highly to its significance. However, as with the other aspects discussed above, this contribution is diminished by the lack of visibility of the castle remains, due to the surrounding trees.

4.17 Situated on the edge of the village, much of the castle’s surroundings, consists of modern housing estates, and other modern development such as roads and street furniture. From within this modern landscape the castle is readily experienced, albeit as a tree covered mound. The modern landscape has no historical association with the castle and is of an entirely different character to it. However, none of the surrounding modern development is on such a scale that its screens views of the castle, or distracts from, or competes with it in views. As such, the modern development in the castle’s setting is not considered to exert any negative impact on its significance, being considered neutral in terms of its effect.

The site in relation to the setting of the monument

4.18 Although Clyro Castle is visible from within all parcels of the site, there are no known, direct historic links between the castle and the land within any of the parcels. The parcel located to the north-east of the castle (B) is located on the lower slopes of the mound on which the castle is situated. As this land consists of an open field, from the edge of this parcel it is possible to experience the castle earthworks amongst the woodland in which they lie. By virtue of its location, and open grassed character, the parcel is also considered to possess a degree of archaeological potential related to the castle. As such, Parcel B is considered to represent a space from which the castle is experienced in close proximity and is considered to make a small contribution to its significance.

4.19 Other parts of the site currently possess a highly modern character. Parcel A consists of a modern public open space within a modern housing development, and Parcel C consists of modern allotments and garages. As such they have no relevance to the castle’s history or character. As from much of the surrounding area, by virtue of its size, the castle is experienced from these areas as a tree covered mound, a limited experience of the monument that is not exclusive to these areas. In this respect, Parcels A and C, are parts

19 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

of the surrounding modern landscape, and, as described above, are considered neutral in terms of their contribution to the castle’s significance.

4.20 Parcel A sits between the castle and the Church of Saint Michael’s and All Angels, and by virtue of its openness, allows for a view between the two assets (Image EDP 2), which extends above the rooftops of surrounding houses. Development within the site would have to be of a considerable height to impose upon this visual link, and it is considered that the construction of two storey buildings, of a scale and appearance similar to that of the houses surrounding the site, would not affect this visual association.

4.21 Development of Parcel C would be relatively close to the castle, however as this area already has a modern character, modern housing would simply represent an alteration to its appearance, rather than introducing a new element into the castle’s setting. Given that this parcel is not considered to make any contribution to the significance of the castle, this change would not be considered to result in any adverse effect upon it.

Grade II* Listed St Michael’s Church and All Angels

4.22 The earliest stages of St Michaels Church were built in the 14th century. Part of the church was rebuilt in 1853 in a decorated style by Thomas Nicholson and the clock is believed to have been added in 1894. There are numerous historic associations between the church and Reverend Francis Kilvert (the famous diarist); who was curate of the church from 1865-1872 and wrote numerous references to St Michaels Church within his diaries.

4.23 The significance of the church is derived from its historic, aesthetic, evidential and communal values. The evidential value of the church is derived from its architecture and fabric, which contains information on medieval building techniques. The historic interest of the church is derived from its illustration of the medieval landscape, its associative links to the origins of Clyro, including an historic association with Clyro Caste. Historic interest is also derived from its association with the written works of the Revered Francis Kilvert.

4.24 The aesthetic value of the church is evident in the decorative aspects of its architecture, and prominence of its tower. Finally, through its continuing use as a church, the building also possesses a strong degree of communal value.

The setting of the church and its contribution to its significance

4.25 The church is set at the centre of the historic core of the village, within an extensive churchyard. This area, both the churchyard, and historic part of the village, and the historic buildings therein, have a close historical and functional relationship with the church, the village having grown up around it. The church is a prominent landmark within this part of the village. As such, the historic core of the village is considered to represent a setting of the church which continues highly to its significance.

20 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

4.26 Also, as noted above there is an historical association between the church and the remains of the castle to the east, which represents an aspect of its setting that also contributes highly to its significance, illustrating the past appearance of the medieval landscape.

4.27 Beyond the historic core (and the conservation area) the church’s setting largely comprises the wider extent of the village, which is mostly a landscape of modern houses. The village’s modern extent has little relevance to the historic character of the church, although no modern buildings are situated near to the church, and none are on such a scale that they screen views of it or compete with it visually. Furthermore, the church has very limited visibility beyond the historic core, with trees on the edge of the historic part of the village, and buildings, restricting views of it to occasional glimpsed view of the tower. As such, the surrounding modern extent of the village is considered neutral in terms of its contribution to the significance of the church.

4.28 The church is also viewed from various locations within the surrounding landscape of agricultural fields which lies beyond the village, in particular from the higher ground to the west. None of these areas has a specific historical connection to the church, and so views are entirely incidental, being possible on account of the prominence of the church’s tower. As such, the surrounding countryside is considered to represent as aspect of the church’s setting which is neutral in terms of its contribution to its significance.

The site in relation to the setting of the church

4.29 As mentioned previously, there is a historic link between Saint Michael’s Church and All Angels and the Clyro Castle Scheduled Monument, due to their shared medieval history, and there is a visual connection between the two assets. Parcel A currently facilitates this experience by providing an open landscape beyond which the castle can be seen, from the churchyard (Image EDP 2). As discussed in relation to the castle above, development proposals that obstruct this view would potentially change the church’s setting such that this link would be lost, resulting in harm to the asset. As also noted above, the type of development proposed within this part of the site will not be of sufficient height to obstruct the view, and such as an effect is unlikely to occur.

4.30 The other two parts of the site (B and C) are well-detached from the church and separated from it by modern development. Distant views of the church tower are possible from these parts of the site (Image EDP 3), as they are from many locations within the church’s wider setting, and, as such, are not of any specific relevance to its significance. Neither parcel has any direct historical relationship with the church, reflecting parts of its wider setting that make no contribution to its significance.

4.31 Considering the above, the development of the site is very unlikely to affect the significance of the church, as it will not affect any part of its setting that contributes to its significance.

21 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Clyro Conservation Area

4.32 Clyro conservation area encompasses the historic core of Clyro village. The boundary of the conservation area (Plan EDP 1) follows the northern edge of the A438 and then turns north west to include the land surrounding The Baskerville Arms. From here, the boundary turns west and includes the buildings within Baskerville Court and the historic buildings to the west of the church, along the roadside. The boundary turns south west from here and includes an area of land historically associated with the Grade II listed Cae- Mawr house before turning east before the Cae-Mawr house and gardens and ending on the northern edge of the A438, at the junction with the B4351.

4.33 A conservation area appraisal has not been produced by Powys County Council for Clyro Conservation Area, and so the paragraphs below describe the character and appearance of its special interest, based on observations made during the site visit.

4.34 Much of the centre of the conservation area exhibits a historic, vernacular Welsh building style with numerous small cottages constructed in rubble stone with slate roofs. These buildings are key elements of the conservation area’s special interest. Although much of the conservation area’s architecture is historic, it does also contain buildings and spaces with a modern, character areas notably, Baskerville Court, built after 1985 and Ashbrook garage and the former police station, built between 1953 and 1964, located to the south of the church.

4.35 The conservation area derives its special historic interest primarily from its history as a medieval village, with the church at its centre. Additional historic interest is derived from the village’s connections with Francis Kilvert, and its numerous descriptions within his diaries.

4.36 The construction of the A438 in the 1960s, to the immediate south-east of the conservation area, divided the historic core of the village from land further to the east, creating a defined edge to the conservation area. Indeed, the land to the east of the A438 is predominantly populated by modern housing, whilst the land to the west of the road, within the conservation area, maintains a high degree of historic character.

4.37 There are two Grade II* listed buildings within the conservation area. These comprise Saint Michael’s Church (15196) and Ashbrook House (8740). The setting and significance of Saint Michael’s Church has been discussed above.

4.38 Ashbrook House was built in c.1852, as a residence for the agent of Clyro Court Estate. There is a small room at the front of the building that was used for wage payments and rent audits. The diarist, Reverend Francis Kilvert also lived at the property from 1865-1972, which is commemorated by a plaque on the front wall. The building was constructed in an L-shaped plan with stone, roughcast render and a slate roof. The house exhibits numerous twelve pane sash windows and one exceptionally large multi-pane staircase window in a Regency Gothic style on its north eastern side.

22 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

4.39 The significance of Ashbrook house is derived from its historic value, due to its links with Rev Francis Kilvert, and also its aesthetic value, with respect to features such as the multi-pane window mentioned above. The only element of the house’s setting that contributes to its significance are the surrounding buildings and spaces within the historic core of the village of Clyro, which provide an historic context to the house. There is no intervisibility between Ashbrook House and the site, and the site is not located within any part of the building’s setting which contributes to its significance.

4.40 The remainder of the buildings within the conservation area are Grade II listed and are mainly located on the circular road surrounding the churchyard. These include numbers 4,5,6 (8743), 16 (15308), 17 (15309), 20 (15310), 21 (15311), 25 (15312) and 26 (15313) The Village. It also includes Sacred Cottage (8742), Rose Cottage (8746) and adjoining Post Office (8745), the Stock House (15307), The Old Vicarage (8751), the Baskerville Arms public house (8747) and a milestone outside Ashbrook House (8744).

4.41 The conservation area is very much centrally focussed, with the facing aspects of its historic buildings being towards the circular road which encircles the churchyard. Within this space the special interest of the conservation area is most readily experienced. Views into this space from the landscape beyond are possible from various locations, although mostly it is the rear of properties being that is experienced, giving a limited appreciation of the conservation area, and its building’s, character and appearance.

The setting of the conservation area and its contribution to its Special Interest

4.42 The village is set within the valley of the Clyro brook, a tributary of the Wye, which is located to the south. The village is surrounded by a mixture of agricultural land, woodland and modern development, and is overlooked by hills to the west. As the three parts of the site are all located to the east of the conservation area, its setting on this side is considered in detail below.

4.43 The land to the east of the A438’s contains modern houses which occupy most of the spaces between the edge of the conservation area and Clyro Castle. As noted, these estates are detached from the historic core of the village by the A438, and as such the houses do not impose upon the edge of the conservation area. Views across the conservation area are possible from various places within the modern estate (i.e. Images EDP 3 and 4). This experience is of the rear garden boundaries of historic properties, with the most prominent historic feature being the more distant church tower. The modern garage on the south-east edge of the conservation area is also a prominent feature. As such, the experience from the south-east includes very little of the character that is apparent within the conservation area, being more a general view across a built up area. The historic form of village is still apparent with the church at its centre, however as noted previously this experience is typical to many places in the locality from which views towards Clyro are apparent.

4.44 The modern estates have little historic character but are detached from the conservation area, and views across to the conservation area from them do not yield any particular experience of the conservation area’s special interest aside from providing an occasional

23 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

view of the church tower. As such, it is considered that the modern estates, whilst representing part of the setting of the conservation area, do not detract from, or add to the special interest of the conservation area, therefore they can be said to be neutral in terms of their effects.

4.45 Historic properties are present along the former approach roads to the village. For example, to the immediate west of Parcel C, on the B4351 there are a group of post- medieval buildings comprising the former 1 & 2 The Village (now Pottery Cottage) and the 19th century former Kilvert’s School (Clyro School; 78281), as well as Cae Mawr Lodge (78282). These buildings are not in the conservation area but represent post-medieval roadside development on the former fringes of the village, and lend a degree of historic character to the roadside in this location (Image EDP 5), reflecting that of the conservation area, further to the north-west. As such, this roadside area, and the buildings along it represent a part of the conservation area’s setting, which contributes positively to its character and appearance, reflecting a continuation of its special architectural interest.

The site parcels and their contribution to the special interest of the conservation area

4.46 Parcel B is well-detached from the conservation area, it being separated from it by modern housing and open spaces on Castle Estate Road, and by the A483. The small field has no specific historic association with the village, being formed when the land to the north-west was redeveloped in the 1960s/1970s, and the experience of the conservation area from it is very limited, restricted to a distant view of the church tower, as achieved from many locations in the vicinity. As such, this parcel of land is not considered to make any contribution to the conservation area’s special interest.

4.47 Parcel A is the closest part of the site to the conservation area, begin located c. 25m to the south-east. Historically the piece of land would have been part of a wider orchard located on the fringe of the village, probably possessing a functional association with one of the village’s nearby farms. Nowadays, this connection is lost, with the land representing a public open space within a modern housing development. The modern character and function of this land has little relevance to the special interest of the conservation area.

4.48 It is possible to view the conservation area from Parcel A, although the view is partially screened by a substantial hedge which bounds the site on its north-west side (Image EDP 4), and by trees and garden hedges to the rear of properties on Clyro Pitch. The upper stories of some of the buildings are visible, however their front elevations are not, and it is hard to fully appreciate their historic character from this location. One of the more prominent structures is the modern garage on Clyro Pitch, reflecting the fact that the view is not only of historic buildings.

4.49 The most prominent historic building is the church, which is visible by virtue of its tower. This view allows for an appreciation of the village, as an historic settlement with the church at its centre, however as noted previously this experience of the village is archived from many locations in the local area, and is not exclusive to Parcel B of the site. As such,

24 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

the experience of the conservation area’s special interest from Parcel A is considered to be fairly limited, with no special quality to the view to the conservation area. Given the nature of the experience from this location, and lack of historic character at the site, Parcel A is not considered to make any contribution to the special interest of the conservation area.

4.50 Parcel C, is, like Parcel A of a modern character and does not in itself relate to the character of the conservation area. However, the parcel is situated on the B4351, which, as described above, does contain several historic buildings, and is considered to represent an aspect of the setting of the conservation area which contributes positively to its character and appearance. As such, although this part of the site currently make no specific contribution, any development within this parcel should be sympathetic to the historic character, of the adjacent buildings, or else risk changing the character of the street such that its positive contribution is reduced.

Listed Buildings

4.51 Outside of the conservation area, there are four listed buildings within the 1km study area. Two of these listed buildings are Grade II* listed and reflect the localities’ medieval built heritage.

4.52 Although now associated with Clyro Court, the barn range (15316) and associated gateway (15317) c.280m south west of the site are believed to be a surviving portion of a medieval monastic grange belonging to the Cistercian Abbey of Cwmhir. The structures are thought to date to the 15th and 16th centuries and would likely have been contemporary with Clyro Castle. The castle, and elements of the medieval grange, represent surviving features of the medieval landscape, and as such have an historical association with each other. Aside from their associations with contemporary features in the wider landscape, these assets are most heavily influenced by their position in relation to neighbouring post-medieval and modern structures. All parts of the site are well- detached from these assets, and entirely screened from then. As such, none of the parts site are considered to be within the setting of these assets.

4.53 The other two listed buildings within the study area comprise the grade II listed Cae Mawr house (8750), c.220m west of the site, and the former stables and coach house for Clyro Court (15315), c.710m south west of the site. Due to their distance from the site and the intervening vegetation and infrastructure, it is not considered that the development will have any effects on these listed buildings. For this reason, they are not been discussed further in this report.

The Archaeological Potential of the site

4.54 There is only one entry from the CPAT HER within one of the three parts of the site (Plan EDP 1). Parcel A, contains an entry related to the previous use of the land within this

25 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

part of the site as an orchard (78290), which is confirmed on the First Edition Ordnance Survey map.

4.55 There are a further 94 HER entries recorded within a 1km radius of the three parts of the site (Plan EDP 1), which describe evidence of activity from the prehistoric to modern periods, and include records of features identified as cropmarks, records derived from historic maps, as well as the results of archaeological fieldwork. The latter includes the discovery of c.17th century barns during excavations at Clyro Court (110533), c.250m south west of Parcel C, in 2006 and a c.19th century stone culvert also uncovered during excavations at Clyro Court (39883), c.120m to the south west, in 2004. Neither of these investigations has any implications for understanding the archaeological potential of any part of the site.

4.56 The three parts of the site are located on the Mid Wye Valley edge, overlooking the floodplain of the River Wye, which lies to the south. Prehistoric archaeology in the Mid Wye Valley area comprises a number of funerary monuments including Neolithic Severn- Cotswold tombs, and a Bronze Age stone circle on the edge of the Black Mountains. Prehistoric activity within the vicinity of the three parts of the site is reflected in HER records related to stray finds such as flint scatters, arrowheads, a hand axe (57571), and the Neolithic chambered tomb (that is a Scheduled Monument) mentioned previously, c.450m south west of Parcel C. Despite this evidence for activity within the wider study area, there has been no previously recorded prehistoric archaeology found within any of the parts of the site, and the nearest asset mentioned within the HER is a hand axe (77806) discovered c.91m away. A mound (2171), c.85m north-east of Parcel B was once thought to be a long barrow, but was confirmed as a natural feature, and has since been levelled.

4.57 There is no evidence for Roman activity within the 1km radius study area. Gaer Roman fort, which is a scheduled monument (RD124), is located c.1,050m east of the site and a proposed Roman road (11601, 11602, 14601) runs to the west of this fort, c.860m east of the site.

4.58 The evidence from the study area suggests that there was some prehistoric and Roman period activity in the locality. However, there is no specific evidence for archaeological remains of these periods from within any of the three parcels of the site, including from the geophysical survey (of Parcels A and B) which did not identify any evidence for archaeological remains. It is like that Parcel A would have been subject to some below- ground disturbance, when in use as an orchard, and later during modern construction of the neighbouring houses, which may have impacted buried archaeological remains. Likewise, for Parcel C, which was also part of an extensive orchard, and which has since been developed for garages and allotments. As such, the potential for prehistoric and Roman archaeology to be present within the site is considered to be low.

4.59 The name Clyro means ‘shining’ or ‘clear water’ and the ancient name ‘clidderwy’ is said to mean ‘the Wye flowing on a bed of clay’. Notwithstanding the designated medieval buildings, and castle, described earlier, the grange at Clyro Court is also medieval, being believed to date from the 14th century, but with most of its buildings having previously

26 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

been demolished (128607). Further medieval activity in the area includes two examples of ridge and furrow which were identified c.140m east (44101) of Parcel B and c.530m north west (44100) of Parcel A, and an inscribed cross-slab (81755), which was discovered in the grounds of the old vicarage c.95m north of Parcel A.

4.60 Considering the medieval designated, and non-designated assets, within the vicinity of Clyro, it is possible that the site’s parcels, located c.100m from the historic core of the village, and directly to the east of Clyro Castle, might have some potential for medieval archaeology. However, as noted above, the geophysical survey of Parcels A and B, undertaken in August 2018, did not identify any archaeological features that might be of a potential medieval date and, as described above, post-medieval and modern disturbance may well have damaged any underlying archaeology. As such, it is considered that the three parts of the sites all have a low-moderate potential to contain buried remains dating from the medieval period.

4.61 In considering the post-medieval period, it is apparent that the majority of the HER and NMRW records within the study area reflect post medieval features, with most entries attributed to buildings.

4.62 14 post-medieval buildings, other than those listed examples already described above, are noted within the HER data; this includes three buildings within 100m of the three site parcels. These buildings comprise the former Clyro school (78281), c.25m to the west of Parcel C, Ashfield Farmhouse (20636), c.55m north of Parcel A, and Cae Mawr Lodge (78282), c.60m west of Parcel C. The only NMRW entry within 100m of the site is the Wye Pottery/vicarage stables (404477) located c.86m north west of Parcel A. None of the post-medieval assets listed above are considered to indicate a specific archaeological potential in any of the three parts of the site, although the buildings lend a sense of historic character to the streetscape on which Parcel C is situated, which was described previously in relation to the setting of the Clyro Conservation Area.

Historic Mapping

4.63 The earliest mapping of Clyro examined for the purpose of this report, was the 1839 Tithe Map of the Parish of Clirow and Bettws Clirow (Plan EDP 2). Here the site can be seen to comprise parts of four separate fields. Parcel B is located over two fields described as ‘arable’ and ‘orchard and pasture’, Parcel A is across parts of two fields described as being ‘pasture and ‘orchard’ and Parcel C is located on land named ‘Castle Meadow’ and noted as ‘pasture and orchard’. The fields partly occupied by Parcel A, adjoin directly onto the rear plots of buildings within the historic village, suggesting that they were closely associated with them. The village, itself is depicted as much smaller than at present; with only a small number of buildings surrounding Saint Michael’s Church.

4.64 The site is next depicted on the First Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1889 (Plan EDP 3). On this map, Parcels A and C are located within former orchards, with part of Parcel B located on open agricultural land. The town clearly developed during the mid-late century, with new development including the Clyro school, depicted to the west of Parcel C, and

27 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

more residential housing to the north of the church, and to the west of the Baskerville Arms.

4.65 Historic Ordnance Survey mapping between 1889 and 1964 (not shown) illustrates little change at the site. However, the Ordnance Survey map of 1974 (Plan EDP 4) shows considerable change from previous editions, reflecting the onset of the localities’ modern redevelopment. This map depicts the A438 as having been constructed, separating the village’s historic core from the land to the south-east, which evidently earmarked for modern redevelopment. Modern development is shown on and around the newly constructed Castle Estate Road to the north west of Clyro Castle, suggesting that much of this housing was constructed in the 1960s/1970s.

Aerial Photographs

4.66 A total of 15 vertical aerial photographs, covering the site and its immediate environs, were identified within the collection maintained by the Aerial Photography Unit for The Welsh Government. None of the photographs are reproduced here due to copyright restrictions. The available images confirm the land use and development sequence shown on those historic maps available online, and do not indicate the presence of any additional archaeological features or otherwise unrecorded historic assets, such as cropmarks, which might indicate the presence of buried remains.

Geophysical Survey

4.67 In August 2018 a geophysical survey was undertaken on the land within the site by SUMO geophysics. The aim of this survey was to identify any existing archaeology within the site, particularly any remains that may be associated with the historic core of Clyro or the scheduled monument Clyro Castle. Parcel A and Parcel B were surveyed, with Parcel C not surveyed as it is occupied by garages and allotments.

4.68 The results of the survey (see Appendix EDP 1) did not identify any archaeological anomalies within either of the two surveyed site parcels. A large amount of modern metallic disturbance was recorded within both of the parcels but particularly in Parcel B, causing a degree of uncertainty as to whether any archaeology exists underneath this disturbance.

28 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Section 5 Conclusions

5.1 It is concluded that the site does not contain any designated ‘historic assets’, such as scheduled monuments, listed buildings, or historic parks and gardens, where there would be a presumption in favour of physical retention or preservation in situ.

5.2 The assessment has considered effects on the significance of the Clyro Castle Scheduled Monument, the Grade II* listed Church of Saint Michael’s and All Angels and Clyro Conservation Area, through change within their setting in accordance with Cadw’s Setting of Historic Assets in Wales (published on 31 May 2017). It has also considered the site’s archaeological potential with reference to available historic environment data and the results of a geophysical survey.

5.3 The assessment has identified that the three parts of the site vary in terms of their contribution to the significance of Clyro Castle. Parcel C is not considered to make any specific contribution to the significance of the castle. Neither does Parcel A, although the land parcel sits within a view corridor between the castle and St Michael Church across the Clyro Conservation Area. This visual link between the localities’ key medieval monuments is considered to represent an element of the setting of these assets, which contributes to their respective significances.

5.4 As such, the current openness of Parcel A serves to facilitate this view, however, the proposed development of the site for housing, of a similar scale and appearance to the two-storey development presently around the site, would not rise above the existing skyline, and would not obscure the view between these assets. Development of this nature would not be considered to have any effect on the setting of either the castle, the church or the conservation area, such that it might cause an adverse effect to the significance of these assets.

5.5 Parcel B is located on the lower slopes of the mound on which the castle earthworks lie, and due to this proximity, and possible association with the castle’s archaeology, is considered to represent a part of its setting which contributes to its significance to a small degree.

5.6 Notwithstanding Parcel A’s position in relation to the view-corridor described above, the assessment concludes that the none of the parcels form part of the setting of the Grade II* listed Church of Saint Michael’s and All Angels, that contribute to the asset’s significance.

5.7 Regarding the Clyro Conservation Area, neither Parcels A or B are considered to make any specific contribution to the conservation areas’, special interest. Neither does Parcel C, although this land is situated on a street that contains historic buildings which represent an aspect of the conservation area’s setting which contributes to its special interest. As such, it is advisable that development of this parcel should respect the street’s historic

29 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

character, in order to preserve this contribution, and not detract from it (in accordance with PPW Wales). It is assessed that the modern housing to the south-east of the A483, which is adjacent the site’s parts, is neutral in terms of its influence on the character and appearance of the special interest of the conservation area, and thus the development of Parcel A for housing of a similar character, would also represent a neutral aspect of the conservation area’s setting.

5.8 Regarding archaeology, a geophysical survey undertaken across Parcels A and B did not identify any archaeological remains, although it’s results may have been affected by magnetic disturbance caused by the surrounding modern development. It is also evident that all three parcels have been subject to post-medieval and modern disturbance, with historic map indicating use of all parts for agriculture including orchards, and that Parcel A and Parcel C were probably disturbed to some extent during mid-late 20th century construction works.

5.9 As such, with refence to HER and NMRW data, it is considered that there is only a low potential for prehistoric or Roman period remains within the three parcels that make up the site, and a moderate-low potential for medieval period remains, either related to Clyro castle or the village.

5.10 With regard to the future development of Parcel A, the assessment concurs with advice issued by CPAT, who identified a potential for unrecorded medieval remains and have requested that archaeological monitoring in the form of a watching brief take place, should development occur within this part of the site.

5.11 With regard to Parcel B, it was stated by CPAT that, in order to preserve the setting of the castle and any associated archaeology within this area, closest to the monument, proposals should be minimal with little or no ground reduction and sparse structures. It is our conclusion that whilst this area is within the setting of the castle, it only contributes to its significance to a small degree, and development, that respects and responds to the castle’s setting should be acceptable. Also, evidence, including from geophysics, does not indicate anything more than a low-moderate potential for medieval period archaeological remains in this part of the site. As such, mitigation of impact on archaeology by recording should be acceptable.

5.12 As such, it is assessed that low impact development, such as for a children’s playground, resulting in some change to the appearance of this field, and limited below ground impacts should be seen to accord with planning policy, in that the effect on the significance of the castle will be minimal, and that significant archaeological remains are unlikely to be affected.

30 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Section 6 References

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) 2014 Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-based Assessment (Reading)

Cadw, 2017 Setting of Historic Assets in Wales

Cadw, 2017 Heritage Impact Assessment in Wales

Cadw, 2011 Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance for the Sustainable management of the Historic Environment in Wales

HMSO, 1979, Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979

HMSO, 1990, Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

SUMO, 2018. Geophysical Survey Report. Clyro Estate, Powys. Worcestershire

Powys, 2018. Powys, Local Development Plan. 2011-2026, Written Statement.

Mike Salter, The Castles of Mid Wales, Folly Publications, 2001

Welsh Government 2018, Planning Policy Wales Edition Ten Cardiff

Welsh Government 2017, Technical Advice Note 24 (TAN 24) The Historic Environment

31 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

This page has been left blank intentionally

32 Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Images

Image EDP 1: View south from within Parcel A towards Clyro Castle, illustrating the inability to view the castle earthworks.

Image EDP 2: View from beside the church towards Clyro Castle illustrating the intervisibility between the two assets.

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Image EDP 3: View towards the church and conservation area with the garages in Parcel C in the foreground.

Image EDP 4: View from Parcel A towards the south-east edge of the Clyro Conservation Area.

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Image EDP 5: View along the B4351 showing some of the historic properties on this historic approach to the village, Parcel C is partially visible on the left-hand side.

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

This page has been left blank intentionally

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Appendix EDP 1 SUMO Geophysics Geophysical Survey Report September 2018

GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY REPORT

Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys

Client The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd

For Powys County Council

Survey Report

13375

Date September 2018

SUMO Geophysics Ltd SUMO Geophysics Ltd Cowburn Farm Vineyard House Market Street Upper Hook Road Thornton Upton upon Severn Bradford Worcestershire BD13 3HW WR8 0SA T: 01274 835016 T: 01684 592266

[email protected] www.sumoservices.com

Project Name: Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys Job ref: 13375 Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd Date: September 2018

GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY REPORT

Project name: SUMO Job reference: Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys 13375

Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd On behalf of: Powys County Council

Survey date: Report date: 25 August 2018 10 September 2018

Field co-ordinator: Field Team: Adam Clark BA Adam Clark BA

Report written by: CAD illustrations by: Rebecca Davies BSc Rebecca Davies BSc

Project Manager: Report approved by: Simon Haddrell BEng AMBCS PCIfA Dr John Gater BSc DSc(Hon) MCIfA FSA

______© SUMO Geophysics: for Archaeology and Engineering

Project Name: Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys Job ref: 13375 Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd Date: September 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 SUMMARY OF RESULTS 1

2 INTRODUCTION 1

3 METHODS, PROCESSING & PRESENTATION 2

4 RESULTS 3

5 DATA APPRAISAL & CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT 3

6 CONCLUSION 3

7 REFERENCES 4

Appendix A Technical Information: Magnetometer Survey Method

Appendix B Technical Information: Magnetic Theory

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 01 1:25 000 Site Location Diagram

Figure 02 1:1000 Location of Survey Areas

Figure 03 1:750 Magnetometer Survey - Greyscale Plots

Figure 04 1:750 Magnetometer Survey - Interpretation

Figure 05 1:750 Minimally Processed Data – Greyscale Plots

______© SUMO Geophysics: for Archaeology and Engineering

Project Name: Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys Job ref: 13375 Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd Date: September 2018

1 SUMMARY OF RESULTS

A detailed magnetometer survey was conducted over two parcels of land at Clyro, Powys. No archaeological responses were identified. The anomalies detected are all modern in origin and relate to nearby ferrous objects, including fences, goalposts and apparatus within a childrens’ play area.

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Background synopsis

SUMO Geophysics Ltd were commissioned to undertake a geophysical survey of an area outlined for development. This survey forms part of an archaeological investigation being undertaken by The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd on behalf of Powys County Council.

2.2 Site details

NGR / Postcode SO 214 436 / HR3 5SP Location The site comprises three areas which are located within the village of Clyro on the Powys-Herefordshire border, approximately 2km north-west of Hay-on-Wye. All three areas are situated off the Castle Estate cul-de- sac. HER/SMR Powys District Powys Parish Clyro Topography Area 1 - sloping down from the southern corner towards the north-west and east; Area 2 - relatively level; Area 3 - flat Current Land Use Area 1 - pasture; Area 2 - playing field; Area 3 - allotment gardens Geology Solid: Raglan Mudstone Formation - siltstone and mudstone, interbedded. Superficial: Hummocky Glacial Deposits, Devensian - diamicton (BGS 2018). Soils Newnham Association (541w) - well drained reddish coarse and fine loamy soils over gravel (SSEW 1983). Archaeology No details available. Survey Methods Magnetometer survey (fluxgate gradiometer) Study Area 0.4 ha - Area 3 could not be surveyed due to its current use as allotment gardens.

2.3 Aims and Objectives To locate and characterise any anomalies of possible archaeological interest within the study area.

______© SUMO Geophysics: for Archaeology and Engineering 1

Project Name: Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys Job ref: 13375 Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd Date: September 2018

3 METHODS, PROCESSING & PRESENTATION

3.1 Standards & Guidance This report and all fieldwork have been conducted in accordance with the latest guidance documents issued by Historic England (EH 2008) (then English Heritage), the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA 2014) and the European Archaeological Council (EAC 2016).

3.2 Survey methods Detailed magnetic survey was chosen as an efficient and effective method of locating archaeological anomalies.

Technique Instrument Traverse Interval Sample Interval Magnetometer Bartington Grad 601-2 1.0m 0.25m

More information regarding this technique is included in Appendices A and B.

3.3 Data Processing

The following basic processing steps have been carried out on the data used in this report: De-stripe; de-stagger; interpolate

3.4 Presentation of results and interpretation

The presentation of the results includes a ‘minimally processed data’ and a ‘processed data’ greyscale plot. Magnetic anomalies are identified, interpreted and plotted onto the ‘Interpretation’ drawings.

When interpreting the results, several factors are taken into consideration, including the nature of archaeological features being investigated and the local conditions at the site (geology, pedology, topography etc.). Anomalies are categorised by their potential origin. Where responses can be related to other existing evidence, the anomalies will be given specific categories, such as: Abbey Wall or Roman Road. Where the interpretation is based largely on the geophysical data, levels of confidence are implied, for example: Probable, or Possible Archaeology. The former is used for a confident interpretation, based on anomaly definition and/or other corroborative data such as cropmarks. Poor anomaly definition, a lack of clear patterns to the responses and an absence of other supporting data reduces confidence, hence the classification Possible.

______© SUMO Geophysics: for Archaeology and Engineering 2

Project Name: Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys Job ref: 13375 Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd Date: September 2018

4 RESULTS

The survey has been divided into three survey areas (Areas 1-3).

4.1 Probable / Possible Archaeology

4.1.1 No magnetic responses have been recorded that could be interpreted as being of archaeological interest.

4.2 Ferrous / Magnetic Disturbance

4.2.1 Scattered magnetic debris in Area 2 is likely to have modern origins, i.e. ferrous debris / rubbish within the topsoil, and reflects the area’s use as a play park / recreational area.

4.2.2 Ferrous responses close to boundaries are due to adjacent fences, gates, goalposts and other features associated with the children’s play area. Smaller scale ferrous anomalies ("iron spikes") are present throughout the data and are characteristic of small pieces of ferrous debris (or brick / tile) in the topsoil; they are commonly assigned a modern origin. Only the most prominent of these are highlighted on the interpretation diagram.

5 DATA APPRAISAL & CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT

5.1 Historic England guidelines (EH 2008) Table 4 states that the average magnetic response on mudstone and siltstone is variable, as are results over superficial diamicton deposits. Though data is largely dominated by strong ferrous disturbance from nearby metal objects which has the potential to mask weaker, more ephemeral anomalies.

6 CONCLUSION

6.1 The survey at Clyro has not revealed any anomalies of archaeological origin. Modern magnetic debris is visible in the data, along with large areas of disturbance from nearby ferrous objects such as fences, goalposts and apparatus in the children’s play area.

______© SUMO Geophysics: for Archaeology and Engineering 3

Project Name: Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys Job ref: 13375 Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd Date: September 2018

7 REFERENCES

BGS 2018 British Geological Survey, Geology of Britain viewer [Accessed 10/09/2018] website: (http://www.bgs.ac.uk/opengeoscience/home.html?Accordion1=1#maps)

CIfA 2014 Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Geophysical Survey. Amended 2016. CIfA Guidance note. Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, Reading http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/CIfAS%26GGeophysics_2.pdf

EAC 2016 EAC Guidelines for the Use of Geophysics in Archaeology, European Archaeological Council, Guidelines 2.

EH 2008 Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field Evaluation. English Heritage, Swindon https://content.historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/geophysical- survey-in-archaeological-field-evaluation/geophysics-guidelines.pdf/

SSEW 1983 Soils of England and Wales. Sheet 2, Wales. Soil Survey of England and Wales, Harpenden.

______© SUMO Geophysics: for Archaeology and Engineering 4

N

Site Locations

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey's 1:25 000 map of 1998 with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Crown Copyright reserved. Licence No: 100018665

Title: Site Location Diagram

Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd

Project: 13375 - Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys

Scale: Fig No: 0 metres 1000 01 1:25000 @ A3 N

Area 2

Area 1

Unsurveyable - allotment gardens / overgrown vegetation / children's play park apparatus

Survey Area - showing 30m grid

Title: Area 3 Location of Survey Areas Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd

Project: 13375 - Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys

Scale: Fig No: 0 metres 50 02 1:1000 @ A3 N

Area 2

+2nT

Area 1 -1nT

Title: Magnetometer Survey - Greyscale Plots

Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd

Project: 13375 - Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys

Scale: Fig No: 0 metres 37.5 03 1:750 @ A3 N

Area 2

KEY

Area 1 Magnetic disturbance

Ferrous

Title: Magnetometer Survey - Interpretation

Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd

Project: 13375 - Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys

Scale: Fig No: 0 metres 37.5 04 1:750 @ A3 N

Area 2

+5nT

Area 1 -5nT

Title: Minimally Processed Data - Greyscale Plots

Client: The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd

Project: 13375 - Castle Estate, Clyro, Powys

Scale: Fig No: 0 metres 37.5 05 1:750 @ A3

Appendix A - Technical Information: Magnetometer Survey Method

Grid Positioning For hand held gradiometers the location of the survey grids has been plotted together with the referencing information. Grids were set out using a Trimble R8 Real Time Kinematic (RTK) VRS Now GNSS GPS system.

An RTK GPS (Real-time Kinematic Global Positioning System) can locate a point on the ground to a far greater accuracy than a standard GPS unit. A standard GPS suffers from errors created by satellite orbit errors, clock errors and atmospheric interference, resulting in an accuracy of 5m-10m. An RTK system uses a single base station receiver and a number of mobile units. The base station re- broadcasts the phase of the carrier it measured, and the mobile units compare their own phase measurements with those they received from the base station. This results in an accuracy of around 0.01m.

Technique Instrument Traverse Interval Sample Interval Magnetometer Bartington Grad 601-2 1m 0.25m

Instrumentation: Bartington Grad 601-2 Bartington instruments operate in a gradiometer configuration which comprises fluxgate sensors mounted vertically, set 1.0m apart. The fluxgate gradiometer suppresses any diurnal or regional effects. The instruments are carried, or cart mounted, with the bottom sensor approximately 0.1-0.3m from the ground surface. At each survey station, the difference in the magnetic field between the two fluxgates is measured in nanoTesla (nT). The sensitivity of the instrument can be adjusted; for most archaeological surveys the most sensitive range (0.1nT) is used. Generally, features up to 1m deep may be detected by this method, though strongly magnetic objects may be visible at greater depths. The Bartington instrument can collect two lines of data per traverse with gradiometer units mounted laterally with a separation of 1.0m. The readings are logged consecutively into the data logger which in turn is daily down-loaded into a portable computer whilst on site. At the end of each site survey, data is transferred to the office for processing and presentation.

Data Processing Zero Mean This process sets the background mean of each traverse within each grid to zero. Traverse The operation removes striping effects and edge discontinuities over the whole of the data set. Step Correction When gradiometer data are collected in 'zig-zag' fashion, stepping errors can (De-stagger) sometimes arise. These occur because of a slight difference in the speed of walking on the forward and reverse traverses. The result is a staggered effect in the data, which is particularly noticeable on linear anomalies. This process corrects these errors.

Display Greyscale/ This format divides a given range of readings into a set number of classes. Each Colourscale Plot class is represented by a specific shade of grey, the intensity increasing with value. All values above the given range are allocated the same shade (maximum intensity); similarly, all values below the given range are represented by the minimum intensity shade. Similar plots can be produced in colour, either using a wide range of colours or by selecting two or three colours to represent positive and negative values. The assigned range (plotting levels) can be adjusted to emphasise different anomalies in the data-set.

______

© SUMO Survey: Geophysics for Archaeology and Engineering

Interpretation Categories

In certain circumstances (usually when there is corroborative evidence from desk-based or excavation data) very specific interpretations can be assigned to magnetic anomalies (for example, Roman Road, Wall, etc.) and where appropriate, such interpretations will be applied. The list below outlines the generic categories commonly used in the interpretation of the results.

Archaeology / This term is used when the form, nature and pattern of the responses are clearly Probable or very probably archaeological and /or if corroborative evidence is available. Archaeology These anomalies, whilst considered anthropogenic, could be of any age. Possible These anomalies exhibit either weak signal strength and / or poor definition, or Archaeology form incomplete archaeological patterns, thereby reducing the level of confidence in the interpretation. Although the archaeological interpretation is favoured, they may be the result of variable soil depth, plough damage or even aliasing as a result of data collection orientation. Industrial / Strong magnetic anomalies that, due to their shape and form or the context in Burnt-Fired which they are found, suggest the presence of kilns, ovens, corn dryers, metal- working areas or hearths. It should be noted that in many instances modern ferrous material can produce similar magnetic anomalies. Former Field Anomalies that correspond to former boundaries indicated on historic mapping, or Boundary (probable which are clearly a continuation of existing land divisions. Possible denotes less & possible) confidence where the anomaly may not be shown on historic mapping but nevertheless the anomaly displays all the characteristics of a field boundary. Ridge & Furrow Parallel linear anomalies whose broad spacing suggests ridge and furrow cultivation. In some cases, the response may be the result of more recent agricultural activity. Agriculture Parallel linear anomalies or trends with a narrower spacing, sometimes aligned (ploughing) with existing boundaries, indicating more recent cultivation regimes. Land Drain Weakly magnetic linear anomalies, quite often appearing in series forming parallel and herringbone patterns. Smaller drains may lead and empty into larger diameter pipes, which in turn usually lead to local streams and ponds. These are indicative of clay fired land drains. Natural These responses form clear patterns in geographical zones where natural variations are known to produce significant magnetic distortions. Magnetic Broad zones of strong dipolar anomalies, commonly found in places where modern Disturbance ferrous or fired materials (e.g. brick rubble) are present. They are presumed to be modern. Service Magnetically strong anomalies, usually forming linear features are indicative of ferrous pipes/cables. Sometimes other materials (e.g. pvc) or the fill of the trench can cause weaker magnetic responses which can be identified from their uniform linearity. Ferrous This type of response is associated with ferrous material and may result from small items in the topsoil, larger buried objects such as pipes, or above ground features such as fence lines or pylons. Ferrous responses are usually regarded as modern. Individual burnt stones, fired bricks or igneous rocks can produce responses similar to ferrous material. Uncertain Origin Anomalies which stand out from the background magnetic variation, yet whose form and lack of patterning gives little clue as to their origin. Often the characteristics and distribution of the responses straddle the categories of Possible Archaeology / Natural or (in the case of linear responses) Possible Archaeology / Agriculture; occasionally they are simply of an unusual form.

Where appropriate some anomalies will be further classified according to their form (positive or negative) and relative strength and coherence (trend: weak and poorly defined).

______

© SUMO Survey: Geophysics for Archaeology and Engineering

Appendix B - Technical Information: Magnetic Theory

Detailed magnetic survey can be used to effectively define areas of past human activity by mapping spatial variation and contrast in the magnetic properties of soil, subsoil and bedrock. Although the changes in the magnetic field resulting from differing features in the soil are usually weak, changes as small as 0.1 nanoTeslas (nT) in an overall field strength of 48,000 (nT), can be accurately detected.

Weakly magnetic iron minerals are always present within the soil and areas of enhancement relate to increases in magnetic susceptibility and permanently magnetised thermoremanent material.

Magnetic susceptibility relates to the induced magnetism of a material when in the presence of a magnetic field. This magnetism can be considered as effectively permanent as it exists within the Earth’s magnetic field. Magnetic susceptibility can become enhanced due to burning and complex biological or fermentation processes.

Thermoremanence is a permanent magnetism acquired by iron minerals that, after heating to a specific temperature known as the Curie Point, are effectively demagnetised followed by re-magnetisation by the Earth’s magnetic field on cooling. Thermoremanent archaeological features can include hearths and kilns; material such as brick and tile may be magnetised through the same process.

Silting and deliberate infilling of ditches and pits with magnetically enhanced soil creates a relative contrast against the much lower levels of magnetism within the subsoil into which the feature is cut. Systematic mapping of magnetic anomalies will produce linear and discrete areas of enhancement allowing assessment and characterisation of subsurface features. Material such as subsoil and non- magnetic bedrock used to create former earthworks and walls may be mapped as areas of lower enhancement compared to surrounding soils.

Magnetic survey is carried out using a fluxgate gradiometer which is a passive instrument consisting of two sensors mounted vertically 1m apart. The instrument is carried about 30cm above the ground surface and the top sensor measures the Earth’s magnetic field whilst the lower sensor measures the same field but is also more affected by any localised buried feature. The difference between the two sensors will relate to the strength of a magnetic field created by this feature, if no field is present the difference will be close to zero as the magnetic field measured by both sensors will be the same.

Factors affecting the magnetic survey may include soil type, local geology, previous human activity and disturbance from modern services.

______

© SUMO Survey: Geophysics for Archaeology and Engineering

• Archaeological • Measured Building • Geophysical • Topographic • Laser Scanning • Utility Mapping

SUMO Services Ltd, incorporated under the laws of England and Wales, Company Registration No.4275993. Registered Office Unit 8 Hayward Business Centre, New Lane, Havant, Hampshire, PO9 2NL

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

This page has been left blank intentionally

Castle Estate, Clyro Heritage Impact Assessment edp5112_r001a

Plans

Plan EDP 1 Heritage Assets (edp5112/d001b 19 July 2019 PD/HS)

Plan EDP 2 1839 Tithe Map (edp5112/d002b 19 July 2019 PD/HS)

Plan EDP 3 1889 First Edition Ordnance Survey Map (edp5112/d003b 19 July 2019 PD/HS)

Plan EDP 4 1974 Ordnance Survey Map (edp5112/d004b 19 July 2019 PD/HS)

Site Boundary

A

B

C

client Powys County Council

project title Castle Estate, Clyro

drawing title Plan EDP 2: 1839 Tithe Map

date 19 JULY 2019 drawn by PD drawing number edp5112_d002b checked HS scale Not to scale QA GY

Registered office: 01285 740427 - www.edp-uk.co.uk - [email protected] © The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd. © Crown copyright and database rights 2019 Ordnance Survey 0100031673 Site Boundary

A

B

C

client Powys County Council

project title Castle Estate, Clyro

drawing title Plan EDP 3: 1889 First Edition Ordnance Survey Map

date 19 JULY 2019 drawn by PD drawing number edp5112_d003b checked HS scale Not to scale QA GY

Registered office: 01285 740427 - www.edp-uk.co.uk - [email protected] © The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd. © Crown copyright and database rights 2019 Ordnance Survey 0100031673 Site Boundary

A

B

C

client Powys County Council

project title Castle Estate, Clyro

drawing title Plan EDP 4: 1974 Ordnance Survey Map

date 19 JULY 2019 drawn by PD drawing number edp5112_d004b checked HS scale Not to scale QA GY

Registered office: 01285 740427 - www.edp-uk.co.uk - [email protected] © The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd. © Crown copyright and database rights 2019 Ordnance Survey 0100031673 CARDIFF 02921 671900

CHELTENHAM 01242 903110

CIRENCESTER 01285 740427

SHREWSBURY 01939 211190 [email protected] www.edp-uk.co.uk

The Environmental Dimension Partnership Ltd. Registered as a Limited Company in England and Wales. Company No. 09102431. Registered Office: Tithe Barn, Barnsley Park Estate, Barnsley, Cirencester, Gloucestershire GL7 5EG