Desk Based Assessment for the Granary, Densole, Folkestone Date: 9Th November 2020
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
© Invicta Archaeological Services Ltd Desk Based Assessment for The Granary, Densole, Folkestone Date: 9th November 2020 Invicta Archaeological Services Ltd 258 Anzio Crescent, Burgoyne Heights Guston, Kent CT15 5LZ Tel: 07395941091 [email protected] www.invicta-archaeology.co.uk 1 © Invicta Archaeological Services Ltd CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 3 2. POLICY AND RESEARCH FRAMEWORKS ……………………………………………………………………….. 3 3. LOCATION, GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY ……………………………………………………………………. 8 4. METHODOLOGY …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….8 5. DESIGNATIONS …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9 6 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ……………………………………………………..11 7 MAP REGRESSION ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 15 8 INTERPRETATION AND ASSESSMENT OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE FROM THE AREA AROUND THE PDA …………………………………………………………………………………………18 9 IMPACT ASSESSMENT …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 19 10 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ……………………………………………………. 20 11 REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 21 List of figures Figure 1... Site Location Figure 2... Development Plan Figure 3... HER results Figure 4... Previous Archaeological Investigations Figure 5... 1st ed Ordnance Survey Figure 6... 2nd Ed Ordnance Survey Figure 7... Ordnance Survey 1907 Figure 8... Ordnance Survey 1920 Figure 9...Ordnance Survey 2020 Figure 10... Aerial Photograph 2020 List of Appendix Appendix 1 – HER Results Appendix 2 – Surrounding site photographs 2 © Invicta Archaeological Services Ltd THE GRANARY, DENSOLE, FOLKESTONE: ARCHAEOLOGICAL DESK BASED ASSESSMENT 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. This report presents a desk-based assessment of the archaeological potential of land at The Granary in Densole, Folkestone (site centred on NGR TR 21333 41828) (fig 1). This report was commissioned by Keith Mansell of Manse Designs in October 2020, as a pre-application desk- based assessment in view of plans for the construction of a proposed holiday let cottage with garaging below. 1.2. The objective of the current research, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2019) has been to review available existing evidence in order to assess the extent and nature of any archaeological remains within the Proposed Development Area (PDA), and within a 1km radius Assessment Area (AA) which may indicate the presence of any so far unrecognised Heritage Assets, and therefore show the likelihood of such archaeological remains being affected by the proposed new works. 2. POLICY AND RESEARCH FRAMEWORKS 2.1. The National Planning Policy Framework (2019) sets out a series of core planning principles designed to underpin plan making and decision taking within the planning system. The policies outlining the approach towards the Historic Environment are laid out in Chapter 16 ‘Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment’ The relevant policies are 184 – 202. Prime amongst these are: 2.2. Policy 184. Which states that ‘Heritage assets range from sites and buildings of local historic value to those of the highest significance, such as World Heritage Sites which are internationally recognised to be of Outstanding Universal Value. These assets are an irreplaceable resource and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of existing and future generations.’ And 2.3. Policy 185. ‘Plans should set out a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment, including heritage assets most at risk through neglect, decay or other threats. This strategy should take into account: a) the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets, and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; b) the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits that conservation of the historic environment can bring; 3 © Invicta Archaeological Services Ltd c) the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness; and d) opportunities to draw on the contribution made by the historic environment to the character of a place.’ 2.4. When determining planning applications, the following policies will be adhered to: 189. In determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary. Where a site on which development is proposed includes, or has the potential to include, heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation. 190. Local planning authorities should identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal (including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset) taking account of the available evidence and any necessary expertise. They should take this into account when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise any conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal. 193. When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance. 194. Any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage asset (from its alteration or destruction, or from development within its setting), should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of: a) grade II listed buildings, or grade II registered parks or gardens, should be exceptional; 4 © Invicta Archaeological Services Ltd b) assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, registered battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional 63. Note 63: Non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest, which are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled monuments, should be considered subject to the policies for designated heritage assets. LOCAL POLICY 2.5. Folkestone’s policy is currently being rewritten from the 2006 iteration, however in the initial statement, paragraph 8 states, ‘It was considered unnecessary to include a suite of policies protecting heritage assets (as in the 2006 Local Plan) as these would be covered by Government legislation, national guidance and Historic England guidance.’ And paragraph 11 states, ‘The policies in the Historic Environment chapter have had regard to national guidance. Paragraph 126 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2012) states that plans should have a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment, including heritage assets at most risk through neglect, decay or other threats. Policy HE1 sets out the council’s general policy for this...’ As such, the National guidance documents have precedence in this matter. RESEARCH FRAMEWORKS 2.6. The regional South-East Research Framework for the historic environment (SERF) is still in preparation, however, initial outputs are available online here (footnote) and have been considered in preparing this report, in combination with the above national and local policies. 5 © Invicta Archaeological Services Ltd Figure 1 Site location plan 1:1250 6 © Invicta Archaeological Services Ltd Figure 2 Site development plan 7 © Invicta Archaeological Services Ltd 3. LOCATION, GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY 3.1. The proposed development area (PDA) occupies an irregular shaped plot of land, as the building is angled to follow the line of the exterior wall of the property (Fig 2). The plot is contained within an area measuring approximately 30m North-east to South-west and 15m North-west to South- east. The land appears to be currently waste and lies to the rear of a current garage style structure. 3.2. The site lies on the eastern side of a shallow ridge above two shallow dry valleys. The geology in this area consists of Head deposits of the Quaternary Period overlying the Lewes Nodular Chalk Formation, laid down 86-94mya in the Cretaceous Period. The site stands at an elevation of around 151m Above Ordnance Datum. 3.3. Around 250m to the east lies Reinden Wood which is a mixed woodland with coniferous and Deciduous trees. This woodland is classified as an Ancient and Semi-natural woodland with areas to the east being Ancient replanted woodland, meaning parts of this woodland have existed since at least 1600 and most likely longer. 4. METHODOLOGY 4.1 The methodology employed during this assessment has been based upon professional guidance, primarily the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists’ Standard and guidance for historic environment desk-based assessment (CIfA 2014). 4.2 The Assessment Area has a 250m radius from a point