Salford City Council Revised Draft Salford Local Plan Heritage Assessments of Site Allocations February 2019 1 Contents Page number Introduction 3 Land west of Hayes Road 12 Charlestown Riverside 18 Brackley Golf Course 33 Land west of Kenyon Way 34 Orchard Street 35 Land south of the Church of St Augustine 48 Land north of Lumber Lane 64 Land at A J Bell Stadium 71 Hazelhurst Farm 80 Land east of Boothstown 81 Western Cadishead and Irlam 91 Extension to Port Salford 107 Appendix A – Historic England Response to the Draft Salford 124 Local Plan Consultation December 2016 Appendix B – Salford City Council Initial Screening Assessment and 136 GMAAS Archaeological Screening Assessment Introduction These background papers have been produced to form part of the evidence base for the local plan. The assessments have been based on the site allocations and boundaries as proposed in the Draft Local Plan (November 2016) and used to inform the development of the Revised Draft Local Plan and specifically, the site requirements included within the site allocation policies. Background The Draft Local Plan was published for consultation for a 10 week period commencing 8 November 2016 to 16 January 2017. In response to the Draft Local Plan consultation, representations were received from Historic England as a statutory consultee in relation, in part, to the supporting evidence base to the local plan. Historic England did not consider that the city council had adequately demonstrated that the policies and proposals contained within the Draft Local Plan had been informed by a proper assessment of the significance of the heritage assets in the area. Furthermore, they were also concerned that a proper assessment had not been undertaken to identify land where development would be inappropriate because of its historic significance. They highlighted that where a plan fails to address these matters (amongst others) it may be found to be considered unsound. A full copy of the comments received from Historic England in response to the Draft Local Plan consultation can be viewed in Appendix A. In response to these comments from Historic England, the city council determined to undertake detailed heritage assessment work in support of the subsequent stages of the local plan process, in this case, for the Revised Draft Local Plan (RDLP). Heritage assessments of the housing and employment allocations proposed in Salford through the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework have also been undertaken. The assessment work was undertaken in partnership with Historic England and also the Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service. Policy Background The government’s approach to planning policy is set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). This outlines that local plans should set out a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment. It recognises that heritage assets which can range from sites and buildings of local historic value to those of highest significance and of international importance are an irreplaceable resource all of which should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for existing and future generations. Heritage Assets are defined in Annex 2 of the NPPF (July 2018) as “A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a design of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. It includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing).” 3 In addition the NPPF (para 190) sets out that local planning authorities should identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal, and including any significance derived from its setting. Understanding significance is therefore key to managing change to heritage assets. Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance (Historic England 2008) sets out four main values to this significance and includes aesthetic (designed or fortuitous), historical (illustrative or associative), communal (social or commemorative) and evidential (or archaeological). Aesthetic: value deriving from the ways in which people draw sensory and intellectual stimulation from a place. This can be designed or fortuitous. Historical: value deriving from the ways in which past people, events and aspects of life can be connected through a place to the present. This can be illustrative or associative. Communal: value deriving from the meanings of a place for the people who relate to it, or for whom it figures in their collective experience or memory. This can be social or commemorative. Evidential: value deriving from the potential of a place to yield evidence about past human activity. Significance of an asset derives not only from an asset’s physical presence but also from its setting. The setting of a heritage asset is therefore also important and should be taken into consideration when considering the impact of any proposal. Setting is not a heritage designation but its importance lies in what it contributes to the significance of the relevant heritage asset itself. The contribution of setting to the significance of an asset is often expressed by reference to views. The NPPF (Annex 2) provides the following definition of setting: “The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.” A heritage asset might be affected by direct physical impact, including demolition but may also be affected by changes to its setting. This could include changes to the historic character of an area, or alterations to views to and from a site which can give rise to an adverse effect on the asset’s setting. The NPPF sets out that possible impacts of a development are considered in terms of causing “substantial” or “less than substantial” harm. Where there is considered to be substantial harm or a total loss to an asset’s significance (para 195 of the NPPF) consent should be refused for a proposed development. Where a proposal is considered to amount to a less than substantial level of harm the NPPF requires that 4 this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal (para 196). There is nothing that sets out what constitutes substantial and less than substantial harm and therefore a judgement is required based on the impact of a proposal upon the significance of an asset, including its setting. Purpose and approach of the heritage assessment The purpose of the heritage impact assessment work was to support the local plan process by demonstrating how the historic environment had been considered in the site selection process and to assess the likely impact of proposed allocations on heritage assets, both designated and non-designated. In addition to identifying the potential impacts of development the assessments also seek to identify opportunities for mitigating any detrimental impacts and to consider opportunities for positive enhancement of an asset. The approach that was undertaken was discussed and agreed in advance with Historic England. As the historic environment also includes below ground heritage assets it was important to include the Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service to assess the impact of proposals upon below ground heritage assets. An initial screening exercise was undertaken of all of the proposed site allocations included within the Draft Local Plan (November 2016). This screening exercise identified those sites that required further heritage assessment work to be undertaken in order to determine the potential impacts. Following this, a detailed heritage assessment was then undertaken for these identified sites the results of which are set out in the reports below. These assessments have then been used to inform the Revised Draft Local Plan. Historic England were kept involved throughout the whole process and were updated with findings at each stage. Screening Exercise The city council together with the Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS), undertook a screening exercise of all of the proposed site allocations in the Draft Local Plan in relation to both the built heritage and also below ground remains. The following types of asset were considered: • Designated assets – including statutorily listed buildings, scheduled ancient monuments and conservation areas • Non-designated assets – including buildings of local historic interest and archaeological remains A total of 21 sites were considered in the screening exercise. Please see Appendix B for the fully detailed screening exercises for the built heritage and also the below ground heritage assets undertaken by GMAAS. The screening exercise drew upon the following resources in particular: 5 Built Heritage: • The city council’s interactive heritage map which identifies all of the city’s heritage assets • Planning permissions granted on affected sites or nearby sites Below ground archaeological potential: • A review of the Greater Manchester Historic Environment Record and local archives to identify and map non-designated and designated heritage assets; • An historic map regression exercise to identify previously unrecognised heritage assets with archaeological interest; • A review of the findings of previous