SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 5 September 2007 Part I Portfolio Holder: Cllr Brenda Gray Report From: Director of Customer Services Agenda 8 Report Author: Graham Darlington - Conservation Item No: Officer Report Title: Great Conservation Area Designation Statement

Summary

To consider a Conservation Area Designation Statement for the village of Great Urswick, which assesses whether the settlement possesses sufficient architectural or historic merit to be worthy of conservation area designation. Recommendations That, for the reasons outlined within the attached report, Cabinet is recommended not to designate the village of Great Urswick as a conservation area. Report See attached Appendix 1 Alternative Options Not applicable Key Decision This report relates to Key Decision Ref. No. KD07/032/H&D. It appears in the Forward Plan for the period 1st August to 30th November 2007.

Material Considerations Finance The report if, resolved as recommended, has no financial implications. If designation were to be approved contrary to recommendation, then additional costs would be incurred by Development Control towards the publication of newspaper advertisements in connection with applications for planning permission.

Risk Management The objective assessment of the area’s architectural and historic significance that might support potential designation has been undertaken in accordance with detailed guidance prepared by English Heritage. No right of appeal is available should the council confirm not to designate the area as a conservation area, in line with the officer’s recommendation, and it is very unlikely that the council could be seen as acting perversely in the improbable situation of a home owner challenging the decision through judicial review. Staffing Not applicable Links to Corporate Plan Not Applicable Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) Community Strategy Priority Issue – A vision for Quality Environment: 1. Conserve, enhance and promote the natural, heritage and built environment. Actions Action 1. Work with the other task groups within the Strategic Partnership to take opportunities to enhance biodiversity, built heritage and the public realm in all aspects of the Community Strategy.

Equalities & Diversity Not Applicable Community Safety Not Applicable

Background Documents Document: Conservation Area Review Contact: Graham Darlington Strategy. 10th December 2003; Conservation Area Review Annual Monitoring Report 2006- 07.

Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 2

Appendix 1: Conservation Area Designation Statement for Great Urswick

1.0 Introduction and Legislative Background 1.1 Guidance for the management of conservation areas is provided by central Government in ‘’Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning & the Historic Environment’’, 1994 (PPG15) and in ‘’Conservation Area Practice’’ published by English Heritage in 1995.

1.2 Section 69 of the Planning (Listed Building and conservation Areas) Act 1990 imposes a duty on local planning authorities to designate as conservation areas any 'areas of special architectural or historic interest the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance'. Local planning authorities also have a duty under section 69 to review their areas from time to time to consider whether further designation of conservation areas is called for.

“In some districts, areas suitable for designation may have been fully identified already; and in considering further designations authorities should bear in mind that it is important that conservation areas are seen to justify their status and that the concept is not devalued by the designation of areas lacking any special interest. Authorities should seek to establish consistent local standards for their designations and should periodically review existing conservation areas”.

1.3 There are no standard criteria for determining which areas shall or shall not be designated. However, PPG15 ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’ makes it clear that it is the quality and interest of areas rather than of individual buildings that should be the prime consideration in identifying conservation areas: There has been increasing recognition in recent years that our experience of a historic area depends on much more than just the quality of individual buildings, but also considers:

“the historic layout of property boundaries and thoroughfares; on a particular 'mix' of uses; on characteristic materials; on appropriate scaling and detailing of contemporary buildings; on the quality of advertisements, shop fronts, street furniture and hard and soft surfaces; on vistas along streets and between buildings; and on the extent to which traffic intrudes and limits pedestrian use of spaces between buildings. Conservation area designation should be seen as the means of recognising the importance of all these factors and of ensuring that conservation policy addresses the quality of townscape in its broadest sense as well as the protection of individual buildings”.

1.4 It was recognised in the Conservation Area Review Strategy that other areas in South Lakeland, in addition to the ten existing conservation areas, might possess sufficient merit to be considered for designation. It was agreed that, rather than wait until after 2008, when the review of existing areas should be concluded, the Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 3 strategy should also allow the investigation of new conservation areas, even if that meant slippage in the timescale for completing the existing areas. The agreement for the investigation of any new areas would be approved by council subject to the following criteria being met: That any request for consideration has significant local community support; That following an initial rapid survey, the quality of the architectural/historic environment displays a recognisable potential; and The number of such requests received each year remains relatively small.

1.5 Urswick Parish Council wrote to the council’s conservation officer in August 2005 to request that consideration be given to designating the villages of Great and Little Urswick as conservation areas. This request was reported to Cabinet as part of the Conservation Area Review Annual Monitoring report in April 2006 and approval was given to undertake a formal assessment the village of Great Urswick for potential designation during 2006-07. Little Urswick was deemed unlikely to meet the selection criteria for designation at that time. Site assessment was begun in February 2007 and completed in May 2007. The conclusions of that assessment can be found in the Designation Statement that follows below in section 3.0. The conservation officer attended a meeting of Urswick parish Council on 2nd August 2007 to report his findings. The parish council were understandably disappointed with the outcome but, from the detailed information that was presented to them, accepted that the appraisal had been carried out in a thorough fashion and were pleased that the council had given the matter such serious and objective consideration. On the 8th of August 2007 the conservation officer consulted with the two ward members on this report and also with the chair of the Community Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee over whether that committee would be likely to want to scrutinise this report. The two ward members have indicated that they have considered the report and that in the absence of any representation from either the Parish Council or other interested organisations/individuals from the Urswick area they support both the conclusion and recommendation contained within the report. No response has been received from the chair of the Community Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

2.0 The Implications of Conservation Area Designation In deciding whether to confirm the designation of a conservation area it is important that members of the Cabinet are aware of the implications that such designation brings. The principal effects of the designation of a conservation area are as follows: i) The Local Planning Authority is under a general duty to ensure the preservation and enhancement of conservation areas and has a particular duty to prepare proposals to that end;

ii) Extra publicity is given to planning applications affecting conservation areas and the Planning Authority must take into account the desirability of preserving and enhancing the character of an area when determining such applications;

iii) Conservation Area Consent is required for the demolition of most unlisted buildings in the area;

iv) Notice must be given to the Local Authority before works are carried out to any Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 4 tree in the area;

v) The display of advertisements can be somewhat more restricted than elsewhere;

vi) Limited financial assistance can be made available for the upkeep of buildings in the area;

vii) The Local Planning Authority may be able to take steps to ensure that a building in a Conservation Area is kept in good repair;

viii) The details as to the limit of those works that may be carried out without planning permission are slightly different in conservation areas. These ‘permitted development’ activities include the use of various types of wall cladding, the insertion of dormer windows; the installation of satellite dishes on walls and roofs facing a highway; the installation of radio masts or antennae; and the size of residential or industrial extensions.

2.1 In addition, as part of its proposals to conserve and enhance the area, it may be possible to provide further safeguards for the protection of an area by making directions under Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995. Article 4 Directions control certain permitted development rights, which, if left unchecked, might threaten the special qualities of an area. An Article 4 direction could provide control over works to: Roofs, porches, chimney stacks, windows, doors and architectural features.

2.2 This designation statement consists of an area appraisal, which includes an assessment of the area’s architectural and historic interest together with an evaluation of the character and appearance of the area. The appraisal is followed by a summary of the area’s significance and a recommendation whether or not to designate based upon the area’s perceived merit.

3.0 Appraisal of the Village’s Architectural and Historic Interest. 3.1 Great Urswick’s place name has various possible origins. Also formerly known as Much Urswick, the Urswick part might relate to ‘Urse’, a Norse settler with ‘wic’, meaning his village or farmstead. Another popular explanation is that ‘Ursae’ is for the ‘Bison’s lake’, while a more recent account proposes that the name might have monastic connections.

3.2 Local folklore desires that Urswick Tarn was the focus of a prehistoric lake settlement but this has never been definitively proved. In fact, known events and histories for Great Urswick are few but those evidenced from building histories, accredited archaeological finds and documentary sources include the following: The surrounding landscape has important Neolithic, Bronze and Iron Age remains, including stone circles, a possible hill-fort and various homesteads. None of these are directly related to the form of today’s village but they indicate much early activity and near by human settlement in the immediate area. Finds from the Roman period are recorded from the general area but no evidence for certain habitation has so far been discovered.

Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 5 3.3 The area is probably recorded as ‘Chilvestrevic’ in the 1086 , although this would not guarantee that any nucleated settlement existed at that time. Known events from the mediaeval period include the probable establishment of a parish church by 1127, although it should be recognised that, while there are strong indications that the church’s founding may have been in the C10th, or even earlier, surviving fabric in today’s church seems to date back only as far as the C13th. The Manor of Muchland may have been created in ca.1212 held by the de Fleming family from 1107and Urswick Hall, the possible manor house, but of uncertain date, is known to have survived in the village until its demolition in the early C19th. There is no record of the formal granting of a Market or Fair for the village suggesting that its size and status as a settlement has always been somewhat slight. As a rural village, agriculture has played a major part in shaping the character of the surrounding landscape, expressed in the survival of a very distinctive field system of probable mediaeval origin.

3.4 It is important to recognise that all buildings within a settlement will help to shape its character and appearance, and these factors will assist in determining whether an area is truly special in some way. The impact that such buildings make will be dependent on a number of factors including not only the appearance of their most public elevations but also, and often most critically, upon their surviving integrity as historic structures. Also important in establishing the particular character of an area is the way that buildings work as three-dimensional forms in defining public and private spaces, and in influencing the appearance of the general roofscape or wider skyline. Also significant is the spatial density or grain of an area and formal or informal nature of the way that streets or other open spaces are laid out and the particular views and vistas that are thus created.

3.5 Within Great Urswick village there are only two buildings included on the statutory List of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Interest, although the parish church is listed Grade I and is, therefore, of very special significance. A further two structures within the churchyard: a C19th sundial and the Gale Monument are also listed, together with Holme Bank Cottages, located outside the village to the south east.

3.6 In addition, all of the other unlisted buildings in the village have been assessed in order to determine whether they possess any special architectural or historic interest. The criteria used for such an assessment is based on the guidance provided by English Heritage in their document “Guidance of Conservation Area Appraisals”, 2006. For the purposes of this assessment a building will be determined as having a positive architectural appearance, which contributes to the special architectural or historic interest of the area, if it displays either attractive aspects of design or distinctive ornamentation; acts as a key visual landmark; shares qualities of age and materials with adjacent listed buildings; or exhibits construction characteristics that are typical of their period of build. Such buildings will generally not have been subject to unsympathetic alteration and they will retain the essential aspects of their main period of construction. An Architectural Quality map is attached as Map Appendix 1, which reveals how each building has been classified according to its architectural appearance. A traffic light system of green, amber and red has been used to place buildings within particular categories of architectural or historic quality: green for positive, amber for neutral and red for Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 6 harmful.

3.7 In Great Urswick only 26 buildings (13.5% out of the total of 192 buildings examined) have been considered as having a positive architectural appearance, according to the above criteria. These are generally pre C20th buildings that clearly retain the general architectural form and character from their period of origin, and which have not been harmed by later alterations or additions that are weak or unsympathetic in design terms. The best of these buildings are Bankfield, a modest country house of mid c19th date but of possibly earlier origins, set in its own landscaped grounds with some interesting estate buildings and fine perimeter woodland planting; Weint End, a mid C18th double pile house, refronted or windowed in the later C19th but retaining fine cylindrical gable end chimneystacks on broad bases (although the former barns attached to the left were insensitively converted; Croft House a double fronted house in painted roughcast with good coupled and canted bay windows to the ground floor and a sympathetic porch; Gordon Terrace, on the north edge of the settlement, a terraced row of two single fronted and one double fronted house with late C19th detailing; and Tythe Barn, now a double fronted one and a half storey cottage with neo vernacular elements, including modern leaded light transomed and mullioned windows and gabled attics.

3.8 A further 42%, or 80 buildings, are considered to be largely neutral in their visual impact, in that they possess only very slight or modest intrinsic importance. These are buildings that can be viewed as neither enhancing nor particularly harming the special character of the area. In their physical arrangement and combination with other buildings they will almost certainly add something to the characteristic appearance of the area, but as individual structures they can be said to be of only moderate architectural value.

3.9 In addition, and more troublingly, the assessment suggests that there are a further 77 buildings (39.5% of the total), which are considered to have an actively detrimental impact on the architectural quality of the settlement. This is largely because these individual or groups of buildings display an ill-conceived choice of construction materials or weak design characteristics that are generally unsympathetic or relate poorly to the local character of the village as a whole. Some of these buildings are of an inappropriate scale or they have been subject to long-term neglect or to particularly harmful alterations, which will have damaged any intrinsic importance that they might once have had. Many of these buildings have been subjected to changes to their doors and windows, undertaken without the need for planning permission as ‘permitted development’ under the General Permitted Development Order. While often done with the best intentions such changes are often made without any consideration of the effects of such changes on the historic and architectural character and appearance of such buildings. In the case of a further 9 buildings (5%) it was not possible to fully inspect them to assess their architectural value.

4.0 Appraisal of the village’s Character and Appearance.

4.1 The landscape setting of Great Urswick, settled around the edge of a moderately large glacial melt water tarn, is spectacular and a key attribute contributing to the settlement’s distinctive character. The tarn sits on a bed of impervious marl within Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 7 a basin situated towards the head of a shallow valley that runs broadly parallel with the coast. The valley is drained only by the small Beck, which empties to the south. The high point of the parish is Birkrigg Common on rolling fells a short way to the east at 136m ASL. Broad views and surprise glimpses of this distinctive waterside setting are possible from various positions along the village street, and from more elevated vantage points to the north, from Weint Lane, and from the east from the road that crosses Birkrigg Common and drops down into the village via Hagg End.

4.2 To the north and north east a very distinctive pattern of drystone walls and hedges form the remains of a system of narrow ‘tofts’ that survive from the mediaeval open fields. It is significant for the village’s historic morphology that many of these tofts retain house/farmyard garths at their southern ‘heads’ although none of these now contain building fabric from that earlier period. Urswick Hall, the probably mediaeval Manor House, was situated in the field now containing Urswick Hall Cottage.

4.3 C19th maps of the village suggest that the edge of the tarn was then hardly developed and that the majority of the earlier buildings were on the ‘outside’ of the street, well away from the water’s edge. Exceptions include a small group set by today’s Coot Inn, and a broader cluster opposite Hagg End. Almost all of the other development visible today along the ‘inner’ side of the village street is mid C20th and later, and much of this is of a form and character that detracts from the historic or traditional character of the village.

4.4 At the northern end of the tarn there is a considerable contrast between the northern and southern sides of the street. The earlier and more traditional pattern of urban development to the north of the street is characterised by a dense concentration of buildings and a far from common building line that displays considerable advancement towards, and regression away from the street edge. The southern arrangement is generally much more suburban in character with larger detached houses frequently set back within more spacious garden plots, where young trees and waterside reed beds are a distinguishing feature.

4.5 Nevertheless buildings on these two sides of the street occasionally combine to force a number of appreciable pinch points between tall building walls that frequently edge up to the highway. Some of the buildings on the north side are markedly orientated with their narrow gabled ends facing south onto the street and their longer elevations set along the length of the narrow plot, and this morphology creates great variety in the patterning of building forms and volumes, slight variations in eaves and verge heights, and a corresponding visual diversity to the roofscape. This cohesive arrangement of narrow plots and strips between buildings also brings uncertainty about which of these spaces are private and which have public access, and this difficult legibility is a significant part of the character of the built up core of the village. Other gaps between these buildings are more formal allowing access to buildings, many of which are now converted to housing, situated to the rear of the garths within former informal farmyard groups, or, in the form of Weint Lane and Hen Parrock Lane, they extend as narrow lanes between tall hedges into the fields on the hill slopes to the north of the village.

Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 8 4.6 Another distinguishing characteristic is the almost complete lack of pavements within the often very narrow street and the general lack of front gardens on the north side, although some shallow set backs and private gardens do exist to give spatial variety. Street vistas, tightly enclosed by buildings, are an attractive aspect of the street scene here and the formal gateway into Bankfield, to the west, forms an important terminated view. Also dominant in vistas along the street towards the east end are a small number of tall mature trees whose deep lush canopies extend out over most of the highway.

4.7 Both edges to the street become a little more open and fragmented beyond Croft Cottage. To the south, the ‘island’ containing Tarn House/Side Cottages breaks the pattern on the south side of the street by allowing direct public engagement with the edge of the tarn via an unmade up lane, which encircles these properties, to create a very distinctive and relatively open and informal space. The water’s edge has tall Typha latifolia and Schoenoplectus lacustris reed beds that create a very important natural fringe to the tarn, while acting to close off or filter easy views across the water to the south. To the north the broader fields have remained undeveloped since the early C19th allowing the rural agricultural fields to penetrate right up the highway wall.

4.8 The western side of the tarn was also traditionally built up only along the ‘outer’ edge of the street, away from the tarn. Here the building line is much more consistent with buildings arranged in a more linear fashion, sometimes in individually built terraced rows, with their long fronts facing the street and displaying a much more constant eaves height. Some of these buildings provide strong edge definition to the street while others are set back slightly behind very shallow front gardens. The sensitively converted Tethers End/Hill Crest Barn has a key landmark focus in street views from the north.

4.9 Some of the backland spaces behind these street rows were developed in the late C19th, when short cul-de-sac lanes were created and/or modified, although none of these internal spaces, set between almost randomly placed houses and outbuildings, are now considered to be of particularly special environmental quality.

To the north, the tall boundary wall to Bankfield and its mature perimeter trees provide a solid and attractive sense of enclosure to the street in what almost feels like the formal village centre. However, the other edges of this space, to east of the highway carriageway and also around the already broad road junction by the Derby Arms, are very weakly defined due to a lack of edge buildings and the transformation of the various front spaces to bland areas of tarmac for car parking, such that this space now feels rather fragmented, spatial incoherent and somewhat compromised by commercial considerations.

4.10 A portion of land on the east side of the tarn has the appearance of unenclosed common land onto which a few late C19th houses have encroached. Property boundaries at Smithy Cottage and Holmhurst Cottages are drawn tightly around these houses and the land in-between, and down to the tarn edge, is generally open and pastoral in character.

Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 9 4.11 The remainder of the landscape on the south east of the tarn is farmland that typically broad in scale and open in character and which is edged to the east by Holme Bank Plantation. There are no major built aspects to this landscape save for the compact farmstead group at Holme Bank. This cluster of buildings contains a single listed building, the early C18th Holme Bank Cottages, which has mullioned windows and good chimneystacks; some interesting but altered C18th and C19th farm buildings, and an imposing mid C19th house now with unfortunate modern fenestration. Large ugly farm sheds screen the group from the north and north east such that its visible presence in the landscape is somewhat diminished.

5.0 Summary of Significance 5.1 It is considered that Great Urswick possesses only a modest architectural and historic interest. As a result of the relatively recent date of many of its houses, together with the adverse changes that have affected a large proportion of its older and more traditional buildings, only 14% of its buildings (including its 5 listed buildings or structures) are assessed as having a positive architectural appearance or character.

5.2 A significant proportion of houses within the village (approximately 42%) do display evidence of pre-C19th origins but the exercising of permitted development rights by householders in regard to changes of doors and windows has undoubtedly had a significantly detrimental affect on the historic integrity and conservation value exhibited by these buildings. As the guidance criteria prepared by English Heritage advises, for a building to be considered as contributing positively to the special interest of an area it will be essential that “Such buildings will generally not have been subject to unsympathetic alteration and they will retain the essential aspects of their main period of construction”. Many of the buildings identified as being essentially ‘neutral’ in architectural terms are so categorised because of such adverse changes.

5.3 In addition, further 38% of buildings are considered to exhibit poor design traits in this local context, or they have suffered particularly adverse alterations that have devalued any former interest that they may have once possessed. This relatively low measure of architectural quality must suggest that the area does not possess sufficient architectural interest to merit it being special enough to warrant designation.

5.4 The village does have some historic components that are of interest, such as the shape of the church land and the field system pattern to the north of the village. The spatial layout of the wider settlement is also suggestive of possible mediaeval origins, with two formal axis’ laid out along the north and west edges of the tarn. In addition, it is characteristic that the majority of the pre-modern buildings appear to have been established within what were probably once (and still are, in some instances) farmstead garths located at the lower end of the medieval tofts, which appear to have been deliberately sited, for the most part, only on the outer side of the street, away from the informal water’s edge.

5.5 This distinctive spatial layout, and particularly the axial yards and passages that lead back from the formal street frontages to the north is, therefore, of some

Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 10 historic interest. Unfortunately, the visual character and appearance of many of these public and private spaces has been severely compromised by ill-conceived changes to building frontages and by the partial infilling of some of these areas with architecturally substandard development from the mid C20th onwards. This has considerably diminished any traditional appeal that these side and rear spaces formerly possessed, so that they cannot now be considered as special.

5.6 Other aspects of the village have also been adversely affected by mid C20th and later development that has detrimentally altered the early form and spatial morphology of the settlement. This occurs most noticeably around the edge of the tarn, where modern housing, often of non-traditional form and material appearance, has been planted, sometimes into quite large garden plots, to give an alien and somewhat suburban appearance to the tarn’s fringes, which is out of character with the older parts of the settlement.

5.7 In addition, the village’s only semblance of an informal open public space, in the area beyond the large garden at Bankfield and adjacent to the two public houses, has been considerably weakened and undermined by modern changes to the boundaries and curtilages of these establishments, which have resulted in an irregular, sprawling and ill-defined sense of space that diminishes the character and appearance of the area so that it cannot now be said to be special in any significant way.

6.0 Conclusion.

6.1 The statutory definition of a conservation area is ‘an area of special architectural or historic interest the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance'. Advice from English Heritage clearly states that whatever criteria are used by local authorities when assessing areas for their special interest “it is essential that the need for real quality, ‘specialness’, in the local or regional context is recognised”, and that “it is important that conservation areas are seen to justify their status and that the concept is not devalued by the designation of areas lacking any special interest”.

6.2 In determining whether an area is worthy of Conservation Area designation South Lakeland District Council will need to form a judgement as to whether the area possesses special importance in terms of its architectural or historic interest, and if the resulting character or appearance is worthy of protection.

6.3 In conclusion it is considered that Great Urswick possesses a limited architectural and historic interest and that, unfortunately, its character and appearance has been become eroded in recent times by many unsympathetic changes and alterations. Theoretically, designation might still be considered as an option on the grounds that certain aspects of the village’s remaining special interest might be protected while other areas would represent an opportunity for positive enhancement and improvement. However, the legislation clearly states that the determining factor must be that the area is demonstrably ‘special’. On balance, it is felt that, while Great Urswick possesses an interesting character in terms of some of its arrangement of buildings and spaces, the architectural and historic significance of the majority of these buildings and spaces has been seriously degraded by Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 11 unsympathetic changes in the modern era, which have undermined their inherent qualities. As a result it is considered that the architectural and historic interest of the settlement can no longer said to be special and that designation would not, therefore, be appropriate.

Date: 28/08/2007 Version No: Amended by: 12