HERITAGE STATEMENT
MAIN STREET STYRRUP
PREPARED BY LANPRO SERVICES ON BEHALF OF ROSE & CO DEVELOPMENTS LTD
MAY 2018
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
Project Reference: RCO001/0984H/01
Document Prepared by: Paul Gajos MCIfA
Document Reviewed by: Ramona Usher BA (Hons), PgDip, MSc, PhD
Revision Reason for Update Document Updated
Contents
List of Figures ...... ii List of Plates ...... ii Non-Technical Summary ...... iii 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2 LEGISLATION, POLICY AND GUIDANCE ...... 1 3 METHODOLOGY ...... 5 4 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ...... 7 5 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ...... 8 6 ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE ...... 12 7 IMPACT ASSESSMENT...... 13 8 CONCLUSIONS ...... 14 9 REFERENCES ...... 16
Figures Plates Appendix 1: Gazetteer of heritage assets
RCO001/0984H/01 i
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
List of Figures
Figure 1. The study site and search area with the location of HER and NHLE records
Figure 2. Extract from the Styrrup enclosure map of 1807
Figure 3. Extract from the Styrrup tithe map of 1843
Figure 4. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 25 inch map of 1893
Figure 5. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 25 inch map of 1902
Figure 6. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 25 inch map of 1921
Figure 7. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 6 inch map of 1948
Figure 8. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 1:2500 scale map of 1962
List of Plates
Plate 1: Study site from north
Plate 2: Railings on boundary wall at front of study site
Plate 3: Study site from west
Plate 4: Looking north-east showing Poplars Farm (LHS) and study site (RHS)
Plate 5: Looking along Main Street from study site
Plate 6: Looking south-west towards study site along Main Street
Plate 7: Looking south-west towards study site along Main Street
Plate 8: View past Fairview Cottage to study site
RCO001/0984H/01 ii
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
Non-Technical Summary
Lanpro was commissioned by Rose & Co Developments to produce a heritage statement to inform the planning application for a residential development on 352m2 of land at Main Street, Styrrup.
The NPPF states that 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. This Heritage Statement includes a summary of relevant planning policy and guidance at national and local levels. Consideration has been paid to the impact of the proposal on designated and non-designated heritage assets in the vicinity of the study site and also presents an assessment of the archaeological potential of the site.
The assessment has established that the proposed development will have no impact upon any designated heritage asset. There are sixteen buildings identified as non-designated heritage assets within Styrrup, of which two have been identified by Bassetlaw District Council as sensitive to development proposals. This assessment has demonstrated that the study site makes no contribution to the significance of Fairview Cottage and a negligible contribution to the significance of Poplars Farm through forming part of their setting. Therefore, whilst there will be a change in the setting of these buildings, that change is not considered to constitute harm to their significance as defined by the NPPF. The proposed development also offers some modest heritage benefits in the restoration of the 19th century wall fronting the site.
The available archaeological records, combined with the topography of the study site, suggest that there is negligible potential for the site to contain archaeological remains of any date and that further assessment of the site’s archaeological potential is not necessary to inform decision-making on the proposed planning application. Furthermore, given the low potential of the study site, it is considered that the imposition of a planning condition requiring further archaeological works would not be justified.
RCO001/0984H/01 iii
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 This heritage statement of land at the proposed Main Street, Styrrup, Nottinghamshire has been prepared by Lanpro Services Limited on behalf of Rose & Co Developments Ltd.
1.2 This assessment has been undertaken to inform a planning application for a proposed residential development on the site.
1.3 This document provides an assessment of the contribution that the site makes to the significance of heritage assets, the potential for the survival of archaeological remains within the study site and assesses the potential impacts that the proposed development could have on these heritage assets.
1.4 The assessment has been undertaken to meet the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF; Chapter 12: ‘Conserving and enhancing the historic environment’, paragraph 128) and is in line with the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) guidelines Standard and guidance for historic environment desk-based assessment (CIfA 2014).
2 LEGISLATION, POLICY AND GUIDANCE
2.1 In considering any planning application for development, the local planning authority will be guided by current legislation, the policy framework set by government planning policy, by current Local Plan policy and by other material considerations.
Current Legislation 2.2 The applicable legislative framework is summarised as follows:
• Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act (AMAAA) 1979; • Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (P(LBCA)) Act 1990
2.3 The AMAAA largely relates to Scheduled Monuments (SMs) and designated archaeological areas, detailing in particular what can and cannot be undertaken on archaeological grounds.
2.4 The P(LBCA) Act provides for the protection of Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas, and is largely expressed in the planning process through policies in regional and local planning guidance, as outlined above.
2.5 Section 66 of the 1990 Act 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”.
2.6 Section 72 then adds 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”.
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
2.7 As far as Section 72 is concerned, it has previously been established by the Courts that 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’.
National Planning Policy Framework
2.8 Section 12 of the NPPF, entitled Conserving and enhancing the historic environment provides guidance for planning authorities, property owners, developers and others on the conservation and investigation of heritage assets.
2.9 Overall, the objectives of Section 12 of the NPPF can be summarised as seeking the:
• Delivery of sustainable development
• Understanding the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits brought by the conservation of the historic environment, and
• Conservation of England's heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance.
2.10 Section 12 of the NPPF recognises that intelligently managed change may sometimes be necessary if heritage assets are to be maintained for the long term. Paragraph 128 states that planning decisions should be based on the significance of the heritage asset, and that the level of detail supplied by an applicant should be proportionate to the importance of the asset and should be no more than sufficient to review the potential impact of the proposal upon the significance of that asset.
2.11 Heritage Assets are defined in Annex 2 of the NPPF as: ‘a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape positively identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. They include designated heritage assets (as defined in the NPPF) and assets identified by the local planning authority during the process of decision-making or through the plan-making process.’.
2.12 Annex 2 also defines ‘Archaeological Interest’ as a heritage asset which holds or potentially could hold, evidence of past human activity worthy of expert investigation at some point. Heritage Assets with archaeological interest are the primary source of evidence about the substance and evolution of places, and of the people and cultures that made them.
2.13 A Designated Heritage Asset comprises a World Heritage Site, Scheduled Monument, Listed Building, Protected Wreck Site, Registered Park and Garden, Registered Battlefield or Conservation Area.
2.14 Significance is defined as: ‘The value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. This interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting.’
2.15 In short, government policy provides a framework which:
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
• Protects nationally important designated Heritage Assets (which include World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Ancient Monuments, Listed Buildings, Protected Wreck Sites, Registered Parks and Gardens, Registered Battlefields or Conservation Areas)
• Protects the settings of such designations
• In appropriate circumstances seeks adequate information (from desk based assessment and field evaluation where necessary) to enable informed decisions
• Provides for the excavation and investigation of sites not significant enough to merit in situ preservation.
Planning Practice Guide 2.16 The NPPG is a web-based resource which is to be used in conjunction with the NPPF. It is aimed at planning professionals and prescribes best practice within the planning sector. The relevant section is entitled ‘Conserving and enhancing the historic environment’. The guidance given in this section is effectively a condensed version of the PPS5 Practice Guide and sets out the best practice to applying government policy in the NPPF.
Definition of Harm 2.17 Current guidance by Historic England is that ‘change’ does not equate to ‘harm’. The NPPF and its accompanying PPG effectively distinguish between two degrees of harm to heritage assets – substantial and less than substantial. Paragraph 133 of the NPPF states that:
‘Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss.’
2.18 Paragraph 134 of the NPPF states that:
‘Where a development proposal would lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposals.’ 2.19 Recent High Court rulings have emphasised the primacy of the 1990 Planning Act – and the fact that it is up to the decision makers in the planning system to ‘have special regard to the desirability of preserving the [listed] building or its setting’. As stated by HH Judge David Cooke in a judgment of 22 September 2015 regarding impact on the setting of a listed building:
‘It is still plainly the case that it is for the decision taker to assess the nature and degree of harm caused, and in the case of harm to setting rather than directly to a listed building itself, the degree to which the impact on the setting affects the reasons why it is listed.’ 2.20 The judgment was agreed by Lord Justice Lewison at the Court of Appeal, who stated that:
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
‘It is also clear as a matter both of law and planning policy that harm (if it exists) is to be measured against both the scale of the harm and the significance of the heritage asset. Although the statutory duty requires special regard to be paid to the desirability of not harming the setting of a listed building, that cannot mean that any harm, however minor, would necessarily require planning permission to be refused.
Local Planning Policy 2.21 The Bassetlaw District Council Core Strategy and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document sets out the strategic and spatial land-use planning framework for Bassetlaw and comprises the strategic objective, adopted in December 2011. The Core Strategy sets out strategic planning policies and development principles for Bassetlaw to guide development until 2026.
2.22 Local policy relating to the historic environment is detailed under Strategic Objective 9 (SO9) and the policy aimed to deliver SO9 is Policy DM8: The Historic environment. The relevant sections of each are reproduced here:
SO9:
To protect and enhance Bassetlaw’s heritage assets, identify those of local significance, advance characterisation and understanding of heritage asset significance, reduce the number of heritage assets at risk and ensure that development is managed in a way that sustains or enhances the significance of heritage assets and their setting.
POLICY DM8: THE HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT Support will be given to development proposals or regeneration schemes (particularly in central Worksop, Retford and Tuxford) that protect and enhance the historic environment and secure its long-term future, especially the District's Heritage at Risk. Such proposals must recognise the significance of heritage assets as a central part of the development. They will be expected to be in line with characterisation studies, village appraisals, conservation area appraisals (notably the site specific development briefs that may be found within them), archaeological reports and other relevant studies.
A. Definition of Heritage Assets Designated heritage assets in Bassetlaw include:
• Listed Buildings (including attached and curtilage structures);
• Conservation Areas;
• Scheduled Monuments;
• Registered Parks and Gardens. Non- Designated assets in Bassetlaw include:
• Buildings of Local Interest;
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
• Areas of archaeological interest;
• Unregistered Parks and Gardens;
• Buildings, monuments, places, areas or landscapes positively identified as having significance in terms of the historic environment.
B. Development Affecting Heritage Assets There will be a presumption against development, alteration, advertising or demolition that will be detrimental to the significance of a heritage asset.
Proposed development affecting heritage assets, including alterations and extensions that are of an inappropriate scale, design or material, or which lead to the loss of important spaces, including infilling, will not be supported. The setting of an asset is an important aspect of its special architectural or historic interest and proposals that fail to preserve or enhance the setting of a heritage asset will not be supported. Where appropriate, regard shall be given to any approved characterisation study or appraisal of the heritage asset. Development proposals within the setting of heritage assets will be expected to consider: Scale; Design; Materials; Siting; Views away from and towards the heritage asset.
C. Change of Use Affecting Heritage Assets The change of use of heritage assets, including Listed Buildings and buildings in Conservation Areas, will only be permitted where the proposed use is considered to be the optimum viable use that is compatible with the fabric, interior and setting of the building. Evidence supporting this will be submitted with proposals. New uses that adversely affect the fabric, character, appearance or setting of such buildings will not be permitted.
D. Shopfronts Proposals for replacement shopfronts or alterations to shopfronts affecting heritage assets will be expected to ensure that traditional shopfronts are retained wherever possible irrespective of the use of the property. New shopfronts will be expected to utilise traditional materials such as timber and be designed to respect the special interest of the building and its setting.
Professional Guidance 2.23 The Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-based Assessment (2014) provides guidelines and recommendations for best practice in undertaking archaeological desk-based research and assessment.
2.1 The Historic England publication Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision Taking in the Historic Environment (2015) outlines a seven-stage process for the assembly and analysis of relevant information relating to heritage assets potentially affected by a proposed development:
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
• Understand the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits brought by the conservation of the historic environment;
• Understand the significance of the affected assets;
• Understand the impact of the proposal on that significance;
• Avoid, minimise and mitigate impact in a way that meets the objectives of the NPPF;
• Look for opportunities to better reveal or enhance significance;
• Justify any harmful impacts in terms of the sustainable development objective of conserving significance and the need for change; and
• Offset negative impacts on aspects of significance by enhancing others through recording, disseminating and archiving archaeological and historical interest of the important elements of the heritage assets affected.
2.2 In order to understand the nature, extent and level of significance the note advocates considering the four types of heritage value an asset may hold, as identified in Conservation Principles (English Heritage 2008): aesthetic, communal, historic and evidential. Significance results from a combination of any, some or all of the values.
2.3 The most recent guidance produced by Historic England (Historic Environment Good Practice Advice Planning Note 3 (Second Edition): The Setting of Heritage Assets; (December 2017) recognises that whilst setting is not a heritage asset, 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’. This guidance also notes that the contribution of setting to the significance of a heritage asset is often expressed by reference to views, although the importance of setting lies in what it contributes to the significance of the heritage asset, and this can be influenced by a number of other factors.
2.4 In order to assess the contribution made by setting to the significance of a heritage asset, and the implications of new developments, the guidance recommends that a systematic and staged approach to assessment should be adopted, namely:
i) identify which heritage assets and their settings are affected;
ii) assess the degree to which these settings make a contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s) or allow significance to be appreciated;
iii) assess the effects of the proposed development, whether beneficial or harmful, on that significance or on the ability to appreciate it;
iv) explore the way to maximise enhancement and avoid or minimise harm;
v) make and document the decision and monitor outcomes.
2.5 This report therefore follows steps (i) and (ii) to identify the local heritage assets and their settings and then makes an assessment of the potential impact of the proposed development having regard to steps (iii) and (iv).
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
3 METHODOLOGY
Information Sources 3.1 A gazetteer of all records held on the Nottinghamshire Historic Environment Record (HER) and the Historic England National Heritage List for England (NHLE) for within the search area is provided in Appendix 1, and their locations marked on a plan in Figure 1.
3.2 The following sources of information have been consulted in order to meet the requirements of the assessment and are in line with the guidelines laid down by the CIfA (CIfA 2014).
Archaeological records 3.3 Information on heritage assets and archaeological investigations for within a 1km search area was obtained from the HER and the NHLE.
Historical documentary and cartographic sources 3.4 The holdings of the Nottinghamshire Archives and other on-line repositories were consulted for historical maps and plans, and relevant documentary sources.
Designated heritage assets 3.5 Information on designated heritage assets was obtained from the HER and the NHLE.
Published and unpublished documentary sources 3.6 A range of published and unpublished material has been consulted, including the regional archaeological research framework, East Midlands Heritage. An updated research agenda and strategy for the historic environment of the East Midlands (Knight et al. 2012) and sources on the wider archaeological and historical background.
Walkover Survey 3.7 A site walkover survey was undertaken on 23rd April 2018 to provide a further assessment of the character of the study site and to appraise the potential impact of the proposed development on any archaeological heritage assets (see Plates 1 to 8).
Assessment Criteria Significance
3.8 Paragraph 128 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should be based on the significance of the heritage asset, and that the level of detail supplied by an applicant should be proportionate to the importance of the asset and should be no more than sufficient to review the potential impact of the proposal upon the significance of that asset.
3.9 It is recognised that not all parts of a heritage asset will necessarily be of equal significance. In some cases, certain elements could accommodate change without affecting the significance of the asset. Change is only considered harmful if it erodes an asset’s significance. Understanding the significance of any heritage assets affected and any contribution made by their setting (paragraph 128, NPPF 2012) is therefore fundamental to understanding the scope for and acceptability of change.
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
3.10 Assessment of significance has been undertaken in accordance with the methodology outlined in Historic England’s Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment (2015).
Setting 3.11 The NPPF defines the setting of a heritage asset as: ‘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’
3.12 Historic England’s Historic Environment Good Practice Advice Planning Note 3 (Second Edition): The Setting of Heritage Assets (2017) was used to inform the methodology for this assessment which follows steps i) to iv) outlined in the guidance.
4 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
4.1 The study site consists of approximately 352m2 situated on the southern side of Main Street, to the south-west of the centre of Styrrup, Nottinghamshire (SK 60624 90428; Figure 1).
4.2 The study site comprises a small plot of land which is currently in an overgrown state. The site is bounded to the north by Main Street, the south and west by residential gardens and to the east by agricultural fields.
4.3 The study site is situated on a small spur of higher ground that drops away to the immediate north-east, north-west and south-west, and continues to rise to the south-east.
4.4 The recorded bedrock geology within the study site comprises sandstone and pebbly sedimentary rock of the Chester Formation (BGS 2018).
5 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Introduction 5.1 This section reviews existing archaeological evidence for the study site and the archaeological and historical background of the general area, based on a consideration of evidence in the HER, the NHLE and the Nottinghamshire Archives. It is not the purpose of this document to create a detailed archaeological or historical narrative of the area, but to provide an assessment of the study site’s historical development and archaeological potential in accordance with the NPPF.
Designated Heritage Assets 5.2 The study site contains no designated heritage assets.
5.3 There are two listed buildings with 1km of the study site Yews Farm House (Grade II) and Ivy Farmhouse (Grade II). Both of these buildings are located c.250m to the north-east of the study site on the southern side of Main Street, within the main built core of the village. There
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
is extensive existing development between the buildings and the study site, effectively screening all views, and there are no historic links between these buildings and the study site. The study site is not considered to contribute to the significance of these buildings through forming part of their setting. These buildings are not considered to be sensitive to development proposals and are, therefore, given no further consideration within this report.
5.4 Styrrup is not designated as a conservation area and there are no other designated heritage assets (i.e. Scheduled Monuments, Registered Parks and Gardens or Registered Battlefields) within the search area. The locations of all designated heritage assets within the search area are shown on Figure 1.
Non-designated heritage assets 5.5 There are no recorded non-designated heritage assets within the study site. Whilst the study site does fall within the historic core of the village as identified by the Nottinghamshire HER this is not considered to be a heritage asset in its own right but is rather intended as an indication of where archaeological remains relating to the evolution of the village may be encountered. The potential for any such evidence is discussed below.
5.6 The search area contains sixteen locally listed buildings, as defined by Bassetlaw District Council (Figure 1). The majority of these buildings are located to the north-east of the study site within the built core of the village and are not considered sensitive to development proposals. Poplars Farm (BDC ref: 2336) is situated directly opposite the study site and Fairview cottage (BCD ref: 2342) is situated to the immediate south-east.
5.7 The HER contains 23 ‘monument’ records within the search area. Details of all HER records are listed in a gazetteer in Appendix 1 and their positions marked on Figure 1.
5.8 The HER records relating to archaeological remains or finds within the search area breakdown as follows. Some records cover more than one period: -
Period Within Study Site Within Search Area
Prehistoric 0 2
Roman 0 2
Early medieval 0 0
Medieval 0 3
Post-medieval/19th century 0 13
Modern 0 0
Undated 0 3
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
Prehistoric Period (c. 9500 BC – c.AD 43) 5.9 There is no recorded evidence for prehistoric activity in the study site.
5.10 Evidence of prehistoric activity within the search area is limited to just two records. Part of a Bronze Age axe hammer is recorded as being found in Styrrup parish, however, the exact location is not known (MNT5525). The HER records substantial earthworks thought to be an Iron age fort (MNT25926) located c.600m to the north-east of the site.
5.11 The wider area surrounding Styrrup is noted for evidence of occupation since at least the late Iron Age, through the brickwork field patterns which are visible as cropmarks throughout much of North Nottinghamshire and South Yorkshire. As the majority of the brickwork field systems have been identified from aerial photography it may be the case that ground cover or localised geological conditions have not been suitable for the identification of cropmarks within the vicinity of Styrrup, however, a number of undated cropmark features have been identified (see section 5.27 below) and so it is reasonable to assume that should extensive prehistoric features be present that they would have been identified.
5.12 The paucity of prehistoric evidence from the surrounding area, but particularly the localised topography of the site would indicate a negligible potential for the site to contain significant prehistoric archaeological remains.
Roman Period (c.AD 43 – c. AD 410) 5.13 There is no recorded evidence for Roman period activity in the study site.
5.14 There are two records of Roman finds from within the search area on the HER (MNT5013 and MNT10833). However, with regards to MNT5013, a Roman coin hoard, whilst the location given by the HER is within the search area the description of where the hoard was found is within a field between Bawtry and Everton, which would place the actual location of the find at least 5km to the east of the study site and perhaps as much as 8km.
5.15 The remaining HER entry of Roman date, MNT10833, refers to a single sherd of Roman greyware pottery found during an archaeological evaluation c.950m to the north-east of the study site.
5.16 Given the topography of the study site, combined with the lack of evidence for Roman period activity in the surrounding area, it is considered that there is negligible potential for the survival of Roman period remains within the study site.
Medieval Period (c.AD 410 – c. AD 1540) 5.17 The name of Styrrup is of Old English origin and is believed to relate to the shape of the ridge upon which the village is sites (Ekwall, 1991), and the village is also mentioned in the Domesday survey of 1086 demonstrating the presence of an established settlement in at least the late Saxon period. The Domesday survey records the village as relatively large (21 households) yet quite impoverished with a very low taxable value. Despite this there is no evidence of early medieval activity recorded within the search area and the localised
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
topography means that there is a negligible potential for the survival of early medieval remains within the study site. 5.18 The HER holds three records relating to the later medieval period within the search area. Two of these records relate to documentary references to a medieval tournament field, used in the time of Richard I, located some 500m to 900m to the south-east of the study site (MNT5524 and MNT15793).
5.19 MNT10880 relates to an artefact scatter of medieval material, including pottery and metalwork, centred c.750m to the east of the study site. As stated by the HER, it is likely that this artefact scatter relates to casual loss or material spread as the result of manuring fields in the medieval period.
5.20 Whilst the study site lies within the historic core of the village, later cartographic evidence suggests that the focus of the village was located further along Main Street, to the north- east of the study site. Whilst the pattern of ribbon development along Main Street may have begun in the medieval period the spur of slightly higher ground upon which the study site is located would not have made it an attractive location for building when there is more level ground in it’s immediate vicinity. It is therefore, considered that there is a negligible potential for the study site to contain significant remains dating to the medieval period.
Post-Medieval and Modern (c.1540 – Present) 5.21 The HER contains 13 records of post medieval or modern monuments within the search area, however, the majority of these relate to buildings or sites of a well-defined extent and nature which add little to the understanding of the archaeological potential of the study site and are therefore not discussed in any detail.
5.22 The earliest surviving building within the village would appear to be the Grade II listed Yews Farmhouse, located c.250m to the north-east of the study site, which is believed to date to the 16th century. Fourteen of the fifteen locally listed buildings in the village are of 18th century date (including Poplars Farm opposite the study site) and are predominantly located to the north-east of the study site, indicating where the main focus of the historic village was located.
5.23 The earliest detailed cartographic evidence for the study site is the enclosure map of 1807 (Figure 2). The map shows the study site as comprising one entire enclosure and falling partly over a neighbouring enclosure to the west. The tithe map of 1843 (Figure 3) shows a slightly more detailed picture with the study site falling across plots 96 and 97. The accompanying apportionment lists plot 97 as garden and being in the same ownership (John Parker) as plot 33 (Poplars Farm). Plot 96 is also listed as garden but is in separate ownership (owned by Alfred Alderson and occupied by Betty Gunthorpe). Plot 96 was in the same ownership as plot 95, which included a building on the site of the locally listed Fairview Cottage, although at this time the building extended further to the east, towards the study site, than the current house.
5.24 The Ordnance Survey map of 1893 is the first to show the study site in it’s current arrangement (Figure 4). From this map it is clear to see that Poplars Farm has been extended to the west
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
with a new frontage added, and that the study site has been amalgamated into a single plot to bring it in line with the new frontage of the farmhouse. It may have been at this point that the wall forming the boundary of the study site with Main Street was constructed. It would also appear to be at this point that Fairview cottage was constructed, replacing the earlier building that had previously extended to within a few meters of the western edge of the study site.
5.25 The run of historic Ordnance Survey mapping from the 20th century (Figures 5 – 8) show no change to the study site.
5.26 The site has potential to contain surviving remains of the former plot boundary shown on the early 19th century mapping, however, any such remains are considered to be of no archaeological interest. The surviving wall and railing along the frontage of the study site are of late 19th century date but are of little, if any, archaeological interest.
Undated
5.27 The HER contains three records from within the search area that may pertain to archaeological features but have not been verified. These are predominantly identified from aerial photography and may be anything from prehistoric date to post medieval. None of these features are in close enough proximity to the study site to have a significant bearing on the perceived archaeological potential.
6 ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
Designated heritage assets 6.1 The study site contains no designated heritage assets.
Non-designated heritage assets 6.2 There are no recorded non-designated heritage assets within the study site.
6.3 There are two locally listed buildings in the immediate vicinity of the study site that have been identified by the local planning authority as sensitive to development proposals. These are:
• Poplars Farm, Main Street, Styrrup (BDC ref: 2336)
• Fairview Cottage, Main Street, Styrrup (BDC ref: 2342) 6.4 Poplars Farm comprises a farmhouse on Main Street with attached outbuildings to the north-west and a separate range of farm buildings to the north-east. The majority of the buildings dates from the 18th century although they have been substantially altered in the mid to late 19th century. The buildings are constructed of a mix of stone and brick, the majority of the 18th century elements built in stone and the 19th century elements in red brick. The principal façade of the farmhouse faces to the south-west and is of 19th century date. Bassetlaw District Council list Poplars Farms elements of significance as aesthetic appeal, integrity and rarity.
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
6.5 As far as the setting of the building is concerned it primarily draws its significance from its historic value with the location upon the main street of the village with access to agricultural lands to the rear providing a good illustration of how the village developed as a farming community. The study site, whilst having some historic links with Poplars Farm, does not add to this understanding of how the farm functioned, why it was located where it is or how the village developed. It would appear that because of a peculiar quirk of topography that the study site was used as a garden as it had no other practical use for farming or building, however, even its former use as a garden is not readily apparent or capable of being experienced. The former use of the study site also means that it cannot be considered to represent part of Poplars Farm rural, agricultural setting. As such the study site is considered to make a negligible contribution to the significance of Poplars Farmhouse.
6.6 Fairview cottage is recorded on the Bassetlaw list of non-designated heritage assets as early 19th century cottage (although historic mapping suggests a mid to late 19th century date), of red brick (Flemish stretcher bond) with pantile roof, brick stacks and timber joinery. Elements of interest are listed as historic and architectural with elements of significance listed as aesthetic appeal. The date and construction of the building, however, mean that it’s historic and architectural interest are very limited and the lack of any ornamentation or architectural design, other than the external wooden porch, also limits any aesthetic value.
6.7 The contribution that setting makes to the significance of the building is very limited. There is some illustrative historic value in it being a small cottage located towards the end of the village, however, its immediate setting has been compromised by the construction of a modern boundary wall and garage within its garden and the construction of modern housing on the opposite side of Main Street.
6.8 The study site does not have historic connection with Fairview Cottage, the construction of a modern garage between the cottage and the study site and the modern walling, clearly of a different age and nature to that fronting the study site, give clear separation between the two. The study site does not form part of the cottages agricultural and rural setting and is therefore not considered to make any contribution to the significance of this non- designated heritage asset.
7 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Proposed development 7.1 The development proposals comprise the construction of a new Dorma bungalow with garage and access. Proposals allow for the retention and refurbishment of the boundary wall fronting Main Street, although a small portion of the wall will need to be demolished to allow access.
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
Designated heritage assets 7.2 The proposed development will have no impact upon any designated heritage assets.
Non-designated heritage assets 7.3 The search area contains eighteen locally listed buildings, as defined by Bassetlaw District Council, of which two (Poplars Farm and Fairview Cottage) have been identified by BDC as sensitive to development within the study site. The significance of these buildings is primarily vested in their evidential, historic and aesthetic values which will not be impacted by the proposed development.
7.4 This assessment has established that, in its current state, the study site makes no contribution of the significance of Fairview Cottage and a negligible contribution to the significance of Poplars Farm through forming part of their setting.
7.5 Under the NPPF non-designated heritage assets are conferred less weight in heritage considerations of the acceptability of new development than designated assets. Non- designated heritage assets have a low level of significance and changes in their wider setting cannot be accorded much weight. The proposed development will not result in any direct or indirect impact on these non-designated heritage assets. The proposed bungalow will not dominate either building, nor will it remove any rural agricultural aspect from either building or reduce their inherent evidential, historic or aesthetic heritage values, and as such the proposed development poses no harm to their significance.
7.6 The existing boundary wall, whilst of limited heritage value in its own right, is currently in a poor state of repair and is obscured from view by ivy and other vegetation. The sensitive reconstruction of the wall is therefore considered to be a heritage benefit.
7.7 This assessment has established that there is negligible potential for the survival of significant archaeological remains of any date within the study site. Therefore, the proposed development is considered to have no impact upon the archaeological resource of the area.
8 CONCLUSIONS
8.1 The NPPF states that 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. This Heritage Statement includes a summary of relevant planning policy and guidance at national and local levels. Consideration has been paid to the impact of the proposal on designated and non-designated heritage assets in the vicinity of the study site and also presents an assessment of the archaeological potential of the site.
8.2 The assessment has established that the proposed development will have no impact upon any designated heritage asset. There are sixteen buildings identified as non-designated heritage assets within Styrrup, of which two have been identified by Bassetlaw District Council as sensitive to development proposals. This assessment has demonstrated that the study site
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
makes no contribution to the significance of Fairview Cottage and a negligible contribution to the significance of Poplars Farm through forming part of their setting. Therefore, whilst there will be a change in the setting of these buildings, that change is not considered to constitute harm to their significance as defined by the NPPF. The proposed development also offers some modest heritage benefits in the restoration of the 19th century wall fronting the site.
8.3 The available archaeological records, combined with the topography of the study site, suggest that there is negligible potential for the site to contain archaeological remains of any date and that further assessment of the site’s archaeological potential is not necessary to inform decision-making on the proposed planning application. Furthermore, given the low potential of the study site, it is considered that the imposition of a planning condition requiring further archaeological works would not be justified.
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
9 REFERENCES
BGS 2017, British Geological Survey website, www.bgs.ac.uk/data/mapViewers/home.html CIfA 2014, Standard and guidance for historic environment desk-based assessment DCLG 2012, National Planning Policy Framework DCMS 2010, Scheduled Monuments. Identifying, protecting, conserving and investigating nationally important archaeological sites under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. March 2010 English Heritage 2010, Understanding Place English Heritage 2011a, The Setting of Heritage Assets English Heritage,2011b, Seeing the History in the View English Heritage, 2012, ‘Reject and Initial Assessment Report. Former Crewe Railway Works’, ref. 463390 (26th October 2012)
Historic England, 2017, Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: Note 3 (second edition) – The Setting of Heritage Assets Historic England, 2016, Understanding Historic Buildings Williams, A. and Martin, G.H. (eds.), 2002, Domesday Book: A Complete Translation (London)
Historical Mapping
Styrrup Inclosure Map of 1807 Styrrup Tithe Map of 1843 Ordnance Survey 1893, County Series 25 inch (Nottinghamshire) Ordnance Survey Map 1902, County Series 25 inch (Nottinghamshire) Ordnance Survey Map 1921, County Series 25 inch (Nottinghamshire) Ordnance Survey 1948, County Series 6 inch (Nottinghamshire) Ordnance Survey 1962, National Grid Series 1:2500
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
Figures
RCO001/0984H/01
Study Site
Search Area
Listed Building
HER monument point
HER monument area
HER event point
HER non-designated heritage assets
0 100 200 300 400 500 m
Figure 1. The study site and search area with the loca on of HER and NHLE records
© Crown copyright 2018 OS Licence 100059060 Figure 2. Extract from the Styrrup enclosure map of 1807
StudySite 0 50m A a IN+++ -11111111111 N Lanpro>> Figure 3. Extract from the Styrrup tithe map of 1843
StudySite 0 25m A a IN+++ -11111111111 N Lanpro>> ,07 1 572.
67
Figure 4. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 25 inch map of 1893
StudySite O 25m A a IN+++ -11111111111 N Lanpro>> l. 51�
� 0,4 Figure 5. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 25 inch map of 1902
StudySite 0 25m A a IN+++ -11111111111 N Lanpro>> I .. r. ; .. ) ,_·' ...,
106
Figure 6. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 25 inch map of 1921
StudySite 0 25m A a IN+++ -11111111111 N Lanpro>> Figure 7. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 6 inch map of 1948
StudySite 0 25m A a IN+++ -11111111111 N Lanpro>> Figure 8. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 1:2500 scale map of 1962
StudySite 0 25m A a IN+++ -11111111111 N Lanpro>> Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
Plates
Plate 1: Study site from north
Plate 2: Railings on boundary wall at front of study site
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
Plate 3: Study site from west
Plate 4: Looking north-east showing Poplars Farm (LHS) and study site (RHS)
Plate 5: Looking along Main Street from study site
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Statement: Main Street Styrrup
Plate 6: Looking south-west towards study site along Main Street
Plate 7: Looking south-west towards study site along Main Street
Plate 8: View past Fairview Cottage to study site
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Desk-Based Assessment: Bilston Urban Village, Wolverhampton
Appendix 1: Gazetteer of heritage assets
The following table provides details of heritage assets recorded on the Nottinghamshire HER and on the Historic England National Heritage List for England within 1km of the study site. These have been listed in order of their HER and NHLE references, and their locations are marked on Figure 1.
Ref. Name Description NGR Designation Period
HER monument records:
Linear cropmarks, Styrrup with Post Medieval woodland boundary. These cropmarks represent an old field SK 608 910 Post-medieval Oldcotes boundary, depicted on early OS maps up to 1921 and removed by 1948. MNT5004
A hoard of 600 Roman coins was found in 1885 in a field between Everton and Bawtry. All are of copper except a few which appear to have been MNT5013 Roman coin hoard, Everton SK 6 9 (point) Roman washed with silver; the emperors represented were from Valerian to Diocletian (AD 253-305).
This is the possible site of Blyth tournaments, licenced AD 1194 and Documentary reference to situated SE by S of the village of Styrrup. Of the 5 places licenced for public MNT5524 tournament field, Styrrup SK 6093 8989 Medieval tournaments in the reign of Richard I, Blyth and Tickhill stand first on the with Oldcotes records.
Axe hammer, Styrrup with Part of a large axe hammer was found in 1962. It is made from fine grained MNT5525 Bronze Age Oldcotes olivine gabbro. SK 6 9 (point)
MNT10614 Linear Features Field Boundary. SK 6123 8964 Unknown
One piece of Roman greyware was found at the south-eastern end of the MNT10833 Roman pottery from Styrrup SK 6085 9126 Roman ridge.
A substantial bank and ditch, which encloses the wood on three sides and survives to a height of more than 1.5m with a relatively steep profile. The Earthworks at Crow Wood, MNT10834 earthworks are truncated by the cut of the modern drainage ditch circling the SK 6074 9100 Unknown Styrrup wood. A complex of shallower banks and ditches are located in the middle of the wood. The south-west area of the wood is relatively flat, excluding a trackway and possible modern drainage channel. During excavation, an area
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Desk-Based Assessment: Bilston Urban Village, Wolverhampton
of preserved wood and bark was uncovered. Many of the wood pieces were upright within the peat layer were revealed to be the roots of small trees.
Post-medieval - MNT10835 Linear Feature, Styrrup A recent field boundary found on OS maps from 1841. SK 6083 9094 Modern
On an Enclosure Award map dated 1806, a footpath is shown along the high ground, labelled "Tickhill Foot way". Cropmarks on the ridge of high ground on Cropmarks of linear features at an air photo show that three divisions run off at right angles from a longer MNT10836 SK 6040 9144 Unknown Styrrup boundary. A double line follows a sinuous route to the north of the modern trackway, perhaps indicating that the pathway has shifted slightly in the post med period.
The most common find type was fired clay, mostly representing fragments of ploughed out field drains. Overall, the Post- Medieval finds showed a random Artefacts from fieldwalking, Post-medieval - MNT10837 distribution over the area walked, with only one obvious concentration, SK 6047 9123 Styrrup modern corresponding to the position of a modern track created by spreading rubble and other material.
At a small area adjacent to the boundary of the wood, was a large pile of fire MNT10842 Kiln Site, Styrrup Hall Farm SK 6084 9099 Modern bricks, probably the remains of C19 kiln lining.
The significant finds comprise a medieval silver seal matrix, a copper alloy rumbler bell and two sherds of medieval pottery. There is no apparent MNT10880 Medieval artefacts from Styrrup SK 6130 9034 Medieval concentration, and they would seem to represent casual loss or the results of manuring.
Raker field is shown on a map based on Harrison's survey of 1636, and is possibly the site of Blyth tournaments, licenced AD 1194.It is situated SE by S MNT15793 Tournament Field, Raker Field of the village of Styrrup is Blyth Tournament Field. Of the 5 places licenced for SK 6107 9007 Medieval public tournaments in the reign of Richard I, Blyth and Tickhill stand first on the records.
Post-medieval - MNT19112 Grange Farmhouse 18th century listed building SNT228 SK 60768 90601 modern
17th or 18th century listed building SNT228 which has been considerably Post-medieval - MNT19117 Styrrup Hall SK 60784 90688 altered and enlarged in the early to mid-19th century. modern
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Desk-Based Assessment: Bilston Urban Village, Wolverhampton
16th century cottage which was refronted in the late 18th century. Listed MNT19126 Yews Farmhouse SK 60738 90529 Grade II Medieval - modern building description SNT228.
Early 19th century cottage with remnants of an earlier build. Listed building Unknown - MNT19128 Ivy House Farmhouse SK 60734 90513 Grade II description SNT228. Modern
18th century cottage which had side elevation with 2 small pointed arched Post-medieval - MNT19588 Cherry Cottage (Demolished) SK 60480 90364 windows, since demolished. Listed building description SNT228. modern
Cottages 75 yards SW of the A pair of 18th century cottages, since demolished. Listed building description Post-medieval - MNT19906 SK 60700 90500 Swan Inn (Demolished) SNT228. modern
Farmhouse NW of Yews MNT21742 Early to mid-19th century building. Listed building description SNT228. SK 60570 90440 Modern Farmhouse
Village shop and cottage at the Post-medieval - MNT21744 18th century house and shop. Listed building description SNT228. SK 60517 90340 south end of Village Street modern
The shape of Crow Wood can be explained by the presence of a substantial bank and ditch, which encloses the wood on three sides. The bank survives to a height of more than 1.5m and has a relatively steep profile. It may be that the modern drain flows along the course of an older infilled ditch on the outside of the bank, in which case the circuit may be said to be bi-vallate. It is difficult to suggest a date for the construction of the earthworks; the fact that the surviving bank is on the inside of the ditch may indicate that it is a medieval forest bank, but it seems equally plausible that the remains are older Possible "Marsh Fort", Crow in origin, perhaps even prehistoric. The eastern side of the wood may hold MNT25926 SK 6074 9098 Iron Age Wood, Styrrup remains of quarrying. A complex of shallower banks and ditches are located in the middle of the wood. The layout of these banks and ditches resembles 'entrances' seen in smaller Iron Age enclosures elsewhere in England. The banks and ditches which enclose the site, along with its size and location, all compare favourably with other suggested marsh forts (eg Moorhouse Farm, Tickhill, only 1,600m to the north and Sutton Common, near Doncaster), however, the internal earthworks suggested as entrance structures seem unlikely to be such and are far more likely to represent modern disturbance, such as the results of quarrying.
RCO001/0984H/01
Lanpro Services Ltd. Heritage Desk-Based Assessment: Bilston Urban Village, Wolverhampton
Elsewhere within Crow Wood there are a number of irregular butt-ended scoops, hollows and banks. The eastern side of the wood may hold remains of MNT25927 Quarries at Styrrup quarrying. The presence of kiln debris and partly fired bricks in the terminal of SK 6074 9100 Modern one of the ditches may link the activity to brickmaking. A brick maker, George Hurwood, is known to have operated in Oldcotes in the 1830s.
RCO001/0984H/01