The Tootal Buildings, Oxford Street, Manchester Heritage Statement: Courtyard Works Prepared for: XLB Property 6 July 2021 The Tootal Buildings, Courtyard Works - Heritage Statement July 2021 Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Background and Proposals................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Planning Policy Context .................................................................................................... 4 2. Heritage Context ........................................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Statutory Designations...................................................................................................... 6 3. History and Development .......................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Brief History and Development of the Site ....................................................................... 7 3.3 Existing Context .............................................................................................................. 10 4. Significance Assessment .......................................................................................................... 12 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 12 4.2 The Site (Courtyard) ........................................................................................................ 12 5. Heritage Impact Assessment ................................................................................................... 14 5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 14 5.2 Assessment Methodology............................................................................................... 14 5.3 The Proposals .................................................................................................................. 14 5.4 Heritage Impact Assessment .......................................................................................... 16 5.5 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 17 6. Appendix I – List Descriptions .................................................................................................. 18 6.1 List Descriptions .............................................................................................................. 18 7. Appendix II – Criteria for defining impact ............................................................................... 20 © SLHA P a g e 2 | 22 1. Introduction 1.1 Background and Proposals Heritage Architecture Ltd (HA) have been commissioned by XLB Property to prepare a Heritage Statement for minor refurbishment works to the courtyard which is enclosed by the Grade II* listed Tootal, Broadhurst and Lee building to the north, east and south sides and Lee House (Grade II) to the west. Reference should be made to the information and plans prepared by Planit-ie, which provide a detailed schedule of the proposed works and annotated drawings. The earliest building which encloses the courtyard site was constructed in 1898 as a head office and textile warehouse for Tootal, Broadhurst & Lee, to designs by J. Gibbons Sankey. It was built as part of the late 19th century wave of warehouse development in the city and is part of an important group of historic buildings on Oxford Street, Manchester. The building was extended in several phases, the first in 1910 when additions to the rear were designed in a seamless architectural style. In the 1930s, Lee House (Grade II), designed by Harry S.Fairhust was built to the rear, fronting Great Bridgewater Street. In the 1950s, a new office block was built on the canal frontage, resulting in one large courtyard to the centre. Figure 1 below illustrates the spatial layout of the courtyard site, which is enclosed by Lee House and the Tootal Buildings (historically known as Churchgate House). The proposals seek to refurbish the central courtyard and create a more contemporary offering. Lee House (Grade II) 1910s extension 1950s extension Tootal Buildings (Grade II*) Figure 1: Site plan of the Tootal Buildings and Lee House (within dotted red line). The current proposals are focused on the refurbishment of the central courtyard only (shaded red). Source: Google Maps. © SLHA P a g e 3 | 22 The Tootal Buildings, Courtyard Works - Heritage Statement July 2021 This Heritage Statement appraises the proposals and provides a description of the significance of the central courtyard space / elevations which surround the space. The purpose of the Heritage Statement is to outline the capacity for change and potential impact of the proposals. Due to the enclosed nature of the courtyard, it will be clear there will be no impact upon any heritage assets in the surrounding area. The focus of the following Heritage Statement is therefore on the impact to the Grade II* Tootal Building and the Grade II listed Lee House only. 1.2 Planning Policy Context The key planning policy documents are, respectively, the: Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (NPPF), and Manchester City Council’s Core Strategy (2012). Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990: With regards to the 1990 Act, Section 66 is relevant to the current scheme as it requires the Local Planning Authority to “have special regard to the desirability of preserving [a listed building] or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses” when considering whether to grant planning permission. The Council is thus, required, by legislation and national planning policy, to have regard to the impact of any Proposed Development which has the potential to affect designated heritage assets. This consideration needs to be proportionate to the relative significance of the designated heritage asset and the actual impact of the Proposed Development. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2019): The policies in the NPPF constitute the Government’s view of what sustainable development means in practice. The definition requires development to give due weight to the appropriate conservation of heritage assets in order to be defined as sustainable development (paragraph 8). This is because one of the key dimensions of sustainability is protecting and enhancing the historic environment. It is thus necessary to demonstrate that the proposals for the site are demonstrably sustainable. This statement has been prepared in the context of relevant national and local heritage planning policy. Of particular relevance is paragraph 189, which 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.” (NPPF, 2019). Planning Practice Guidance (PPG): The PPG provides current advice to assist with the interpretation of the NPPF. Of particular relevance is the PPG’s commentary upon the importance of ‘significance’ in decision taking (Paragraph 7). This section advises that “being able to properly assess the nature, extent and importance of the significance of a heritage asset, and the contribution of its setting, is very important to understanding the potential impact and acceptability of development proposals.” This report provides such information. The PPG emphasises that, in general terms, “substantial harm is a high test, so it may not arise in many cases” (Paragraph: 018 Reference ID: 18a-018-20190723). For example, in determining whether works to a listed building constitute substantial harm, an important consideration would be whether the adverse impact seriously affects a key element of its special architectural or historic interest. It is the degree of harm to the asset’s significance rather than the scale of the development that is to be assessed. © SLHA P a g e 4 | 22 The Tootal Buildings, Courtyard Works - Heritage Statement July 2021 Historic England’s Guidance: This Heritage Statement accords with the guidance set out in Historic England’s Advice Note 12: Statements of Heritage Significance: Analysing Significance in heritage Assets (October 2019). The recent guidance calls for a staged approach, which provides relevant and proportionate information sufficient to inform decision-making by the Council. In 2015 Historic England released three Good Practice Advice notes supporting the implementation of national policy and the related guidance in the PPG. The advice notes do not constitute a statement of Government policy itself, nor do they seek to prescribe a single methodology or particular data sources. Good Practice Advice Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment – (March 2015), was utilised as part of this assessment in order to gain a full understanding of the relevant issues, alongside the NPPF and PPG. © SLHA P a g e 5 | 22 The Tootal Buildings, Courtyard Works - Heritage Statement July 2021 2. Heritage Context 2.1 Statutory Designations