F5. Cultural Heritage v6 20111018 - Southampton VTS · 2011. 10. 24. · Environmental Statement...

Environmental Statement for Port of Southampton: Berth 201/202 Works updated by Further Information

369

F5. Cultural Heritage

Executive Summary: Chapter F5. Cultural Heritage In order to assess likely cultural heritage effects of the development proposals an analysis of them was carried out against the existing baseline position whilst also having regard to the changes that could occur over time in their absence. The assessment has had regard to recognised best practice guidance and involved a desktop study of acknowledged sources in order to identify cultural heritage assets and assess the significance of potential effects. No direct effects (physical changes) to an identified asset are generated, and as such identified effects are limited to those on the setting of the assets identified. The assessment concludes that the residual effects of the proposal on cultural heritage assets and resources can in the majority of cases be classed as insignificant. The only exceptions to this are the temporary adverse minor significant effect during construction and the permanent adverse minor effect during operation on the setting of cultural heritage assets within the Marchwood RNAD area, and the permanent beneficial effect of insignificant/minor significance on the setting of the King George V Dry Dock and adjacent pumphouse during operations.

The limited harm that is caused by the development on the setting of cultural heritage assets is concluded, in accordance with the consideration required by PPS5, to be outweighed by the wider benefits of the development.

Introduction F5.1 This chapter identifies and assesses the likely cultural heritage effects generated by the

proposed development. As explained in Chapter 7 it is considered that the proposed development will not have any significant impacts on archaeological features, and these have, therefore, not been subject to further detailed consideration.

F5.2 The approach to the assessment that is reported in this chapter reflects the approach that is

detailed in Chapter 7 of the ES. In summary, in addition to effects during construction, the consequences on the cultural heritage resource that would result from the future operation of the Container Terminal with the berth 201/202 works in place have been assessed.

The Study Area

F5.3 From an initial consideration of the cultural heritage assets located within proximity of the

Container Terminal at Southampton, a series of five general groupings or clusters of features with the potential to be effected were identified, along with the cultural heritage asset that is the New Forest. These assets, which are shown on Figure F5.1, have been used as the extent of the assessment undertaken.


370

Methodology F5.4 The structure of the assessment followed for this assessment corresponds with common

assessment practice. In general terms this has consisted of identifying an area within which the cultural heritage baseline position is established. This in turn is then followed by an analysis of the project against the baseline to identify and determine the significance of any effects arising.

Determining the Significance of Impacts

F5.5 For the purposes of this assessment the methodology used to define the significance of impacts

has taken account of advice provided in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB), Volume 11, Section 3, Part 2 (HA 208/07). Although the proposals that have been assessed are not a road scheme, this is considered to be useful guidance to assist and inform the assessment process.

F5.6 The significance of cultural heritage effects are determined by taking account of both the value

of the cultural heritage asset being impacted on and the magnitude of the impact occurring on that resource. The value of the asset is defined as being of very high, high, medium, low or negligible value. The value of each asset identified is considered on a case by case basis, but in general terms the following has been used as a guide to assist determining the value of the asset.

Very High Value – International sites and features. High Value – National sites and features such as Scheduled Monuments and listed

buildings of exceptional interest (i.e. Grade I) or more than just special interest (i.e. Grade II*).

Medium – Local statutory designated sites such as Conservation Areas and listed buildings of special interest (i.e. Grade II).

Low – Features and assets of local importance such as locally listed buildings. Negligible –Features and assets with little or no significant historic interest.

F5.7 The magnitude of the impact is the degree of change that is considered likely to be experienced

by the asset and its setting if the project were to be completed as compared to the do nothing scenario. The magnitude of the impact occurring is classified as either major, moderate, minor or negligible. Determining the magnitude of impacts is undertaken on a case by case basis. It will be seen from the assessment provided in the following sections of this chapter, that any effects on cultural heritage resources and assets are limited to indirect effects only. No direct effects, taken to be actual physical changes to an identified asset, are generated. As such, the effects generated are limited to those on the setting of the assets identified.

F5.8 This being the case, the following has been used as a guide to assist in determining the

magnitude of impacts generated on cultural heritage assets.

Major – Comprehensive changes to the setting or character of the resource. Moderate – Changes to the setting or character of a resource, such that it is significantly

modified. Minor – Changes to the setting or character of a resource, such that it is noticeably

modified.


371

Negligible – Slight changes to the setting or character of a resource that hardy affect it. F5.9 Table F5.1 sets out in matrix form the way in which the overall significance of effects on cultural

heritage resources have been determined. Table F5.1 Significance of effects matrix

Magnitude of Impact Negligible Minor Moderate Major

Very high Minor Moderate/ Major

Major Major

High Insignificant/ Minor

Minor/ Moderate

Moderate/ Major

Major

Medium Insignificant

Minor Moderate Moderate/ Major

Low Insignificant

Insignificant/ Minor

Minor Minor/ Moderate

Value of resource

Negligible Insignificant Insignificant/ Minor

Insignificant/ Minor

Minor

Implications of Policy and Guidance

F5.10 The main legislation concerning the protection of important archaeological sites is the Ancient

Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 (as amended), which provides for nationally important archaeological sites to be statutorily protected as Scheduled Monuments. The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 gives statutory protection to Conservation Areas and Listed Buildings. This protection is achieved by the inclusion of suitable buildings within the lists of buildings of special architectural and historic interest (Listed Buildings) and the designation of Conservation Areas.

Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (2010) F5.11 Guidance on the identification and protection of historic buildings, conservation areas, historic

parks and gardens, archaeological assets, scheduled monuments and other elements of the historic environment is provided by Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment 2010 (PPS5).

F5.12 Policy HE6 highlights the need for applicants to assess the significance of heritage assets

potentially affected by a proposal, submitting a desk-based assessment where appropriate. Furthermore, Policy HE7 makes clear that any element of the historic environment that may be affected by the proposal (including any effect on the setting of a heritage asset) should be assessed.

F5.13 Development that may affect the setting of a designated heritage asset is covered by Policy

HE10, which makes clear that any harm to the setting of a designated heritage asset should be weighed against the wider benefits of the proposal. The greater the negative impact on the significance of the asset, the greater the benefits that will be needed to justify approval.


372

Furthermore, any opportunities to enhance of better reveal the significance of a heritage asset should be identified.

The South East Plan 2009 F5.14 South East Plan Policy BE6 - ‘Management of the Historic Environment’ states that ”When

developing and implementing plans and strategies, local authorities and other bodies will adopt policies and support proposals which protect, conserve and, where appropriate, enhance the historic environment and the contribution it makes to local and regional distinctiveness and sense of place….”

F5.15 The text supporting this policy makes clear that the historic environment is all around us as part

of everyday life, and it is therefore dynamic and continually subject to change. It is further made clear that the historic environment is not limited to the built environment and archaeological sites, but also includes landscapes and marine heritage sites.

Southampton Core Strategy 2010

F5.16 An objective of Southampton City Council’s Core Strategy (2010) is to conserve and enhance

the City’s historic environment ensuring that designated sites are safeguarded (Strategic Objective S8). Policy CS14 seeks to achieve this objective and states:

“The Council will safeguard from inappropriate development and, where appropriate, enhance important historical assets and their settings and the character of areas of acknowledged importance including listed buildings, conservation areas, sites of archaeological importance and their setting and parks and gardens of special historic interest. The Council will promote the retention of buildings and structures of local architectural or historical importance identified on the Local List….”

F5.17 The supporting text highlights that a fundamental consideration in the overall approach to development is how it respects Southampton’s historic environment. Proper conservation of the heritage of the city is seen as a vital tool in ensuring that development proposals are well designed and do not detract from existing local characteristics and built form.

F5.18 Saved policies of the Southampton Local Plan include policy HE3 which, amongst other things,

indicates that development will not be permitted which adversely affect the character or setting of a listed building. The supporting text highlights the need to pay special attention to maintaining the character and/or setting of listed buildings.

New Forest District (outside the National Park) Core Strategy 2009 and New Forest National Park Core Strategy 2010

F5.19 Although not an element of the development plan encompassing the site of the berth 201/202

works the New Forest District and New Forest National Park Core Strategies contain policies applicable to cultural heritage assets that are potentially impacted on by the berth 201/202 works. Regard has therefore been had to the relevant policies contained in them.


373

F5.20 The New Forest District Core Strategy recognises the value of the built environment and heritage in ensuring local character and an attractive living environment (paragraphs 3.2.1-3.2.3).

F5.21 Policy CS3 - ‘Protecting and enhancing our special environment’ (Heritage and Nature

Conservation) and supporting text recognises the role of National and Regional policies in protecting the natural and built heritage. Policy CS3 seeks to ensure that development proposals protect and, where possible, enhance sites of recognised heritage conservation importance. It states, amongst other things that - “New development proposals should maintain local distinctiveness and where possible enhance the character of identified features”.

F5.22 The importance of the New Forest as a cultural heritage asset is identified within the spatial

portrait given in the New Forest National Park Core Strategy. The retention of the various special qualities of the National Park is a common theme running through the strategic objectives which are set for the plan area.

Existing Baseline Environment

F5.23 A desktop study was undertaken using data from a number of sources, including the following,

in order to identify cultural heritage assets and assess their value.

National Heritage List for England1 National Monument Record2 Hampshire Register of Historic Parks and Gardens3 Hampshire Archaeology and Historic Buildings Record4 Southampton City Council Historic Environment Record ‘The Local List’5 Southampton City Council, New Forest District Council and New Forest National Park

Authority websites. Background

F5.24 Section 69 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires local

authorities to determine which parts of their area merit designation as conservation areas. Such areas are identified because of their special architectural or historic interest. In conservation areas the general duty of the local planning authority in the exercise of its planning functions is to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the area (section 72).

F5.25 A Listed Building is a building which has been placed on the Statutory List of Buildings of

Special Architectural or Historic Interest. Listing decisions are made by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, who approves a list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest. The general principles of selection given by DCMS (Principles of Selection for Listing Buildings, March 2010) are:

1 http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/default.aspx 2 http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/professional/archives-and-collections/nmr/enquiry-and-research-services/ 3 http://www3.hants.gov.uk/landscape-and-heritage/historic-environment/parks-gardens/hampshire-register.htm 4 http://historicenvironment.hants.gov.uk/AHBSearch.aspx 5 http://www.southampton.gov.uk/s-environment/historicenvironment/locallylistedbuildings/


374

before 1700, all buildings that contain a significant proportion of their original fabric are

listed; from 1700 to 1840, most buildings are listed; after 1840, because of the greatly increased number of buildings erected and the much

larger numbers that have survived, progressively greater selection is necessary; particularly careful selection is required for buildings from the period after 1945; buildings of less than 30 years old are normally listed only if they are of outstanding quality

and under threat. F5.26 Buildings are classified in grades to show their relative importance. Grade I are buildings of

exceptional interest (only about 2 per cent of listed buildings are in this grade), Grade II* buildings are particularly important buildings of more than special interest (some 4 per cent of listed buildings) and Grade II buildings are of special interest, which warrant every effort being made to preserve them.

F5.27 As previously indicated the cultural heritage assets around the site of the proposal (other than

the New Forest) can helpfully be described by reference to five general clusters or groupings. These are shown on Figure F5.1 and consist of:

1) assets located within parts of Totton and Eling, including Eling Conservation Area

(subsequently referred to as the Totton and Eling cluster); 2) assets located between Eling and Marchwood (subsequently referred to as Northern

Waterside cluster); 3) assets located to the north of Marchwood, including the Royal Naval Armaments Depot

Conservation Area (subsequently referred to as the Marchwood cluster); 4) assets located to the north and north east of the Southampton Container Terminal

(subsequently referred to as the North of Container Terminal Cluster); and 5) assets located in and around the Redbridge area of Southampton (subsequently referred to

as the Redbridge cluster).

F5.28 In addition to the assets within these clusters, regard has been had to the New Forest National Park (NFNP), which is a significant element in the cultural heritage of the wider surroundings of the berth 201/202 site. The boundary of the NFNP is located beyond cluster 1 and 2 to the south west.

1) Totton and Eling Cluster

F5.29 Totton and Eling was established as a Bronze Age settlement and has a long history of ship

building. Eling Conservation Area consists of a settlement of farms and cottages, interspersed with more imposing buildings, stretching up Eling Hill from the Creek to Cole's Farm. The historic buildings within the conservation area include three which are listed Grade II*; Eling Tide Mill, Church of St Mary, and the Old Rectory, as well as several attractive unlisted buildings. Listed buildings within this cluster are detailed in Table F5.2.


375

Table F5.2 Listed buildings within the Totton and Eling Cluster Asset No. on Fig F5.1

Building name Description Listing OS Grid Reference

1 10, 11 & 12 Eling Hill Early 16th Century house converted to 3 cottages

Grade II SU3667512414

2 4 Headstones, 13m south of Chancel Door of Church of St Mary

Early 18th Century carved stone Grade II SU3666512442

3 5 Eling Hill Late 18th Century house Grade II SU3666512442 4 6, 7 & 8 Eling Hill Early 19th short terrace Grade II SU3677512167 5 Church Gatehouse,

Eling Hill 18th Century house with early and mid 19th Century extension

Grade II SP4268200268

6 Church of St Mary, Eling Hill

Parish church of Saxon and Norman origin with 13th century restoration of the chancel, 14th century south chapel, 15th century north aisle and tower, early south aisle and north chapel rebuilt in a substantial general restoration of 1863

Grade II* SU3669312462

7 Elingfield House House, now offices. 18th century with 19th and 20th century extensions.


8 Group of 5 Headstones 8m East of Church of St Mary, Eling Hill

Group of 5 headstones. Late 17th/early 18th century. Stone.


9 Headstone 5m south-west of Chancel of St Mary, Eling Hill

Headstone, early 18th Century, carved stone.


10 Home Way Cottages 1-4, Eling Hill

Mid 18th century terrace of cottages, altered in 19th century.


11 Home Way 5-8, Eling Hill

Mid 18th century terrace of cottages, altered in 19th and 20th centuries.


12 No 138 Totton Tyre & Battery Company, Commerical Rd, Totton

House now offices. Early 18 century altered 20 century.


13 Station Hotel Art Nouveau style c1900 public house.


14 The Cross Keys Public House, Commercial Road.

Late C18 public house. Grade II SU 3606613369

15 Pair of Headstones 8m South-east of Chancel of Church of St Mary, Eling Hill

Pair of headstones, early 18th century. Stone


16 The Old Rectory 1-5, Late 18th century house divided Grade II* SU3666512442


376

Eling Hill into flats. 17 Eling Tide Mill,

Eling Hill Tide Mill. Mid 18th century on site of mill dating from around 1420, altered in 19th century and 20th century, worked until 1948, restored 1978-83. Brick, old plain tile roofs, internally timber-frame. Situated on seaward side of dam/causeway across mouth of Bartley Water.


18 90 & 92 Rumbridge Street

Manor house, now 2 dwellings. Mid 18th Century, altered 19th and 20th century, originally Rumbridge Manor House, records of which date to 15th century.


(Source: English Heritage National Heritage List for England, 2011)

F5.30 The key features in the Eling Conservation Area are described by New Forest District Council on their website, as:

Eling Tide Mill: The only surviving tide mill in the world still regularly producing

stoneground flour. Tide mills are usually built on causeways across inlets of tidal estuaries which form both a bridge and a dam. In 1382 William Wykeham granted Eling Tide Mill to his newly founded College in Winchester as part of its endowment. It remained the property of the College until 1975 when it was bought by New Forest District Council and restored by volunteers.

Church of St Mary: The first church on this site was replaced by a stone building in the 11th century. The ashlar tower dates from Tudor times and is three storeys high with battlements. Although most of the church dates from between the Norman period and the 14th century much of this is hidden by the restoration work of Benjamin Ferrey 1863-5. The churchyard contains twelve listed grave stones dating from the last 300 years.

Bartley Water: Tidal area of salt marsh and reed beds, forming an important open space and a wilderness haven for wildlife.

Cole's Farm: An important survival of the rural landscape. The farmhouse is a fine example of early 19th century architecture with original sash windows with no 'horns' and rubbed brickwork over the ground floor windows. The adjoining contemporary farm buildings grouped around the yard are marked on the tithe map of 1843.

The high brick wall to the Old Rectory plot is a prominent feature. Set into the wall is a Victorian post box. The wall contrasts with the hedgerows of the rest of the conservation area.

Anchor public house and a small area of open space

F5.31 NFDC also outline, on their website, the key setting elements of the Conservation Area as being: the view upstream from the causeway, across the reed beds; the view north across the Creek to the old area of Eling Quay beside the Anchor public

house; and views across Southampton Water and down Southampton Water towards Marchwood.


377

2) North Waterside Cluster

F5.32 This cluster is located in a generally open area of farmland between the settlements of Eling and Marchwood. The Container Terminal is located to the north and north east of this cluster across the River Test. Cultural heritage assets within this cluster consist of listed buildings, which are detailed in Table F5.3.

Table F5.3 Listed buildings within the North Waterside Cluster

Asset No on Fig F5.1


19 Holly Cottage, 2 Trotts Lane

Cottage, 17th century timber-framed lobby-entrance house, with 20th century restoration


20 Kennels Cottage Lodge, early 19th century. Rendered brick under overhanging thatch roof supported on rustic tree-trunk posts


21 Trotts Farmhouse House, 17th century timber-framed lobby-entrance house


22 Granary 5m West of Bury Farmhouse

18th century granary. Grade II SU3778711400

23 Bury Farm House 16th century timber framed lobby entrance house with 18th century cladding and 20th century renovation.


24 Icehouse 25m north of Bury Farmhouse

Early 19th century icehouse. Grade II SU3909309947

25 Barn immediately south east of Holly Cottage

Circa late 17th century/early 18th century barn.


(Source: English Heritage National Heritage List for England, 2011) 3) Marchwood Cluster

F5.33 The Royal Naval Armaments Depot (RNAD) is an important site on the waterfront at Marchwood. The site developed between 1812 and the 1890s, initially as a depot for the storage and management of gunpowder, and later for the storage of other munitions. The survival of Georgian military works from the period of the Napoleonic wars is relatively rare. Many of the buildings and walls are individually listed, as detailed with other listed buildings in Table F5.4.


378

Table F5.4 Listed buildings within the Marchwood Cluster



26 Blast Wall around rebuilt magazine at RNAD

Blastwall. 1814. Red brick Portland stone coping. Surrounds rebuilt (unlisted) magazine. Gateways to N (blocked) and S, each flanked by square piers with round-headed recessed panels surmounted by slightly projecting panels.


27 Former magazine and associated blast walls at former Royal Naval Armaments Depot, 200m WNW of entrance lodge (Marchwood Yacht Club Offices)

Magazine, now derelict. 1856-7. Red brick walls, roofs of grey slate laid to diminishing courses; cambered gauged brick arches to openings.


28 Former A (no.1) Magazine and Enclosure Walls, Portside Close

Built between 1814 and 1816, the magazine is a simple rectangular building within a rectangle formed by its outer enclosure wall. Both the magazine and enclosure have red brick walls.


29 Former Examining room and associated walls at former RNAD

Examining rooms, now derelict. Built 1814, for unheading barrels and examining contents. Red brick walls, roofs of grey slate laid to diminishing courses; camber gauged brick arches to openings.


30 Former Receiving Room at Former RNAD

The former Receiving Room is an integral part of A (No.1) Magazine at Marchwood, which was built between 1814 and 1816. The Receiving Room is a simple oblong red brick building forming the north side of the rectangular enclosure around Magazine `A' (No.1


31 Marchwood Yacht Club and Attached Wall & Gates

Entrance lodges and gates, now club building. Dated 1814 on foundation stone. Red brick walls, roofs of grey slate


32 Frobisher Court and attached wall

Barracks flanked by officers’ quarters, now houses, 1816.




379

F5.34 Key features in the Royal Naval Armaments Depot Conservation Area, as described by NFDC on their website, are outlined below.

Magazine C: The Magazine with its surrounding walls is one of the surviving magazines

added in 1856-7. A large red brick building with few window and door openings. Much of the original roof structure survives. Internally, one large space was laid out in bays for the storage of powder barrels.

The barrack block now restored and converted to apartments and known as Frobisher Court.

Magazine A, the Receiving Rooms and surrounding walls: Magazine A dates from the original development of 1814. The roof covering of this magazine consisted uniquely of huge slates underlayed by clay tiles - a protective measure.

The Examining Rooms dating from the original development of the site. A single storey building consisting of two rooms with entrance porches. The Examining Rooms were used for inspecting and repacking powder barrels.

The office and guardhouse, two small lodge-type buildings, dating from the original development of 1814, now occupied by Marchwood Yacht Club. The colonnaded porches were added to the front of the buildings in 1856. Original doors and window joinery survive.

The earth banked blast walls around existing and former magazines. These are impressive six metre high walls which lean in towards the banks. They are now consolidated by mature vegetation and oak and pine trees.

F5.35 On their website, NFDC also outline the following as being of importance to the setting:

the approach to the site along Magazine Lane which still retains the character of a narrow

country lane; the spaces contained by the walls around the building compounds; the promenade to Southampton Water - an important open space with stunning views of

the docks, and backed by the continuous frontage wall bounding the magazine compounds;

the sea wall, part original, part rebuilt - a key landscape feature; Magazine Lane, with the accommodation buildings on one side and the creek on the

other; and groups of trees on the earth banks to the blast walls and valuable trees across the site

are especially prominent when the area is viewed from the water.

4) North of Container Terminal Cluster

F5.36 This cluster is located to the north/north-east of the Container Terminal, and includes the King George V Dry Dock and adjacent pumphouse, which are located immediately adjacent to the north east of the berth 201/202 site. The assets within this cluster consist of listed buildings, which are detailed in Table F5.5.


380

Table F5.5 Listed buildings within the North of Container Terminal Cluster Asset No on Fig F5.1


33 King George V Dry Dock, Herbert Walker Avenue

King George V Graving Dock, also known as No. 7 Dry Dock, is a dry dock located in Southampton's Western Docks. It was designed by FE Wentworth-Shields and constructed by John Mowlem & Company, with Edmund Nuttall Sons & Company. It was formally opened by HM King George V and Queen Mary on 26th July 1933, but work was not completed until 1934.


34 No 7 Pumping Station at King George V Dry Dock

No. 7 Pumping Station, built to house the pumps and machinery used in flooding and draining King George V Graving Dock. The Pumping Station lies on the west side of the entrance to the Dock, and was built in 1933/34 at the same time as the Dock was constructed.


35 369 & 371a Millbrook Road, Southampton

Early to Mid 19th century. Two storeys yellow brick


36 Church of the Holy Trinity

The Parish Church of Millbrook. 1873-80


(Source: English Heritage National Heritage List for England, 2011) 5) Redbridge Cluster

F5.37 This cluster is located to the north west of the Container Terminal at Redbridge. The assets in this cluster consist of Scheduled Monuments (Table F5.8), listed buildings (Table F5.6) and locally listed buildings and structures (Table F5.7).


381

Table F5.6 Listed buildings within the Redbridge Cluster Asset Number on Figure F5.1


35 Anchor Hotel, Test Lane

Right-hand side early 18th Century, left hand side early 19th Century.


36 Ivy House 45, Old Redbridge Road

L-shaped house dating from 17th century but front part mid-18th century.


37 Redbridge Bridge 17th century but on the site of an earlier bridge and of medieval type. Built of rubble and ashlar.


38 County Bridge, Redbridge Causeway

Road bridge over the River Test, 1793.

Grade II. SU3689013667

39 Ship Inn, Old Redbridge Road

16th century or 17th century and later. Exterior of 18th century brick.


40 The Nook, Old Redbridge Road

18th century range, not uniform. Two storeys. Mee's House of red brick. The Cottage grey brick with red brick dressings and Hazeldene and The Nook now painted brick.


41 65, Test Lane Formerly an outbuilding to the Anchor Hotel. Early 18th century. Two storeys and attics red brick.


42 Store Cottage, 63 Test Lane

Formerly an outbuilding to the Anchor Hotel. Early 18th century. Two storeys and attics red brick.


43 The Chestnuts Early to mid-19th century. Two storeys red brick.




382

Table F5.7 Locally Listed Buildings within the Redbridge Cluster


Building name Description Designated

44 1 to 6 Railway Cottages, Old Redbridge Road

Built between 1897 and 1910. Good example of workers housing of this period, following the ‘Arts and Crafts’ style.

19/01/2009

45 13 to 18 Railway Cottages, Tate Road.

A terrace of railway workers cottages built between 1883 and 1897. Brick with some mock-timber frame at first floor level.

19/01/2009

46 Redbridge Primary School

Dated 1859. Mid-Victorian school building fronting main road.

19/01/2009

47 Milestone (on south verge of highway) Redbridge Road

Early 1800s Milestone. No distinguishing marks but noted on 1867 OS map as Southampton.

19/01/2009

(Source: Southampton City Council Local List)

Table F5.8 Scheduled Ancient Monuments within the Redbridge Cluster Scheduled Ancient Monument

Listing ID OS Grid Reference

Redbridge Old Bridges Hampshire 180 (1003455) SU3688913666 Redbridge Old Bridges Southampton 180 (1003805) SU3699413713

(Source: English Heritage National Heritage List for England, 2011) New Forest F5.38 The New Forest National Park (NFNP) was designated in 2004 under the National Parks and

Access to the Countryside Act 1949 (as amended). Section 5(1) of the 1949 Act makes clear that National Parks are designated for the purpose of: conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the designated areas; and of promoting opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of those areas by the public.

F5.39 The NFNP, the closest part of which is located approximately 2km from berth 201/202, is therefore a significant cultural heritage asset within the wider surroundings of the berth 201/202 site. F5.40 The New Forest has, in the recent past, been included on the UK’s Tentative List of World

Heritage Sites for consideration by UNESCO. The site put forward was based upon the New Forest Heritage Area boundary, a smaller area than that covered by the National Park. The New Forest was, however, withdrawn from the UK Tentative List in 2006 by the National Park Authority.

Environmental Change without the Berth 201/202 works

F5.41 Chapter 7 explains what potentially is likely to occur in the future at the Container Terminal at

Southampton if the berth 201/202 works do not take place.


383

F5.42 In addition to the Container Terminal, other changes within the Port of Southampton are likely to occur over time. The Port estate at Southampton benefits from permitted development rights which allow the Port to undertake certain developments in response to market and trade demands. Other port operational changes are therefore also likely to continue to occur within the Port estate over time even if the berth 201/202 works do not take place. As the Port estate has a finite area of land, such developments are likely to be a continuation of the current process of seeking to make more intensive use of the available land. These matters are factors taken into account when determining the baseline position against which the effects of the development are considered. Impact Identification and Assessment

F5.43 As previously indicated, the development does not result in any direct effects on cultural

heritage assets. Potential effects are therefore limited to indirect effects on the setting of cultural heritage assets. In this assessment, an asset’s setting is taken to be its relevant surroundings, which includes both physical factors and context.

F5.44 In undertaking the cultural heritage assessment, consideration has been given to the

conclusions of the landscape and visual assessment provided in chapter F3. In considering indirect effects on the character of adjacent townscapes/landscapes, that assessment takes account of various effects likely to be generated, including those brought about by visual intrusion, noise effects, lighting effects and other effects, which are factors considered to contribute in some way to the setting of a cultural heritage asset. Whilst regard has therefore been had to the conclusions of the landscape and visual assessment in chapter F3, those conclusions have not, and cannot be, solely relied upon to provide the conclusions as to effects on setting because different types of receptor are being considered.

1) Totton and Eling Cluster

F5.45 This cluster contains three individual assets considered to be of high value, namely the Church of St Mary, The Old Rectory and Eling Tide Mill Grade II* Listed Buildings, located within Eling Conservation Area. All of the remaining assets within this cluster, including the Conservation Area itself are considered to be of medium value. F5.46 As previously indicated, NFDC highlight that one of the key setting elements of the

Conservation Area is the view across Southampton Water and down Southampton Water. Where such views are also possible from the various listed building assets in this cluster, they are clearly part of the setting for these assets as well. The Container Terminal and operational port activity already, therefore, contribute to the setting of the cultural heritage assets within this cluster. As indicated in the previous section an intensification of port activity in these areas is likely to occur over time in any event even without the berth 201/202 works. The berth 201/202 works will, therefore, result in an intensification of activity and operations which already currently contribute to the setting of the assets in this cluster.

F5.47 The landscape and visual assessment reported in chapter F3 considers the indirect effects of

the works on the character of landscapes and townscapes adjacent to the site of the works, including the area within which this cluster of cultural heritage assets is located. From that assessment it can be concluded that there will be indirect effects as a result of the works, both


384

during construction and operation, on the landscape / townscape character of the area within which this cluster is located, but that such effects will be insignificant.

F5.48 In light of the above it is considered that the magnitude of the impact generated during both the

construction and operation phases of the project on the setting of the assets within the Eling Conservation Area and the Conservation Area itself, is negligible, i.e. whilst there will be slight changes to the setting, these will hardly affect it. The overall effects generated by the project (during both construction and operation) on the setting of the listed buildings within the Eling Conservation Area, including those considered individually of high value, and the Conservation Area itself, are therefore considered to be adverse but insignificant.

F5.49 For the listed buildings located within this cluster but outside of the Conservation Area any

effects generated are also considered to be adverse but insignificant. 2) North Waterside Cluster F5.50 The assets within this cluster consist of Grade II listed buildings, which are all considered to be

of medium value. F5.51 An element of the existing setting of these heritage aspects is the close proximity of the

Container Terminal and operational port activity, particularly in respect of those assets located to the north east of Marchwood Road / Bury Road. This element of the setting of these assets will remain, albeit with an incremental increase in intensity, with the proposals in place. From the assessment of the effects of the works on the character of the landscape/townscape provided in Chapter F3, it is possible to conclude that the works will have an indirect but insignificant effect on the landscape/townscape of the area within which the assets in this cluster are located. This conclusion is reached for both the construction and operation phases.

F5.52 In light of the above it is considered that the magnitude of the impact generated during both the

construction phase and operational phase on the setting of the assets within this cluster will be negligible, i.e. slight changes that hardly affect the setting. The overall effects generated by the project (during both their construction and operation) on the setting of the listed buildings within this cluster are therefore considered to be adverse but insignificant.

3) Marchwood Cluster

F5.53 The assets located within this cluster, consisting of Grade II listed buildings and the Conservation Area, are considered to be of medium value. F5.54 The landscape and visual assessment reported in chapter F3 indicates that existing

views from this general area include close and stunning views of the Container Terminal. NFDC identify that these stunning views are one of the important elements that contribute to the overall setting of the Conservation Area. The setting of the cultural heritage assets in this cluster are, therefore, clearly influenced by port operational activity, including that associated with the Container Terminal which occurs within and across the River Test adjacent to this part of Marchwood.


385

F5.55 The landscape and visual assessment contained in Chapter F3 indicates that the combined indirect landscape effects on the waterfront of the RNAD area of Marchwood during the initial construction phases would be insignificant. Temporary adverse indirect landscape character and amenity effects of moderate significance would, however, occur whilst the quay wall piling was being undertaken. Once the works are in place, it is concluded that there will be a small scale incremental change of minor, and more locally moderate adverse effects to the landscape character of the Marchwood RNAD, with effects varying due to the degree of exposure to the Container Terminal in its altered form.

F5.56 It is concluded that the magnitude of the impact on the setting of the cultural heritage assets

within this cluster will generally be negligible for the majority of the construction period, but rise to a temporary impact of minor magnitude (i.e. a change to the setting such that it is noticeably modified) during the piling of the quay wall. Once in place and operational, the works are considered to have an impact of minor magnitude on the setting of the assets within this cluster.

F5.57 The overall effects on the setting of the cultural heritage assets within this cluster are therefore

considered to be adverse but insignificant during the majority of construction, but temporarily of minor adverse significance when quay wall piling is being undertaken. Once in place and operational, the effects of the project on the setting of the assets within this cluster are considered to be adverse and of minor significance.

4) North of Container Terminal Cluster

F5.58 This cluster consists of four Grade II listed buildings, including two which are located

immediately adjacent to berth 201/202 – the King George V Dry Dock and adjacent pumphouse. These assets are all considered to be of medium value.

F5.59 Due to their proximity to the site of the berth 201/202 works, the King George V Dry Dock and

adjacent pumphouse are located within the same landscape/townscape area as the site of the proposals, namely an area characterised by operational port activities. The assessment of effects on landscape/townscape assessment detailed in Chapter F3 demonstrates that during their construction, the works will have insignificant effects on this landscape/townscape.

F5.60 Once in operation, the landscape assessment concludes that the proposals will create a more

ordered townscape and have a subtle positive effect. There is also predicted to be a positive effect on the character of the area as an operational port. It is concluded that the operational landscape effects would be beneficial and of minor significance.

F5.61 Views of the activity associated with the project (both during construction and operation) will

clearly be possible from the site of these assets, but in terms of their setting such views of frequently changing port activity are already key aspects.

F5.62 The magnitude of the impact on the setting of the King George V Dry Dock and adjacent

pumphouse is therefore considered to be negligible during the construction of the works. During the operation of the works the impact on the setting of these assets is considered to be of negligible/minor magnitude. The overall effects on the setting of these cultural heritage assets are therefore considered to be insignificant during the construction phase and insignificant/minor significant during their operation. These effects during operation are,


386

however, considered to be beneficial as they will help emphasise the working port setting of the assets.

F5.63 For the cultural heritage assets within this cluster located along Millbrook Road, the impacts on

their setting as a result of the proposals, both during their construction and operation, are considered to be adverse but insignificant.

5) Redbridge Cluster F5.64 The majority of assets within this cluster consist of Grade II listed buildings, which are

considered to be of medium value. There are also some locally listed buildings/structures of low value. The Redbridge Bridge / Old Bridge assets are, however, considered to be assets of high value, reflecting their status as Grade II* listed buildings and Scheduled Monuments.

F5.65 The existing setting of these high value assets is dominated by the Lower Test Nature Reserve

to the north and the A35 Redbridge Flyover and Redbridge rail bridge to the south. Taking into account the conclusions of the assessment of the indirect effects of the proposals on adjacent landscapes and townscapes, there is considered to be, at worst, an impact of negligible magnitude on the setting of these assets as a result of the proposals. It is considered that the overall effect both during the construction and operation phases of the proposals on the setting of these high value assets is adverse but insignificant.

F5.66 For the other assets in this cluster the magnitude of impact is also considered, at worst, to be

negligible. Again, it is concluded that the overall impacts on the setting of these assets during both the construction and operation phases of the proposals is adverse but insignificant.

New Forest F5.67 The New Forest National Park, the closest part of which is located approximately 2km from

berth 201/202, is a significant cultural heritage asset within the wider surroundings of the berth 201/202 site. The setting of the New Forest has, however, for a considerable number of years included as part of its context the close proximity to the north east of industrial and port uses located along Southampton Water/River Test. The berth 201/202 proposals will not alter this relationship or the type of use occurring in this part of the River Test waterside.

F5.68 As explained in chapter F3, the indirect effects of the proposals on the character of the New

Forest National Park landscape is considered to be insignificant during both the construction and operation phases. Although the value of this cultural heritage resource is considered to be high, the magnitude of the impact on the setting of the NFNP during both construction and operation is, therefore, considered to be negligible, which results overall in an insignificant adverse effect on the setting of this cultural heritage asset during both construction and operation.

Residual effects

F5.69 Based on the above assessment it is concluded that the residual effects of the proposal on

cultural heritage assets and resources can in the majority of cases be classed as insignificant. The only exceptions to this are the temporary adverse minor significant effect during


387

construction and the permanent adverse minor effect during operation on the setting of cultural heritage assets within the Marchwood RNAD area, and the permanent beneficial effect of insignificant/minor significance on the setting of the King George V Dry Dock and adjacent pumphouse during the operation of the development.

F5.70 The limited harm that is caused by the development on the setting of cultural heritage assets is

concluded, in accordance with the consideration required by PPS5, to be outweighed by the wider benefits of the development.

Cluster 1

Cluster 2 Cluster 3

Cluster 4

Cluster 5

36

35

33

34

3837

3542

41 43 40

3639

45

44

46

47

1

234

5

6

7

8

9

16

1715

10

11

18

14

12

13

19

25

21

20

22

23

24

26

27 2930

28

31

32

0 500 metres

Figure F5.1 - Cultural Heritage Features

NorthNorthNorth

Conservation Area

Grade II Listed Buildings

Grade II* Listed Buildings

Locally Listed Buildings

Scheduled Ancient Monument

New Forest National Park

Southampton Container Terminal

Berths 201 / 202

ABP SouthamptonOcean Gate, Atlantic WaySouthampton, SO14 3QN

Based upon the Ordnance Survey scale maps with thepermission of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office

© Crown Copyright ABP Group Licence . ALD 814517 Ocean Gate, Atlantic way, SO14 3QN

Source: Adams Hendry Consulting Ltd National Heritage List for England (English Heritage 2011) National Monument Record (English Heritage 2011) Hampshire Archaeology and Historic Buildings Record (Hampshire County Council 2011) Southampton City Council Historic Environment Record ‘The Local List’ (Southampton City Council 2010)

Note: Locations of Listed Buildings shown are taken from theNational Heritage List for England Online Map Search(English Heritage 2011)

F5. Cultural Heritage v6 20111018 - Southampton VTS · 2011. 10. 24. · Environmental Statement...

Documents

Transcript of F5. Cultural Heritage v6 20111018 - Southampton VTS · 2011. 10. 24. · Environmental Statement...