Feethams, Darlington - Archaeo Environment

Transcription

HERITAGE STATEMENT
For a Proposed Office
Development, Feethams,
Darlington.
Archaeo-Environment Ltd
for Willmott-Dixon and
Darlington Borough
Council.
August 2013
Report AE-2013-0137
Oasis ID archaeoe1-157243
Heritage Statement for a Proposed Office Development, Feethams, Darlington.
1
Archaeo-Environment Ltd for Willmott-Dixon and Darlington Borough Council
AE0137 August 2013
Summary
Archaeo-Environment (AE), were appointed by Willmott-Dixon Construction Ltd on
behalf of Darlington Borough Council (DBC), to prepare a heritage statement to
inform and accompany a planning application for a proposed new office building to
the rear (east) of the Town Hall on Feethams Lane, Darlington. Consultation and
scoping correspondence with English Heritage, the DBC Conservation Officer and
Durham County Council Archaeology Service (the archaeological advisors to DBC)
identified that the site was of considerable heritage significance and that a heritage
statement would be required to accompany any planning application. The scope of
the heritage statement was identified as needing to address issues of buried
archaeology and the contribution of setting to the heritage significance of
neighbouring historic assets such as St.Cuthbert’s Church and the Town Centre
conservation area.
The site is immediately outside of the Town Centre Conservation Area and lies
between the Town Hall to the west, a ‘brutalist’ concrete building completed in 1972;
the River Skerne to the east and the Grade I listed church of St.Cuthbert a building in
the Early English style and built between 1192 and c1250 to the north. The site of the
proposed new office building itself is within the former ‘Hallgarth’ an enclosed area of
medieval land originally containing the Bishop of Durham’s manor house first built in
the 12th century. By the 18th century the Hallgarth had already been subdivided with
the front plot onto Feethams Lane containing the imposing early 18th century house
of the Pease family (Feethams House) and a lane known as either the Lead Yard or
on some 19th century plans as Post House Lane, running along the north side of the
site dividing it from St.Cuthbert’s churchyard. The Bishop’s Manor House although
damaged in the English Civil War of the 17th century was restored by Bishop Cosin
later in the 17th century. It survived until the early 19th century when it was sold and
converted into the town’s poor or work house. At this time the main north-south range
was demolished and replaced by a new workhouse building, leaving the north wing of
the old manor and chapel of St.James. In 1870 a new and enlarged workhouse was
constructed on Yarm Road following which the remainder of the manor house was
demolished and the early 19th century workhouse buildings incorporated into a new
development comprising residential properties on Luck’s Square and Luck’s Terrace
named after Alderman Richard Luck who had purchased the site. A few architectural
fragments of the old manor were reused on site and elsewhere at this time. The
square and terrace survived till the 1960’s when the site was cleared before
construction of the Town Hall began in 1969. Following completion of the Town Hall
in 1972, the site of the manor house was initially laid out as a lawned area, but had
been converted into a car park by the 1990’s.
The area can be seen to be one of considerable change, especially over the last 200
years during the industrial development of the town. During this period the River
Skerne has been canalised from its original wide and shallow course, its east bank
formerly the Park of the Bishop of Durham, has been developed by railway line,
housing and mill buildings which themselves have been partially swept away by the
construction of the dual carriageway inner ring road in the 1970’s. To the south of the
site the open space of Feethams Field has been replaced by urban sprawl, the
2
AE0137 August 2013
town’s post war bus station and is currently used as a car park pending a planned
new leisure and retail development. Nevertheless despite all of this change the
historic core of the town retains much of its medieval layout within which are many
handsome 18th and 19th century buildings. The wide expansive market place still
holds a central focal point and frames on its east side the 12th century church of
St.Cuthbert with its soaring spire.
To inform this heritage statement a scheme of archaeological evaluation work was
agreed with the planning authority and their advisors. This was undertaken during
July 2013 when five trenches were excavated by Archaeological Services Durham
University on the site of the proposed new building, significant archaeological
deposits were identified in all trenches. This consisted of substantial lime bonded
stone walls, which can be reconciled in part with the known extent of the Bishop’s
Manor House, together with pits and trenches all associated with medieval and later
finds. The top of these deposits was between 0.66m and 0.84m below ground level
(bgl). The top of undisturbed natural subsoil was identified at between 0.75m and
1.34m bgl. Archaeological deposits in features cut into this material were identified to
a depth of 1.7m bgl, but may exist to greater depths.
The Heritage Significance of the development Site. A phased process of Desk based
assessment and evaluation excavation has confirmed that well preserved
archaeological remains of medieval date survive on site. These appear to be
surviving elements of the Bishop of Durham’s manor house built in the late 12th
century and finally demolished around 1880. While the remains exposed in the
evaluation work have great archaeological significance, the effects of 19th century
demolition, followed by further disturbance during the construction of the Town Hall
between 1969-72 mean that the surviving remains are relatively fragile and
fragmentary and are not best served by attempts at preservation in-situ. Instead they
present an opportunity to increase knowledge and public understanding of the
architecture of the manor house, associated human lives and the economy and
history of medieval Darlington. Other more peripheral archaeological interest lies in
the overlying remains of the 19th century workhouse, and the possibility of prehistoric
palaeo-environmental remains associated with the River Skerne still surviving on site.
A project design for archaeological excavation has been drawn up with opportunities
for public engagement and it is recommended that this is undertaken in advance of
development work on site. The Project design is attached as an Annex to this report.
St.Cuthbert’s Church. There will be no physical impact on St.Cuthbert’s church during
or after construction of the proposed office building. No areas of heritage significance
within the church will be affected by the proposed development. The setting of
St.Cuthbert’s church contributes great significance to its heritage value however, and
the development will have an impact on the setting by bringing built development
closer to its south side and limiting some minor views from the south. This is however
only a minor impact and does not constitute substantial harm as defined by the
NPPF. Much of this impact will be negated during the year when leaves are on the
mature trees surrounding the church, together with the development of a suitably
subtle lighting scheme for the new building which will mitigate any impacts on the
setting of the church both at night or during the dark half of the year.
3
AE0137 August 2013
The Town Centre Conservation Area. The development is outside the conservation
area, but will be visible from the south and south-east in the foreground of views
towards the conservation area. This is an area of significant change over the past
250 years beginning as open park land, becoming developed with tall textile mill
buildings next to the Skerne and loomed over for much of the 20th century by cooling
towers and chimneys of the Haughton Road electrical power station. Much of the
area was filled with terraced housing until large scale clearance in the late 1960s for
the inner ring road. Currently the view of church and conservation area is largely
screened by mature trees, which will during the summer months also shield the new
development. Nevertheless while not historic as such, views of St.Cuthbert’s from the
inner ring road with its spire soaring from the trees, or illuminated at night provide a
memorable experience for drivers and pedestrians, local community and visitors
alike. The new development will encroach slightly on views of St.Cuthbert’s from the
south, but due to its height and massing will not interfere with views of the spire of the
church. The proposed terracotta cladding of the new building will also present an
improvement on the stark grey concrete of the rear of the town hall and help to make
the edge of the conservation area less severe. Care will however need to be taken in
tone and reflectiveness of this material.
The Victoria Embankment Conservation Area: Located approximately 190 metres
south of the proposed development. Mature tree cover and modern development in
the form of the inner ring road and Victoria Road roundabout mean there is no visual
or link between the development the conservation area, as such there is no identified
impact.
Summary Conclusion
The NPPF makes it clear that when considering the impact on a designated heritage
asset, that great weight should be given to conserving that asset. The proposal will
not result in the destruction of or damage to any designated heritage asset. Relevant
significance has been identified for each designated asset including anything of
significance in its surroundings and there will be no substantial harm or loss to that
significance.
The level of harm identified for buried archaeological deposits is however high, but
can be can be mitigated for through a scheme of archaeological excavation and
recording. Levels of harm to other heritage assets both designated and nondesignated outside the site boundary are however minor at worst and with detailed
design work relating to lighting of the new building, final choice of cladding material
and consideration of landscaping between new build and the River Skerne can be
further mitigated. Indeed the east and north elevation of the new building being lower
than the town hall and in material colours such as terracotta which are more familiar
to the largely brick town centre, will have tempering effect on the current monolithic
concrete wall of the Town Hall producing a minor improvement to the setting of the
conservation area.
The NPPF seeks new development which will make a positive contribution to local
character and distinctiveness. While the design and materials of the proposed new
4
AE0137 August 2013
building are clearly contemporary and not pastiche, it does take several themes from
the surrounding area such as a roof line no higher than the transepts of the
neighbouring St.Cuthberts church, and the use of a terracotta facing material to
recognise the overwhelming use of brick throughout the town centre. It has the
benefit of removing a very visible car park, never a good foreground to a view of a
conservation area, and it does introduce varying roof heights and break up the large
expanse of concrete that is the rear of the Town Hall.
In conclusion the proposed development will not cause any substantial harm to
designated heritage assets. Mitigation should be put in place to ensure that a suitable
lighting scheme is devised so that the new building does not compete with
St.Cuthberts at night or during the dark half of the year; similarly a landscaping
scheme is required to ensure that the new build enhances the approach to the
conservation area from the east and to the south of St.Cuthbert’s churchyard.
The development will cause harm to identified but non-designated archaeological
deposits associated with a medieval manor house of the bishop’s of Durham. This
can be mitigated for by a scheme of archaeological excavation, recording and
publication with opportunities for community involvement and which can be secured
by a planning condition.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to the staff of Crown Street Reference Library, Tim Rainford of Napper
Architects, to Heather Nelson Conservation Officer, Adrian Hobbs and Jill Thwaite of
Darlington Borough Council; Catherine Dewar of English Heritage; Michael Purdey,
Ed Sidey and Ray Nugent of Willmott-Dixon. Lee McFarlane and Clare Henderson of
the Durham County Council Archaeology Service. Particular thanks go to Peter
Ryder architectural historian and former Darlington resident for permission to use his
unpublished analysis of the Bishop’s Manor House.
Report author: Niall Hammond, Archaeo-Environment Ltd
5
AE0137 August 2013
CONTENTS
Summary and acknowledgements
2
1.0
Introduction
7
2.0
Location
8
3.0
Planning Policy
9
4.0
Scoping and Methodology
12
5.0
The historic evolution of the development site
14
6.0
Archaeological Evaluation
37
7.0
The Proposed Development
38
8.0
Impacts on Designated Heritage Assets
40
8.1
The Town Centre Conservation Area
40
8.2
St.Cuthbert’s Church
53
8.3
The Victoria Embankment Conservation Area
55
9.0
Non-designated Heritage Assets in the immediate vicinity
57
9.1
The Site of the Bishop’s Manor or Palace
57
9.2
The Darlington Poor House
60
9.3
The Lead Yard
62
9.4
The River Skerne River Terraces
63
10.0 Heritage Impact Assessment Summary
64
11.0 Proposed Mitigation
64
12.0 Conclusion
65
Bibliography
66
Appendix A
DCCAS provided pre-application advice response on 21/6/2013
Appendix B
Archaeological Evaluation Report (separate document)
Appendix C
Written Scheme of Archaeological Investigation to accompany
development works
6
AE0137 August 2013
1.0
Introduction
1.1
Archaeo-Environment (AE) were commissioned by Willmott-Dixon on behalf of
Darlington Borough Council to undertake studies and produce a report to identify the
heritage interest of a proposed development site for office accommodation to the rear
(east) of Darlington Town Hall. This report also assesses the impact of the proposed
development on the identified heritage significance of heritage assets such as buried
archaeology, historic buildings and their settings.
1.2
The Town Hall is a modern ‘brutalist’ concrete structure completed in 1972 and is the
principal office of the unitary authority of Darlington Borough Council and the
proposed development will see construction of new office accommodation to the rear
(east) of the Town Hall on land currently used as a car park fronting on to the River
Skerne and bounded by the Grade I listed church of St.Cuthbert to the north. The site
is located on the south-eastern edge of the historic town centre of Darlington which is
within the historic county of Durham.
1.2
This report describes the location and historic development of the proposed
development site and its environs, and provides both an assessment of its heritage
significance and that of other heritage assets (both designated and non-designated)
within a study area. This includes an assessment of the contribution of setting to the
significance of historic assets such as listed buildings within the study area.
1.3
This heritage statement in addition to an assessment of the site’s historic
development, heritage interest and the contribution of setting also includes a
summary of the results of an archaeological evaluation of the site undertaken by
Archaeological Services Durham University (ASDU) in early July 2013. This was
undertaken to a written scheme of investigation (WSI) prepared by AE and agreed
with the Durham County Council Archaeology Service (DCCAS), specialist advisors
on this subject to the Borough Council.
1.4
Following the identification of the heritage interest and significance of the
development site and its environs, a heritage impact assessment has been
undertaken to identify how the proposed development impacts upon each of the
identified heritage assets and their settings. Conclusions are then made regarding
the acceptability of the scheme when judged against planning policy and where
appropriate mitigation measures are proposed.
1.5
This report has been lodged with the OASIS: (Online AccesS to the Index of
archaeological investigations) scheme with the reference archaeoe1-1572431 and a
copy will in due course be lodged with the Durham Historic Environment Record.
1
http://oasis.ac.uk/
7
AE0137 August 2013
2.0
Location, geology and topography
The proposed development at Feethams is located on land currently used as a car
park to the rear (east) of Darlington Town Hall. The site is centred on NGR NZ 29081
14353 at a mean altitude of 38m aOD and in its entirety extends to approximately
0.25 hectares. To the east the site is bounded by the River Skerne, to the north the
churchyard of St.Cuthbert’s Church and to the south an area formerly occupied by
the town’s bus station but currently an open car park pending redevelopment (Figure
1). The solid geology of the site is Permian and Triassic sandstones including Bunter
and Keuper deposits of between 298-220 million years ago. These are overlain by
boulder clay and morainic drift from the last (Devensian) ice age which ended around
10,000 BC. These are observed as sands and gravels alongside the River Skerne
which are in turn overlain in places by post-glacial peat deposits.
© Archaeo-Environment, Crown copyright 2013. All rights reserved. Licence number 100042279.
Figure 1. Location of proposed development.
8
AE0137 August 2013
3.0
Planning policy
3.1
The government’s policy on development and the historic environment is set out
within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which was published on 27
March 2012, replacing all previous Planning Policy Statements. Prior to the
publication of the NPPF, the previous policy on the historic environment was
contained in PPS 5 (2010) and supplemented by a practice guide produced by
English Heritage, ‘PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment: Historic Environment
Planning Practice Guide (2010)’. The government and English Heritage have not
formally agreed a methodology to meet the NPPF, but the Practice Guide which was
originally published with PPS5 has not been withdrawn. Therefore the approach to
assessing significance in this document follows the approach outlined in the original
PPS5 practice guide.
3.2
The central theme of the NPPF is the ‘presumption in favour of sustainable
development’, set out in twelve core land-use planning principles which underpin both
plan-making and decision-taking. Although matters relevant to the historic
environment are scattered throughout these principles, particularly design, urban and
countryside policies, it is the section on Conserving and Enhancing the Historic
Environment which specifically supersedes PPS 5, whilst following that document’s
significance-led approach to decision-taking.
3.3
Within the NPPF, the overall approach to making planning decisions requires an
understanding of the significance of a heritage asset before decisions are made
relating to the future management of that asset. The government’s objectives in
paragraph 128 of the NPPF state that applicants should be required to describe the
significance of any heritage assets affected including any contribution made by
setting. Significance is defined as the value an asset has because of its heritage
interest, while defining heritage interest as architectural, archaeological, historic or
artistic interest. This report is designed to meet that objective.
3.4
The NPPF states that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and should be
conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. Three key factors are
identified to be taken into account by LPAs when considering planning matters
affecting heritage assets:




3.5
the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets
and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation;
the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to
sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and
the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local
character and distinctiveness.
opportunities to draw on the contribution made by the historic environment to
the character of a place.
Para 128 of the NPPF also states that in as a minimum the relevant historic
environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed
using appropriate expertise where necessary. Where a site on which development is
proposed includes or has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological
9
AE0137 August 2013
interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate
desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation.
3.6
Para 132 of the NPPF places ‘great weight’ on the conservation of historic assets
when considering the impact of proposed development, and requires clear and
convincing justification of any harm or loss. It is clear that substantial harm to or loss
of designated heritage assets of the highest significance, should be wholly
exceptional.
3.6
More specifically, para 133 of the NPPF requires developments which will result in
total loss of significance to achieve substantial public benefits or to show that no
viable or reasonable use can be found in the medium term.
3.7
The consideration of the contribution of setting to the significance of heritage assets
is referred to on several occasions in the NPPF where setting is defined 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’.
3.8
Guidance pertinent to this study regarding setting was produced by English Heritage
in 2011, ‘The Setting of Heritage Assets (2011)’. The guidance notes that
consideration of setting is necessarily a matter of informed judgement, and identifies
its role as making sure this takes place within a clear framework and is as
transparent and consistent as possible. In this study setting is therefore considered
with this document in mind while addressing how it contributes to the significance and
understanding of the various heritage assets in question.
3.9
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act. 1990
The act allows for the designation and protection of individual historic buildings which
may be listed at varying grades of importance. In addition the 1990 act also provides
protection under section 66 for the setting of listed buildings.
3.10
The Darlington Town Centre Conservation Area was designated on the 1 July 1976,
in May 1990 the boundary was altered to bring in the Crown Street and Bondgate
areas. A second conservation area to the south-east of the proposed development
Victoria Embankment Conservation Area, was designated on 10th May 1990.
conservation area character appraisals (CACA), were completed for both areas in
2010 and 2007 respectively.
3.11
There are a high number of listed buildings within a short distance of the proposed
development, these are however either contained within the designated conservation
areas or due to intervening development have no direct relationship with the
development site. Consequently and as discussed further below, the impacts on
many of these listed buildings is not considered individually but collectively as part of
the conservation area. Only where a specific building has designed or valued
10
AE0137 August 2013
fortuitous view or setting which maybe directly impacted upon by the proposed
development is it discussed individually.
Figure 2. Listed buildings (red) and conservation areas (blue) in the environs of the proposed
development (shaded light red in centre).
3.12
3.13
Local Development Framework (LDF)
Policies have also been devised by the planning authority Darlington Borough
Council relating to the historic environment. These are contained in the Darlington
Local Development Framework Core Strategy which was adopted in May 2011. This
is the foundation of the developing Darlington Local Development Framework, and it
replaces the key polices saved from the previous local plan relating to heritage and
archaeology. Another document produced as part of the LDF is the ‘Making Places
and Accommodating Growth DPD’ which is currently in draft/consultation stage but
contains further detailed policies on the heritage of the borough. In particular the
following policies from the core strategy and ‘Growth DPD’ are pertinent to this
particular development.
LDF Policy CS14: Promoting Local Character and Distinctiveness contains the
following relevant policies;
The distinctive character of the Borough’s built, historic, natural and environmental
townscapes, landscapes and strong sense of place will be protected and, where
appropriate, enhanced by:
A. Protecting and improving the distinctive character of Darlington town centre, the
urban area and the countryside including:
1. the character and appearance of the central area skyline such as the landmarks of
the Market and Station clock towers, St Cuthbert’s spire and St John’s Tower;
11
AE0137 August 2013
E. Protecting, enhancing and promoting the quality and integrity of Darlington’s
distinctive designated national or nationally significant built heritage and archaeology
as well as:
11. buildings, their settings and features of historic and archaeological local
importance in Conservation Areas;
12. buildings, features and landmarks on the local list;
13. buildings and features that reflect Darlington’s railway, industrial and Quaker
heritage; and
14. buildings on the local ‘at risk’ register.
3.14
Draft ‘Making Places and Accommodating Growth DPD’ Policy MGP21: Protecting
Darlington’s Heritage Assets’ contains the following relevant policies;
B) Listed Buildings
Development involving the alteration, extension or change of use of a listed building
or construction of any structure within its curtilage must:
a) protect its significance as a listed building;
b) protect existing historic hard and soft landscaping features including trees,
hedges, walls, fences and surfaces;
c) protect historic plot boundaries and layouts; and
d) ensure the optimum viable use of the building.
Any development affecting the setting of a listed building will be permitted if the
proposal conserves or enhances either its significance as a listed building and/or the
contribution its setting makes to its significance.
C) Archaeological Sites and Monuments
Development proposals involving ground disturbance in Areas of Special
Archaeological Significance (as identified on the Policies Map), must be
accompanied by an archaeological evaluation report, except for all householder
development and extensions, and for alterations to existing commercial premises of
40m2 or less, unless the proposed development directly affects or is within 50m of a
Scheduled Ancient Monument. Outside Areas of Special Archaeological Significance,
planning applications on sites of more than 1 hectare must be accompanied by an
archaeological evaluation report, unless the area is already known to have been
archaeologically sterilised by previous development such as mineral extraction etc.
4.0
Scoping and Methodology
4.1
Scoping. Prior to this report being written, opinions were sought by DBC on the
heritage issues involved from both Durham County Council Archaeology Service and
English Heritage. DCCAS provided a full pre-application advice response on
21/6/2013 (Appendix A). Earlier discussions with English Heritage identified a
number of issues which should be considered. This included the potential for buried
archaeology on site which EH identified as the role of DCCAS to lead on. EH’s major
interest in the project were concerned with Issues of contextual design taking account
of existing documents such as the Town Centre Conservation Area Appraisal (2010)
and the Town Centre Fringe Conservation Management Plan (2010), and the impacts
12
AE0137 August 2013
on the contribution of setting to the heritage interest of neighboring designated
historic assets and in particular the Grade I listed church of St.Cuthbert. EH
suggested that the new building should ‘sit quietly’ and avoid ‘statement’ features on
the corner return adjacent to St.Cuthbert’s Church, they also saw the proposed
development as an opportunity to soften the modern developments in the Feethams
area. A meeting was held with EH at the offices of Napper Architects on 24/6/2013 to
discuss the proposed design. At this meeting and in subsequent email
correspondence2, EH agreed the following: that the scale, form and massing of the
proposed building were appropriate for the setting, but wanted to ensure that the
detailed design reflected the particular character of Darlington while adopting a
contemporary design, that the building needed to visually sit firmly on the ground and
that consideration needed to be given to the levels of light at night and the impact on
the setting of the church as the dominant townscape feature.
4.2
Methodology. The production of this report has followed a staged programme of
work beginning with a desk based assessment including an HER (Historic
Environment Record) search and search of documentary and archive material. This
was followed by the agreement with DCCAS of a Written Scheme of Investigation for
evaluation/trial excavation which was in due course undertaken by Archaeological
Services Durham University and monitored by AE and DCCAS. Further survey work
was undertaken to complete a setting study of the site and its environs, before the
results of these various phases of work were incorporated into this heritage report.
With regard to the setting study, view points were identified to represent the identified
heritage interests of assets in the study area, as well as documented important
viewpoints from conservation area character appraisals.
4.3
For all heritage assets identified an assessment was made of their four areas of
heritage interest which the NPPF defines as ‘archaeological, architectural, artistic or
historic’ also noting that significance derives ‘not only from a heritage asset’s physical
presence, but also from its setting’ (NPPF, 2012, 56). For each historic asset or
group of assets the report provides an identification of the heritage interest, the
contribution of setting to this and uses this to assess the impact of the proposed
development.
4.4
At all times the work has been guided by various guidance notes and policy
documents, in particular Yorkshire, the Humber and the North-East: A Regional
Statement of Good Practice for Archaeology in the Development Process (Regional
Archaeological DM Officers 2011); Standard and Guidance: for archaeological
excavation (IFA 2008); MoRPHE PPN3: Archaeological Excavation English Heritage
(2008); Guidelines for Environmental Archaeology: a guide to the theory and practice
of methods from sampling and recording to post-excavation (second edition), English
Heritage (2011); Shared Visions: The North East Regional Research Framework for
the Historic Environment Petts, D and C Gerrard (2006); The Setting of Heritage
Assets English Heritage (2011).
2
Catherine Dewar(EH) to Tim Rainford (Napper) dated 9/7/2013
13
AE0137 August 2013
5.0
The Historic Evolution of the Development Site.
The following text is based upon an archaeological desk based assessment
undertaken by Archaeological Services University of Durham for Darlington Borough
Council in 20083. This was intended to identify the archaeological interest of potential
development sites either side of Feethams Lane (figure 3), and so guide future
development. In agreement with DCCAS and to inform the current development
scheme this has been updated with research subsequent to 2008 and additional
information more focussed upon the specific site of the new office development.
Figure 3. Survey area (black boundaries) of Archaeological Services University of Durham
Desk Based Assessment of 2008.The proposed development site is shaded red.
5.1
The prehistoric and Roman period (up to 5th Century AD)
There is no direct evidence of prehistoric activity on the proposed development site.
However, there is evidence that the surrounding area was exploited in prehistory;
during archaeological excavations at the market place, late Mesolithic or early
Neolithic flint bladelets were found4 (HER 4812). An elk jaw bone and associated
peat deposits were discovered on the banks of the River Skerne 2km north of the
proposed development area, at a depth of c.3m and were dated to between 10,000
and 6700 BP5 (HER 4817). It is likely therefore that the Skerne, which runs
immediately to the east of the proposed development area, was exploited in
prehistory, and there is potential for associated palaeo-environmental and prehistoric
deposits to survive.
3
Feethams, Darlington Town Centre archaeological desk-based assessment on behalf of Darlington
Borough Council. Archaeological Services University of Durham, Report 1922, May 2008
4
Archaeological Services University of Durham. 1994
5
Huntley & Gidney 1995
14
AE0137 August 2013
5.2
Darlington lies approximately equidistant between two known Roman north-south
routes, Dere Street 7km to the west at Piercebridge, and Cade’s Road 6km to the
east around Sadberge. The closest identified significant Romano-British activity is at
Faverdale East Industrial Estate 3km to the north of Darlington town centre. Here
archaeological excavation identified continuous occupation from the Iron Age into the
Roman period (HER 9756). Darlington itself has provided two small Roman coin
hoards (HER 1517; 1533), both well to the east of the town centre, but no other
significant material of this period has been found. There is however some speculation
that a Roman fort or more likely a defended farmstead or native settlement may have
been sited at Darlington although no supporting evidence has as yet been identified6.
5.3
The medieval period (5th century to 1540)
The first traces of a permanent settlement which may have been a precursor of the
modern town have been identified in the Greenbank area of the town (approximately
1km northwest of the study area) Here Anglian burials of the 5/7th century were
discovered in 18767, and indicate the presence of an early medieval settlement in the
vicinity. There are also indications that an early medieval church of perhaps the
10/11th century was present near the centre of Darlington, suggested by the
discovery of early architectural fragments on the site of St. Cuthbert’s church to the
north of the proposed development area in the 19th century during restoration work
(Wooler & Boyd 1913, 115-119). These sculptures included part of a gravestone
known as a ‘hogback’, a decorated slab and two incomplete cross fragments found
during restoration works in 1862-5 (HER 733-736). Along with the street name suffix
‘gate’, the hogback is also associated with Scandinavian influences, perhaps related
to Danish settlement of North Yorkshire and the Tees Valley in the 9th and 10th
centuries.
5.4
The discovery of a series of graves during excavations in the 1990’s at the southern
end of the Market Place and which were on a different alignment to those associated
with the current Church8, also supports the notion that an early medieval church was
present in the Market Place area. Darlington itself first appears in the written records
in a land grant by Styr, son of Ulphus, to the see of Durham in 1003-1016; this was
licensed by Ethelred the Unready, and referred to “Darlington and its dependencies”9.
The place name Darlington’ has Anglo-Saxon origins; early references suggest
spelling of ‘Dearthingtun’ or ‘Dearnington’ which may come from the word ‘Derne or
Derning’, an alternative for the River Skerne (ibid). The term ‘gate’, a common suffix
for road names around the centre of Darlington e.g. Blackgate, Priestgate etc,
derives from the Scandinavian for street.
5.5
It has been suggested that Darlington may have been a Saxon burgh – a fortified
town. Wooler stated that this burgh was “protected by a ditch and rampart of earth
surmounted by a wooden stockade formed of one or two rows of stout palisades,
pointed at the top and fixed deeply in the ground”10. He maintained that these
6
Clack & Pearson 1978
Miket and Pocock 1976, 62-74
8
Archaeological Services University of Durham 2004
9
Surtees 1823, 350
10
Wooler & Boyd 1913, 43-45
7
15
AE0137 August 2013
boundary defences extended west from the River Skerne (which formed the eastern
boundary), along East Street, crossing Northgate and turning south at Union Street.
The western boundary continued south through properties between Skinnergate and
High Row, crossing Blackwellgate and Houndgate, and turning east at the rear of No
37 Blackwellgate (Post Office). The course of the ditch followed a route roughly
parallel with Beaumont Street back to the river. Wooler cites evidence for these
defences from traces of the ditch uncovered in Mechanic’s Yard and on
Blackwellgate, and remains of the rampart in the garden of No 37 Blackwellgate,
indicating an eastern return, along with further evidence discovered in 1912 in
Feethams Field. Most of this route appears to be supposition, although Wooler
recounts a “Saxon ditch” 8ft deep, 16ft wide at the bottom and 25.5ft wide at the
top11. He also noted that the rampart was still visible in places. No drawings of the
ditch survive and there is no mention of finds from the ditch, and so there has been
no archaeological confirmation of these findings and theories. Evaluation work by
ASDU in 2009 however did identify a large ditch of likely medieval date at the rear of
Houndgate and it maybe this is related to Wooler’s observations (see para 5.37
below). The ditch may therefore never have existed as single feature, but has been
created by conflating many ditches of different dates some or none of which may be
Saxon in date. Should Wooler’s theory prove accurate the proposed development
site would be within this enclosed/defended Saxon town.
5.6
The presence of an early Church near the Market Place also indicates that the
Market Place may be early medieval in origin as well. However, alternative
possibilities include Bondgate, a wide open street where extensive commercial
activity continued into the post-medieval period and which was the centre of a
separate township in the later medieval period. This division may have had its origins
in the early medieval period, although parallel developments of a separate Bondgate
(a street belonging to bondsman of a feudal lord, in this case the Bishop of Durham),
exist at Bishop Auckland and the now deserted settlement of Walworth to the west of
Darlington and it may well represent what is in effect a separate small settlement or
village appended to the existing town and under different feudal ownership rather
than an early market place.
5.7
The Bishop of Durham, William de Carileph, began the building of St. Cuthbert’s
Church (HER 1512: Grade I Listed) in 1084; it was a collegiate church to provide for
the secular priests he transferred there when Durham Cathedral became exclusively
for Benedictine monks after the Conquest. The original building was replaced by the
present church which was founded by Bishop Hugh de Puiset in 1192: it is possible
that this was situated on reclaimed land outside the original boundaries of the town.
At this time the church had burial rights, implying that Darlington was an important
administrative, economic and religious centre12. A medieval effigy of about 12th
century date can be found in Darlington Church (HER2552).
5.8
The college consisted of a Dean and four prebendaries. The known Deanery
building, possibly replacing an earlier structure was constructed in the 15th century
(HER 4028) and was located at the south-east corner of the market place where the
11
12
Wooler & Boyd 1913, 45
Cookson 2003
16
AE0137 August 2013
Dolphin Centre currently stands. St. Cuthbert’s Church and the Deanery were vested
in the Crown in 1550. The Deanery was then leased to the Earl of Westmoreland.
The 1st edition Ordnance Survey plan shows the Deanery on the corner of Feethams
and Market Place. It is not named on the 2nd edition Ordnance Survey plan of 1898,
but is known to have been demolished around 1901. A medieval stone lined well
(HER 4033) was discovered on the west side of Feethams Lane during groundwork
developments for the Dolphin Centre, and it is possible this may relate to the
Deanery.
5.9
In 1183 Bishop Hugh de Puiset commissioned the Bolden Book, an account of his
landholdings and their value in which Darlington is described as a moderately
prosperous town, based on a mixed economy of arable lands, cattle grazing, milling,
smithing, fishing, hen rearing, smallholding and cloth-dying (Austin 1982, 57). Bishop
Hatfield’s Survey of 1380 states that Darlington had 39 free tenants that occupied 57
parcels of land and that these formed part of the “ancient and proper waste”,
including Sadbergate, Cockyrtongate, Duremsgate and Prestgate13.
5.10
Along with St.Cuthbert’s church and the Deanery, the other principal medieval
building in Darlington was the Bishop’s Manor, sometimes called Bishop’s Palace
which also incorporated St. James’s Chapel (HER 1519; 1520). While St.Cuthbert’s
church is very much in the Transitional and Early English styles with pointed arches,
the few surviving images of the manor house seems to show a largely Romanesque
building with round-arched windows. The manor house was allegedly built by Bishop
Pudsey (le Puiset), around 116414, although not much seems to be known as to its
medieval history. The manor stood in a surrounding park reputedly enclosed under
Bishop Bek (1287-1311) and which became known as the Hallgarth. The term
‘Hallgarth’ was restricted to the manorial enclosure on the west bank of the Skerne
around the manor, while further enclosed parkland was on the opposite east bank15.
This area was still referred to as High and Low Parks into the 19th century and is
reflected in the modern street name of Parkgate. Attached to the manor was also the
Chantry Chapel of St James. This was valued at 60s per annum in the Valor
Ecclesiasticus of 1535, Thomas Emerson being the chantry priest, succeeded in
1548 by Ralph Cootes16.
5.11
The Bishop of Durham possessed several manor houses or ‘palaces’ of various sizes
around his estates in addition to his principal residences at Durham and Auckland
Castles. These included Bishop Middleham (now an earthwork), and at Seaton
Holme in Easington, a late 13th century house which with later additions still survives
largely intact. Cookson suggests that the manor house at Darlington was only
occasionally occupied by the bishop himself, but regularly used by his officials as was
likely the case with many of these manor houses which were necessary to administer
the secular side of the Bishop’s estates and affairs. The manor also provided a facility
to accommodate prominent visitors to the town and it is recorded that Margaret
13
Wooler & Boyd 1913, 15-19
Clack and Pearson 1978, 8
15
Cookson 23-24
16
Longstaffe 198-199
14
17
AE0137 August 2013
Tudor, daughter of Henry VII, is recorded as having spent a night at the Bishop’s
Manor in Darlington in 150317.
5.12
In 1575 much of Darlington was destroyed in a great fire, when some 273 properties
are recorded as being lost. The fire appears to have been centred on the High Row
and Skinnergate areas leaving St.Cuthbert’s church, the Deanery and the Bishop’s
Manor unaffected with no mention being made in the official Halmote Records of any
repairs required to these buildings. Rebuilding of the town would seem to have
retained much of the medieval plan and property boundaries.
5.13
The Manor was however said to have been partly destroyed in the Civil War (164251), but after the Restoration in 1660 it was repaired by Bishop Cosin; on April 18th
1668 he collected an assessment of 3s6d per oxgang in Bondgate, to pay for the
leading of slates, stones, timber and brick for both the manor house (‘bishop’s hall’)
and the toll booth18. Despite this, it does not seem to have been often favoured as an
actual residence for the Bishop, and in 1703 the antiquary Ralph Thoresby was
concerned to see ‘the …house of the bishop of Durham converted in to a Quaker’s
workhouse’19.
5.14
Having been initially leased from the bishop for use as a workhouse, the Manor was
bought by the town in 1808, when the main north-south range appears to have been
demolished and replaced by new workhouse buildings, partly financed by a bequest
of £100 from a Quaker Gideon Gravett Phillips20. These retained the north wing of the
old hall containing the chapel of St.James which is still shown on the 1:1,050 scale
Ordnance Survey map of 1856 (figure 8). In 1870 the Workhouse was relocated to
Yarm Road and the buildings sold to Alderman Richard Luck for either £200021 or
£250022, who soon afterwards demolished them and the remainder of the Old Hall,
constructing Luck’s Terrace and Luck’s Square on the site.
17
Cookson, 25
Longstaffe, 143-5
19
Longstaffe, 153
20
Cookson 61
21
Pritchett, H.D. (1924) The History of the Parish Church of St Cuthbert, Darlington. Darlington,
William Dresser & Son, 20.
22
Victoria County History of Durham IV (2005) 92
18
18
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 4. Extract from Armstrong’s Map of County Durham 1768 showing the general layout
of the town much as it had been since medieval times and before any significant industrial
expansion. The development site is shown as a block of buildings south-east of the church of
St.Cuthbert and representing the Bishop’s manor.
5.15
The earliest description of the Manor is by John Leland, the famous antiquary, who
visited Darlington around 1538 and noted that ‘The Bisshop of Duresme hath a praty
palace in this toune’. Few images or descriptions however survive for the Manor
House, and which first appears on a plan of the town in 1768 (figure 4) and then only
in figurative form. Early estate maps of 1776 (figure 5) and 1789 (figure 6), either
don’t show the building or just mark its location with little detail other than suggesting
a courtyard building. It is not until after the major demolition works of 1808, that any
detail is shown with the new workhouse and north wing of the old hall on John
Wood’s 1826 town plan (figure 7). Finally on the Ordnance Survey of 1856 (figure 8),
an accurate ground plan of the surviving north wing marked as ‘Old Hall’ is provided.
Figure 5. Extract from an estate
plan of 1776 ‘A Plan of the
Revd. Mr Sissons Estate called
High Parks in the Township and
Borough of Darlington by
I.Mowbray’. (Darlington Local
History Library Acc No. 29121)
19
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 6. Extract from ‘A Plan of Feethams belonging to the Bishop of Durham in lease to Mrs
th
Lumley’ by John Mowbray September 15 1789. (Darlington Local History Library Acc No.
33823).
Figure 7. Extract from John Wood’s town map of Darlington (1826), the Poor House occupies
the site of the proposed development.
20
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 8. Extract from the Ordnance Survey 1,1050 scale plan of Darlington of 1856.
5.16 It is also from the 18th century that the few surviving illustrations of the manor house
originate. Topographic prints of towns and country house became increasing popular
during the 18th century and there are several views of Darlington from the higher
ground now occupied by Bank Top Station looking west across the open ground of
the Bishop’s Low and High Park and the River Skerne to the focal point of
St.Cuthbert’s Church (figure 9). This distant view of the manor house was also
supplemented by a small unattributed sketch now in Darlington Library Local Studies
collection (figure 10), which is almost identical to that shown in Wilkinson’s more
finely realised drawing23.
23
Darlington Local Studies Library acc no. PH3122
21
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 9 (above). A prospect of Darlington by Samuel Wilkinson 1760, looking west from the
high ground now occupied by Bank Top Station. The Bishop’s Manor is seen to the left on the
far bank of the River Skerne. The land in the foreground was originally the Bishop’s High and
Low Deer Park.
Figure 10 (below). A small sketch titled ‘The Bishop’s Palace, East View’, unattributed and
dated 1766. Almost identical to that shown in Wilkinson’s more finely realised drawing above.
(Darlington Local Studies Library acc no. PH3122)
5.17
The building shown in the images of 1760 and 1766, appears to consist of a long
north south range of two storeys separated by a string course and with projecting
gabled attic windows At its north end is an adjoining small north wing which project
eastwards towards the river and which has attic windows in the gable end over what
appears to be a mullion and transom centrally placed window on the first floor. To the
rear of the building can be seen further slightly lower structures forming possibly an
extension to the south together with a wider group of buildings, perhaps representing
22
AE0137 August 2013
a manorial complex of stables, barns etc. Substantially more architectural detail is
shown in a wood cut from Longstaffe’s History of Darlington (1854) and labelled ’view
of the Manorhouse temp Geo.Allan, archaeol’, presumably a reference to George
Allen, ‘the Antiquary’ (1736-1800), According to the index it is engraved from an old
cut by [Thomas] Bewick (figure 11). The view is presumably also mid 18th century
and once again shows the east elevation facing on to the River Skerne. The north
wing can clearly be seen to have three round-arched lights, the whole building is well
buttressed and has at least five chimney stacks. A water colour dated 1764 (figure
12), and signed ‘Norman Crosse’ also shows what appears to be a more detailed
view of the east elevation of the manor House, built of stone with a pan-tile roof, the
north wing containing the chantry chapel of St.James can be seen to the right24. This
however maybe a 19th century copy of the 18th century Bewick cut seen at figure 11.
Figure 11(above). A wood cut from Longstaffe’s History of Darlington (1854) and labelled
’view of the Manorhouse temp Geo.Allan, archaeol’, presumably a reference to George Allen,
‘the Antiquary’ (1736-1800), According to the index it is engraved from an old cut by [Thomas]
th
Bewick. The view is presumably mid 18 century and shows the east elevation facing on to
the River Skerne.
24
Darlington Local Studies Library acc no. PH5067 L566A
23
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 12 (above). A water colour dated 1764 and signed Norman Crosse and showing what
appears to be a more detailed view of the east elevation of the manor House, built of stone
with a pan-tile roof. The north wing containing the chantry chapel of St.James can be seen to
th
th
the right. This maybe a 19 century copy of the 18 century Bewick cut seen at Figure 11
(Darlington Local Studies Library acc no. PH5067 L566A).
5.18
25
A further view of the Manor, this time showing the west elevation is also found in the
Darlington Library collection25 (figure 13). This view dated 1813 shows some
considerable architectural detail, with the main north-south range and the adjoining
north wing which can be seen to project to the west as well as the east. The ‘1813’
date is however problematical, as it was clearly drawn before the recorded demolition
of 1808 and construction of the work house buildings. Nevertheless this is a good
detailed drawing, showing the west side of the main block, with three attic dormers on
this side, and on the left the projecting end of the north wing. On its ground floor are
two windows under flattened four-centred heads, and on the first, breaking through a
chamfered set-back, two taller ones also under arched heads of varying form. On the
right return of the wing is a round-headed recess at mid-height, and then, in the angle
between wing and main block, a big lateral chimney stack. The main block, on this
side of two broad bays with a large stepped buttress between them and another
apparently set diagonally at the south-west angle, has a chamfered off-set at around
first-floor level (considerably lower than that on the wing). There is a large arched
doorway at the north end, and various mullioned windows to the ground floor further
south; the first floor has two small windows, one round-arched, directly over the
doorway, then an irregular series of windows, three under earlier arches, two pointed
and the southern, apparently richly moulded, semicircular.
acc no. PH2933 L56B
24
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 13 Sketch dated 1813 and titled ‘Old Bishop’s Palace. This shows the west facing
elevation of the manor facing towards Feetham’s Lane. The date is problematic as by 1813
the range of buildings to the right of the large chimney had been demolished to make way for
the new workhouse leaving the north wing (Darlington Local Studies Library acc no. PH2933
L56B).
5.19
A few further internal illustrations of the manor as surviving after the demolition of the
south wing in 1808 were recorded by Longstaffe both in his history of Darlington
(1864), and also in a separate article26 (Figure 14).
Figure 14 (above left) Sketch from an article of 1868 by Longstaffe and showing part of the
chantry chapel of St.James in the north wing of the Bishop’s manor. (Above right) Drawing of
an arch in the Old Hall at Darlington from Longstaffe’s History of Darlington of 1864.
26
Transactions of the Architectural & Archaeological Society of Durham & Northumberland (1868)
25
AE0137 August 2013
5.20
In the 1870 demolition it would appear that four medieval arches were saved from the
old building and these are shown in an undated photograph in Darlington Library27
(figure 15). Two were taken to Alderman Luck’s house in Middleton One Row and are
now protected as a Grade II listed structure 28. Two other archways said to have been
from the Chapel of St James were apparently re-erected in the garden between
Luck’s Terrace and Feethams House; one seems to have been removed to the
town’s South Park to form part of a grotto; the other remained on the site but had
gone by the 1960s.
Figure 15. Arches from the Manor House demolished in 1870 and re-erected at Middleton
One Row (left and right); and in garden of Feethams House (centre) but now lost.
5.21
The manor within its Hallgarth enclosure was most likely the focal point of a number
of buildings necessary for the Bishop to collect tithes, administer his estates and
support manor and staff. These are likely to have included a gatehouse on to
Feethams Lane, stable, brewhouse and a tithe barn. Only for the last of these is there
any record when a tithe barn is mentioned in the 15th century (HER 1515) which
‘once stood in Feetham’s Field’29.
5.22
The south side of St.Cuthbert’s churchyard abutting the development site has had a
long history of educational use. In 1416 the almoner at Durham paid 14 shillings to “a
schoolmaster coming from Darlington”30. In a certificate made in 1546 under the
Chantries Act of Henry VIII an endowed Grammar School is mentioned; this was ‘The
Chauntrie of All Sayntes’, founded by Robert Marshall31; (HER 1510). In 1548 the
chantry was confiscated and was continued by an order by Sir Walter Mildmay and
Robert Keylway by warrant. The school was re-founded by charter or letters patent in
1567 and re-named “the Free Grammar School of Queen Elizabeth”32. Parts were
rebuilt in 1650-52 and it was in decline in 1705. The school formerly stood to the east
of St. Cuthbert’s Church; it eventually closed in 1813 and the site was added to the
27
o
Acc N . PH2985
28 Ryder, 2010, 2
29
Longstaffe 1854, ciii
30
Page 1905, 388
31
ibid
32
Page 1905, 388
26
AE0137 August 2013
burial ground. A new school was built to the southeast of the church, and an upper
storey was added in 184633. This addition was attested by a stone slab inscribed
“ROYAL GRAMMAR SCHOOL ENLARGED A.D. 1846” now built into a wall against
the River Skerne in the southeast corner of the churchyard34 (HER 3736). The school
existed until the early half of the 20th century.
st
Figure 16. 1 edition OS map 1:1,056 surveyed in 1856 showing the town centre.
5.23
33
34
As the 19th century progressed Darlington began to expand through trade, banking,
industry (especially the railways), and also the growing population which came with
these. Study of the successive Ordnance Survey maps of the town from c1860, 1881
and 1898 (figures 16, 18 & 19), show the gradual expansion of the town, especially
after 1890 when the east bank of the Skerne, the former High and Low Park of the
Bishop of Durham become developed with mill and industrial buildings along the river
side opposite the Manor House site (figure 17), and further back with rows of terraced
housing. To the north of the site the Priestgate Mill complex of the Pease family
continued to expand dominating this area of the town and in particular with its
chimney dominating the skyline and detracting from the singular focal point of the
spire of St.Cuthbert’s which had been the tallest building in the town for some 700
years. The development site itself after the construction of the workhouse in 1808,
remains little altered up to and including the OS map of 1881-4 (figure 18), this is
however a slight conundrum as documentary evidence indicates ... ‘Alderman Luck is
recorded as having demolished the old Bishop’s Palace in 1870; fifty years later it
was described as ‘barbarously and wantonly destroyed to make room for cottages’.
Longstaffe 1854, 256
Ryder 1997, 18
27
AE0137 August 2013
Whatever the precise date of final demolition of the hall by the OS map of 1898 the
development site is clearly occupied by the housing of Luck’s Square and Luck’s
Terrace (figure 19).
Figure 17. The Skerne became increasingly constrained between engineered banks during
th
the 19 century, which supported a number of large mill buildings giving the area an
increasingly urban, industrial character. Above left, the view upstream from the Lead Yard
Bridge c.1890 with the chimney of Priestgate Mill in the background; above right Pease’s Low
Mill of 1812 was on the south bank of the Skerne directly opposite the Bishop’s Manor.
5.24
By the end of the 19th century the setting and character of the Town had altered
considerably from the largely rural market town of 100 years before. While the town
centre retained its medieval plan layout and Georgian brick housing, the growing
wealth of the town had seen a number of significant institutional and civic buildings
changed and replaced, including the demolition of the old Toll Booth in 1808, and the
appearance of a new generation of buildings with a heavy neo-gothic influence such
as Backhouse’s Bank on the High Row of 1864 and in particular the new Town and
market halls with its soaring clock tower of 1861-4 both by the renowned architect
Alfred Waterhouse. The clock tower in particular added yet another tall building to the
Darlington skyline to compete with the spire of St.Cuthbert’s. A protégé of
Waterhouse, another architect G.G.Hoskins moved to Darlington in 1864 and over
the following 40 years became largely responsible for Victorian Darlington with a
string of public and private commissions including Crown Street Library and many
fine villas for the town’s growing merchant class. Industrially the town saw a
considerable change with extensive railway infrastructure and manufacturing to the
north and east of the town centre with Banktop Station (1887), and its tall clock tower
and the line of the East Coast main line creating a strong built skyline to the east of
the town on the ridge above the River Skerne. The latter half of the century also saw
several new churches erected in this area, of particular note being St.John the
Evangelist on Neasham Road (1847), St.Hilda’s, Parkgate (1887-8) and Victoria
Road Methodist Church (now sadly minus its spire), and all of which added to an
increasingly diverse town roof top profile.
5.25
The development site had by 1900 had all above ground evidence for the Bishop’s
manor removed and was largely covered by the re-used workhouse range of c1808
now part of the brick built Luck’s Square and Terrace development. Feethams House
still faced onto Feethams Lane to the west, and to the south the last shred of rural
setting remained in the open pasture of Feethams Field, but even here by 1898 a
small iron foundry had been built (figure 19).
28
AE0137 August 2013
nd
Figure 18. OS 2
edition 1:2,500. map 1881-4
29
AE0137 August 2013
rd
Figure 19. OS 3 edition 1:2,500. map 1898
5.26
The modern period (1900 to present)
By the Ordnance Survey map of 1915 (figure 20), the development of the town and
surrounding area had removed practically all of the rural qualities on the south and
east of the town centre seen as late as the 1880’s. Only to the south did Feethams
Field remain undeveloped into the 20th century (figure 33). The area east of
Feethams remains essentially the same as in 1898, with the exception of a public
urinal placed in the northwest corner. The area around the site of the foundry is
shown as allotment gardens, with some buildings to the east on the bank of the
Skerne. The 20th century saw further industrial expansion of the town, much of it well
away from the town centre especially after the Second World War. One dramatic
addition to the Darlington skyline in the interwar period was the construction of an
electrical power station on Haughton Road. Construction started in 1939 and the
cooling towers were to dominate the town centre until their demolition in 1978 (figure
21)
30
AE0137 August 2013
rd
Figure 20. OS 3 edition 1:2,500. map 1915
Figure 21. Haughton Road electricity power station under construction in 1939 which was to
dominate the town’s skyline until its demolition in 1978 (see also figure 34).
31
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 22. OS 1:1,250. map 1956
5.27
The development area underwent substantial redevelopment in the 1960s and 70’s.
The bus depot moved from the Lead Yard to a new building further along Feethams
Lane (and which itself has now been demolished). Perhaps most dramatically for the
town, the Great North Road by pass on the A1 was completed in 1966 which while
removing traffic from the town, was also accompanied by the construction of the bête
noir of English Historic market towns the inner ring road. This saw considerable
numbers of historic buildings cleared to create St.Cuthbert’s Way along the east bank
of the Skerne opposite the development site, changing once more the setting of the
St.Cuthbert’s Church.
5.28
On the development site Luck’s Square and Luck’s Terrace were demolished in the
1960’s (figure 23 and figure 24). The new Town Hall designed in a modern
monolithic, ‘brutalist’ style by architects Williamson, Faulkner, Brown & Partners in
association with E.A Tornbohm the Borough Architect was constructed between 1969
and 1972 on the site of Feethams House on land originally part of the Hallgarth of the
Bishops Manor and where the gatehouse may originally have stood. The school in
the southwest part of the site was demolished and replaced with a car park. Initially
the land to the rear of the town hall on which the Manor had stood was laid out as
lawn, but by the 1980’s this had been converted to a car park which it remains in
2013. Close to the site is the Dolphin Centre (named after an Inn which previously
32
AE0137 August 2013
occupied the site), on the corner of Feethams and the Market Place. This leisure
centre, on the site of the old Deanery, was successfully integrated into the historic
town centre by use of high quality brick facing, roof height levels similar to
surrounding historic buildings and by sitting within the footprint of the medieval street
plan. It also cleverly linked and integrated with the function rooms of the Central Hall
of 1847.
Figure 23. The site of the Bishop’s manor in 1966 following demolition of Luck’s Terrace and
Luck’s Square, looking north-west towards the Market Place and the rear of the partially
demolished Feethams House. (Durham Record Database)
Figure 24. Aerial photograph of development site c.1967 following the demolition of Luck’s
Square and Terrace, and prior to the construction of the new Town Hall for which the
foundation stone was laid in November 1967. Clearance work for the inner ring road
(St.Cuthbert’s Way) can be seen on the near bank of the River Skerne.
33
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 25. The new Town Hall under construction c1969 (left), and as completed c1972.
Images taken looking south from the roof of St.Cuthbert’s Church (Durham Record Database)
Figure 26 OS 1,1250 1968-71
5.29
Previous archaeological work
Aside from the antiquarian observations of Edward Wooler in the late 19th and early
20th centuries, Darlington had seen little archaeological observation until the 1970’s.
Since this time and increasingly since the introduction of archaeology into the
34
AE0137 August 2013
planning process in 1990 with PPG16 there have been increasing numbers of
archaeological interventions which have added significantly to the understanding of
the town’s development.
5.30
To the south-west of the proposed site, five evaluation trenches were excavated west
of Feethams Lane and between Beaumont Street and Houndgate in 2000. The
results of the excavations indicated that although the evaluated area had been
substantially landscaped in recent years (modern made ground extended to a depth
of 1.75m in the west of the site), archaeological horizons survived below this
disturbance, which included sherds of animal bone and pottery. No evidence for
structures or cut features was uncovered (Johns 2000, 1-5; HER 6307).
5.31
Trial trenches were excavated in 2000 at 7-9 Houndgate immediately to the
northwest of the survey area. These excavations were limited due to the previous
development of the site. Despite this a layer of cobbling, a hearth, a pit and a number
of post and stake holes were identified. No firm dates could be given to the features
but they were all associated with the medieval and modern period (HER 4027).
5.32
To the north-west of the proposed development site excavations were conducted by
Archaeological Services Durham University during 1994 and 1995 in advance of the
re-paving of the market place area (HER 4000, 4812, 9555, 9556, 9567). Excavation
identified a river terrace running along the eastern edge of the market place on which
were found prehistoric stone tools. To the east of this terrace several stakes had
been driven into the subsoil, forming a boundary feature of late 10th-12th century
date. Along the top of the terrace a north-south ditch had been excavated, with a
palisade along its west edge. A series of parallel ditches were identified traversing
the site further to the west. These features are interpreted as representing the
eastern boundary of the town and together with a number of burials excavated as
part of the same work may be associated with a church situated in the market place
area which predates St Cuthbert’s Church.
5.33
All of the ditches apart from the most eastern one were cut by a series of graves.
There were 32 graves, containing a total of 21 poorly preserved skeletons. All graves
were aligned east-west with the head to the west. Several bore traces of coffin wood
or nails. Limited dating evidence from pottery fragments suggests that the graves
date to the mid-11th to mid-/late 14th centuries, whilst the layout of the graves in
conjunction with the pottery dating indicates 2 distinct phases of burial.
5.34
The excavation indicated that the churchyard went out of use before the end of the
14th century. The southern part of the churchyard remained open ground up to the
present day. In the northern part of the site, archaeological features survived
indicating that buildings of a probable industrial nature stood in this area on the edge
of the market place from the medieval period onwards. These included several large
pits and latrines, an oven, a dump of horn cores, and the slight remains of timber
structures.
5.35
The site was truncated in the post-medieval period, perhaps as part of a remodelling
of the market place. Documentary evidence dates the construction of the entrance
through the churchyard wall to 1791; this may have been part of a major
35
AE0137 August 2013
redevelopment of the east end of the market place at this time. This redevelopment
led to a lack of material culture and archaeological features surviving from the late
medieval and post-medieval period. The remodelling may have involved the
construction of buildings over the northern part of the site, a building later known as
the Boot and Shoe Inn and which fronted onto the modern market place to the west
with a narrow alley, Church Lane, running between the back of the plot and the
church wall. The Boot and Shoe (demolished in the early 20th century to improve
views of St.Cuthberts), and the Hat and Feathers may date to this period, as do two
tiny cottages forming the south side of the plot.
5.36
Elsewhere across the town centre the last two decades have seen numerous
archaeological assessments and interventions, often as part of development. These
included close to the development site, in 1997 an archaeological assessment was
conducted of St Cuthbert’s Church (HER 3736), and Victoria Road35 (HER 9994).
The overall picture painted by this body of work is that across the historic town centre
of Darlington, survival of medieval and post medieval archaeological deposits is
generally good.
5.37
In 2009, Archaeological Services University of Durham were commissioned by DTZ
to undertake an evaluation on the north side of Feethams lane to the rear (south) of
Houndgate on land currently used for car parking36. Three trial trenches were
excavated revealing a number of medieval and post-medieval soils and possible
garden features. The singular most interesting find was a large NW-SE aligned ditch
which although it contained no specific dating evidence was considered by the
excavator to be of likely medieval date, if not earlier. The ditch may have been a
continuation of a feature observed by Edward Wooler in 1913 and which he
conjectured formed part of a rectangular enclosing defensive ditch around the town
and which had been constructed in Anglo-Saxon times.
35
36
Archaeological Services 2007a
ASUD (2009). Feethams, Darlington, an Archaeological Evaluation. Report 2221
36
AE0137 August 2013
6.0
Archaeological Evaluation 2013
During the preparation of this report and discussions with DCCAS and EH, it became
clear that the proposed development site was of some considerable archaeological
potential, principally as the site of the medieval Bishop’s Manor House, but also for
potential prehistoric deposits associated with the River Skerne, and later use of the
site as the Town’s workhouse. In line with the NPPF para 128 which states that;
‘Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has the potential to
include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should
require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where
necessary, a field evaluation.’
a written scheme of investigation for field evaluation was prepared by AE and
approved by DCCAS and five trenches each 2 x 5 meters were excavated by
Archaeological Services Durham University (ADSU) in early July 2013 (figure 27).
6.1
A full report on the trial works was produced by ADSU37 which identified stone walls
as present in trenches 3, 4 and 5, surviving up to approximately 0.65m high. These
walls had crude facing stones and may reflect the foundation level of a building. Their
orientation is similar to those visible on early Ordnance Survey maps, reflecting the
19th-century poor house and Bishop’s manor house. The walls may be associated
with the Bishop’s manor house complex, elements of which may have been reused in
the 19th century when the poor house was constructed. Archaeological features were
also identified cut into the natural subsoil in trenches 1, 2, 3 and 5. These comprised
a probable pit in trench 1 and linear features, possible ditches, in the other trenches.
In trenches 3 and 5 these features predated the stone walls. In trench 5, the feature
contained exclusively medieval pottery; no pottery was present in the other features.
The features are provisionally interpreted as reflecting medieval occupation of the
area prior to the construction of the manor house complex. Thirty seven sherds of
pottery were recovered, 27 of which are medieval in date, the remainder being postmedieval. The distribution of the pottery is compatible with the stone walls being
medieval in origin. Two small pieces of medieval window glass were recovered, along
with a fragment of medieval glazed floor tile. A small assemblage of animal bone was
also recovered, reflecting a variety of species including pig, sheep, dog, rabbit, bird
and cattle. There was no evidence for improved species or butchery techniques of
19th-century or later date. All of the palaeoenvironmental samples contained material
typical of midden deposits. The combined presence of cereal remains including bread
wheat, barley, oats and rye is typical of medieval and post-medieval contexts in
England. Together, the artefactual and ecofactual assemblages are compatible with
the medieval occupation of the site and the medieval manor house, with the area
continuing in use in later periods. No evidence was identified for prehistoric human or
palaeo-environmental remains.
6.2
The top of archaeological deposits was between 0.66m and 0.84m below ground
level (bgl). The top of undisturbed natural subsoil was identified at between 0.75m
and 1.34m below modern ground level. Archaeological deposits in features cut into
37
ASDU (2013) Darlington Town Hall, Archaeological evaluation. Report 3220.
37
AE0137 August 2013
this material were identified to a depth of 1.7m bgl, but may exist to greater depths.
Archaeological deposits are therefore known to exist across the site between 37.2m
OD and 36.16m OD, but may exist at higher and lower levels than this. The
development therefore has the potential to remove or truncate a significant
archaeological resource and the ADSU report recommends the impact of the
proposed development is mitigated through a programme of archaeological
excavation and recording.
Figure 27. Location of archaeological evaluation trenches, overlain on first edition Ordnance
Survey map of 1856 which shows the surviving element of the Bishop’s Manor marked as ‘Old
Hall’ and the Union Workhouse of 1808. The walls exposed in the evaluation works are shown
in blue (Courtesy of Archaeological Services Durham University)
7.0
The Proposed Development
The proposed development is for an ‘L’ shaped office block of four stories to be
constructed to the rear of the existing Town Hall building with which it will be linked
by a lower building. Full details of the building are not included here, but for ease of
reference for the reader of this report the north and south elevations are shown below
at figure 28, in plan at figure 29 and as two 3D sketches at figure 30 in relation to the
Town Hall and Church of St.Cuthbert. These versions of the design were supplied by
Napper architects for the purpose of the following Heritage Impact Assessment, but
may not represent the final designs including later alterations as a result of the
planning process and further dialogue with the planning authority and statutory
consultees.
38
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 28 (above). East and North elevations of the proposed new office building.
Figure 29 (below). The proposed new office building in plan in relation to the Town Hall and
River Skerne.
39
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 30. Computer generated views of the proposed new office building from the south-east
(top), and north-east (below) in relation to St.Cuthbert’s Church, the Town Hall and River
Skerne (Napper Architects).
8.0
Impacts on Designated Heritage Assets
8.1
The Town Centre Conservation Area
The Town Centre Conservation Area was designated in 1976 with boundary
alterations in 1990; the conservation area character appraisal (CACA), was
completed in 2010. The proposed development site lies immediately outside and to
40
AE0137 August 2013
the south-east of the Town Centre Conservation Area and from which it is largely
shielded by the bulk of the Town Hall. Only on its north side where the site faces on
to the churchyard of St.Cuthbert’s is there a direct visual or perceptual link from
within the conservation area to the development site. A suggested extension to the
town centre conservation area identified in the CACA38, which would bring in a
stretch of the River Skerne parallel to St.Cuthbert’s would enhance this relationship.
The CACA only identifies four key important views of which the only one which will
specifically include the development is from Parkgate across the River up
Stonebridge towards Tubwell Row and to St.Cuthbert’s (although the photo in the
CACA to illustrate this is actually from Victoria Road and shows a different view). The
other key features of the townscape identified as being important in views are the
spire of St.Cuthbert’s and the clock tower of the Town Hall of 1864.
8.1.1 The overall character of the conservation area is complex and described in detail in
the full conservation area appraisal, nevertheless a number of key elements can be
drawn out which together provide the individual and local character of Darlington.
Building materials are widely mixed and use red brick, terracotta dressings and the
use of Ashlar (dressed stonework) on grander often commercial buildings (such as
Barclays (formerly Backhouse’s) Bank on High Row. Roofing materials are
predominantly natural slate or pantile, although more recent buildings have a variety
of less traditional roofing materials. Topography is also important with a shallow but
pronounced fall of slope from the High Row, over the Market Place towards the lower
lying ground and the visual ‘stop’ of St.Cuthbert’s. The spire of St.Cuthbert’s and the
tower of the Town Hall clock of 1864 are also identified as key character elements.
8.1.2 Although not specifically identified in the CACA the setting of the conservation area
itself and the experience of the traveller as they approach it is also an important
contribution to its heritage significance and the ability to understand this central area
as an historic market town, even if 19th and especially 20th century expansion have
created a much larger urban area around the historic core. For the purposes of this
study rather than look at the heritage significance of every single listed building and
historic asset a number of viewpoints have been identified to assess the impact of the
proposed development on the setting of the conservation area as a whole. The only
individual building to be looked at in detail is the church of St.Cuthbert due to its high
level of importance (Grade I listed), its proximity to the development (70metres) and
that perhaps above all buildings in the Town Centre conservation area its size, height
and antiquity set it apart. St.Cuthbert’s is discussed in more detail at 8.2 below.
8.1.3 Due to the topography of Darlington, with the shallow fall of slope from the High Row
eastwards to the Skerne, and the largely medieval street plan with many four or five
storey Georgian and Victorian buildings, the development site is shielded from much
of the conservation area. The eight views chosen therefore reflect known historic
views from artistic representations, or relatively modern views which while they do
not have any great historic importance have evolved fortuitously but have a degree of
worth as they provide on a daily basis a valuable experience of heritage to drivers,
38
Darlington Town Centre Conservation Area Character Appraisal, 2010, 42
41
AE0137 August 2013
pedestrians, residents and visitors to the town. These views are shown in figure 31
and discussed below.
3
4
5
6
7
7
8
2
1
Figure 31. Eight view points were chosen to examine the potential impact of the development
on the setting of heritage assets
8.1.4 View 1, Victoria Road.
View 1, is from the south looking north towards the development site and represents
one of profound change over the last 150 years or so. The view today is of fencing
and vegetation alongside the roundabout at the junction of Victoria Road and
St.Cuthbert’s Way beyond which is currently the open parking lot following the
demolition of the post war bus station. In the middle distance is the multi-storey
concrete bulk of the town hall whose pale concrete doe for much of the year blend in
with pale grey northern skies during the day. A limited view is however possible of the
tower and spire of St.Cuthberts. The former bus station site is the subject of a
pending planning application and it seem likely that from this direct view point this
view of St.Cuthbert’s will be closed off.
8.1.5 Historically this view has altered considerably and until as late as 1905, it provided
possibly the last surviving element of rural setting for the historic town centre (figure
33). The remainder of the 20th century has seen considerable negative impact on this
view, with construction of the Haughton Road power station in 1939 with its
dominating cooling towers and chimneys, followed by the post war construction of the
bus station, canalisation of the Skerne between concrete banks and the building of
the inner ring road and town hall in the late 1960s (figure 34). Subsequent demolition
of power station and bus station has improved the view and setting of heritage
assets, but much depends on the quality and scale of the redevelopment of the bus
station site as to how this view may be maintained.
42
AE0137 August 2013
8.1.6 Heritage Impact.
The proposed development will limit views of St.Cuthbert’s from this position,
blocking out the top of the tower, it still should be possible to see the top of the spire
protruding above the new roof line. The view itself is however only now of limited
interest now compared to c.1905, due to modern development and in particular the
town hall. Of greater concern in terms of the setting of the Town Centre Conservation
Area and St.Cuthbert’s will be the design of the Bus Station redevelopment which is
likely to obscure the new office development site from this angle. In conclusion there
will be less than substantial harm to the setting of designated and non-designated
heritage assets from this perspective.
Figure 32. View Point 1. Looking due north to the development site from the Victoria Road
roundabout.
Figure 33. 1905 view across Feethams Field northwards towards St.Cuthbert’s. Land
th
developed in the 20 century with first the bus station and later the town hall.
43
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 34. View upstream along the River Skerne in the mid 1960’s showing how for much of
th
the 20 century the town centre was dominated by a number of tall industrial buildings such
th
as the Haughton Road Power Station. The 19 century Low Mill and terraced housing
development son the east bank of the Skerne, built over the medieval High and Low Park of
the Bishop of Durham can also be seen shortly before their demolition to make way for the
inner ring road. The now demolished bus station and the development site lie to the left hand
side.
8.1.7 View 2, Rear of Houndgate.
This looks north-eastwards towards the development site from the rear of Houndgate,
an area historically of gardens, replaced by terraced housing, now open car parking
spaces (figure 35). The view contains a number of elements characteristic of
Darlington, such as the top of St.Cuthbert’s spire, the backs of brick Georgian
housing (extreme left in figure 35) and distant views of other churches, in this case
St.John the Evangelist on the high ground of Neasham Road. The modern
development of the Dolphin leisure centre is clearly visible, but due to its construction
in brick, with a slate roof at a comparable height to other town centre historic
buildings and by maintaining an historic building line along Houndgate it integrates
well into the conservation area and softly marks the boundary of the historic town
centre. The town hall however although an interesting and not undistinguished
building of its era sits more incongruously with regard to materials, height and
position.
The proposed development will from this perspective be totally shielded by both the
Dolphin Centre and the town hall. In conclusion there will be no harm to the setting of
designated and non-designated heritage assets from this perspective.
44
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 35. View 2. Looking from the rear of Houndgate towards the development site.
8.1.9 View 3, High Row.
This view is from the west from the High Row towards St.Cuthbert’s church and the
development site (figure 36). This perspective has been captured in a number of 19th
century topographic prints of which Collard’s view of 1834 is typical as its
exaggeration of the height of St.Cuthbert’s. In Collard’s view the development site
can just be perceived marked by the chimney of Pease’s Low Mill in the gap between
Market Cross and Town Hall. The former Town Hall and Market Cross (now relocated
to the other side of the Market Place) have both been since replaced but otherwise
the view remains very similar today. The main change being the clock tower and
market hall buildings of 1861-64 which by their increased bulk close off views
towards the development site.
Figure 36. View from the High Row towards St.Cuthbert’s church and the development site.
(Above right) Collard’s view of 1834, exaggerates the height of St.Cuthbert’s as do many
similar topographic prints. The development site can just be perceived marked by the chimney
of Pease’s Low Mill in the gap between Market Cross and Town Hall. The former Town Hall
and Market Cross (now relocated to the other side of the Market Place) have both been
replaced but otherwise the view remains very similar today (above left), the main change
being the clock tower and market hall buildings of 1861-64 which by their increased bulk close
off views towards the development site.
45
AE0137 August 2013
The proposed development will from this perspective be largely shielded by the 19th
century Market Halls, it is possible that on a winter’s day with no leaves on the trees
around St.Cuthbert’s a slight but fleeting view of the north elevation will be possible
for pedestrian’s. The development will not however have any significant impact on
important character elements of the conservation area or recorded historic views. In
conclusion there will be negligible harm to the setting of designated and nondesignated heritage assets from this perspective.
8.1.11 View 4: Market Place.
This view is from the Market Place eastwards towards St.Cuthbert’s (figure 37). This
is a view of considerable importance as it provides both value to the heritage
significance of St.Cuthbert’s church; and it also has a long history of being valued
and appreciated by the community. As the parish church the setting of St.Cuthbert’s
in relation to the historic core of the town around the Market Place, Tubwell
Row/Stonebridge and Feethams is of the highest importance.
Figure 37. (Above left) view of St.Cuthbert’s 1843 by J.C. Napper. Constrained by postmedieval buildings and farmed by gates and railings of 1791 (Above right), the same view in
2013. .(Below right), similar view from 1972 by Myles Meehan showing a busy market day
and the looming presence to the rear of the Haughton Road power station (Darlington
Borough Council collection). (Below left) View slightly to the right, the proposed new
development would be at the rear of the concrete council chamber of the Town Hall and the
narrow oblique view largely obscured by the mature trees between church and town hall.
46
AE0137 August 2013
This importance is of historical, archaeological, architectural and artistic significance
and is explored more fully in section 8.2 below. With regard to this important visual
link between the market place and the Church of St.Cuthbert, the setting of the
church is provided by the framing trees to either side and stone gates and iron
railings of 1791, all within the broader context of the buildings of the historic town
centre, largely defined by the conservation area boundary. The current view,
although largely historic, has been created by first the demolition of buildings to the
left (north) seen in Napper’s view of 1843 in the late 19th century when Edward
Wooler purchased the Hat and Feathers pub with the specific intention of having it
demolished to open out and improve the view of St.Cuthbert’s; and then again by the
re-landscaping of the market place in the 1990’s by the Borough Council. Both of
these, as indeed the handsome new railings of 1791, clearly demonstrate and ongoing care and interest in the church by the people of the town.
8.1.12 Heritage Impact
The proposed development will once again be largely shielded from the town centre
conservation area and this view by both the town hall and the mature trees around
the southern edge of St.Cuthbert’s churchyard. It is possible that during the winter an
oblique view of the north elevation of the new building will be visible in the narrow
gap along the approach road to the current town hall car park. This elevation is
however no higher than the transepts of St.Cuthebrt’s and clad in a terra cotta
material which while not a mature local brick is likely to sit comfortably with the
conservation area and the general setting of the church. While the proposed
development will encroach on the currently open space around the church, it will
have only a negligible negative impact on this view and cause no substantial harm to
the setting of the church provided by this view.
8.1.13 View 5: From St.Cuthbert’s
This view addresses the close reciprocal relationship between the northern elevation
of the proposed development and the southern elevation of St.Cuthbert’s Church,
which at their nearest point are approximately 70m apart.
Figure 38. View from St.Cuthbert’s towards the proposed development (above left); reciprocal
view back from the development to St.Cuthbert’s (above right).
47
AE0137 August 2013
The churchyard itself is relatively featureless from an historic point of view, probably
due to the documented restoration of the church between 1862-65 which no doubt
‘tidied things up’, and the closure of the churchyard for burial in 1856, following which
as so often happens the majority of its monuments have been gradually cleared
continuing into the present century. The southern elevations of the church are as
architecturally distinguished as any others on the building but have no particular
features suggesting they were designed to be seen from a distance, a function more
clearly associated with the spire itself and the west front towards the town centre.
Although St.Cuthbert’s is now set within an open space of green churchyard and
open car park on its southern side, this is a relatively recent situation. Along the Lead
Yard which ran along the south side of the churchyard until the 1960’s there have
historically been a number of substantial buildings, including the Grammar School
(enlarged in 1842), in the south-east corner of the churchyard, the Bishop’s Manor
House, the work house, and through much of the late 19th and 20th centuries the
housing of Luck’s square and Terrace. An ability to experience and appreciate the
south elevation of the church is freely available and the only current constraint is the
mature tree growth on the southern edge of the churchyard which means it has to be
viewed in separate ‘instalments’, rather than being able to stand far enough back to
see it all in one view. The proposed new development will not alter the available
views of the church, nor because of the mature tree growth separating church and
development is it likely to affect the ambient daylight falling on the churchyard. This
may however be different at night or during the dark half of the year when any
inappropriate lighting scheme both internal and external to the new building, could
have a negative impact on St.Cuthbert’s and detract from its visual dominance within
the historic core of the town, especially in views of the church and conservation area
from the south-east and east. Providing a suitable lighting scheme can be agreed
and landscaping around the new development is designed to reflect historic
boundaries and materials the effect on this view and the setting of the church from
this perspective should be neutral.
8.1.15 View 6: Parkgate/Stonebridge.
Views from the east of St.Cuthbert’s and the historic town centre behind it rising
gradually up the low hill to the High Row have historically been very important and
are well shown in Wilkinson’s view of 1760 (figure 42). Close range views of the
church in particular from this aspect as provided from view point 6 are also likely to
have been of note for many years as this was the crossing point of the Skerne over
the nine arch bridge and into the town since medieval times. Indeed Daniel Defoe
who passed through the town around 1725 during his research for what became his
book ‘A Tour Through the Whole Island of Britain’, had little to say other than
mentioning the bridge;
‘Darlington, a post town, has nothing remarkable but dirt, and a high stone bridge
over little or no water, the town is eminent for good bleaching of linen...’39
39
Defoe, 1978, 533.
48
AE0137 August 2013
Through much of the 19th and 20th centuries this view became increasingly urban and
industrial, with replacement of the bridge, narrowing and canalisation of the Skerne,
housing development on the east bank and along Parkgate, and the large mill
buildings of the Pease family, especially the multi-storey Priestgate Mill with its
soaring chimney, dominating the Skerne riverside until its final demolition in the
1980’s. Today the inner ring road while being a negative feature in terms of the
setting of both church and conservation area, does at least permit views and allow
these to a large number of pedestrians and motorists each day.
Figure 39 View 6 in 1892
...and 2013
Figure 40. ‘Pease's Mill, Darlington,
County Durham’ by Myles Meehan
1972. Darlington Borough Art
Collection. Until the 1980’s
dominating views from he north-east.
49
AE0137 August 2013
The impact of the proposed development from this historic entry point to the town at
Parkgate/Stonebridge will be shielded from the development by St.Cuthbert’s Church
and its surrounding mature tree cover. As with view point 5, care should however be
taken with any lighting schemes for the new build to ensure that wider views of the
designated assets from this direction are not negatively impacted upon.
8.1.17 View 7: Union Street/ East Coast Main line.
A view of the development site which has not historically been of any identified value,
is however one from which a wide number of modern travellers experience views of
the town centre conservation area and church of St.Cuthbert’s (figure 41). This is
from the East Coast mainline railway track as it heads northwards (or on approach
southwards) form Bank Top Station (This view can also be achieved from the west
end of Union Street). Passengers looking westwards are afforded a fine (if fleeting)
panorama of the town centre with St.Cuthbert’s in the foreground amidst its mature
tree cover, its spire and that of the Town Hall clock of 1864 standing proud above the
roofline. The concrete rear (east) elevation of the town hall is very obvious in this
view and both its modernity compared to the church, and the brick terraced housing
in the foreground; and its sheer size are detracting features from the setting of the
designated assets of church and conservation area from this direction (as indeed at
the modern ‘at cost’ grey sheds in the foreground)
Figure 41. View 7 from the East Coast main line/Union Street (enlarged right).
The proposed development will be clearly visible in this view situated in front of the
town hall and to the left of the church. The design of the new building does however
provide some opportunities for enhancement of the historic environment. It will clearly
be separated from the church, and by being both lower in roof height and different in
materials will break up the ‘wall of concrete’ that is the town hall from this
perspective. The use of a terracotta cladding on this east elevation will provide some
degree of sympathy with local brick buildings and add further to the visual breakup of
the town hall facade into a number of rooflines and angles, more in keeping with the
historic ‘jumbled’ roofline of the town centre. Final selection of the terracotta cladding
material will be important to ensure the building integrates with the town, rather than
50
AE0137 August 2013
stands out. There are a large number of terracotta brick finishes in Darlington, from
18th century handmade bricks to the highly polished or glazed brick work of the
Crown Street Library which can inspire a choice here, generally a less reflective
surface would be best to avoid competition with St.Cuthbert’s as the preeminent
townscape feature. Providing the correct facing materials and lighting schemes are
adopted the development has the potential to make a positive contribution to the
setting of designated heritage assets from this view point.
8.1.19 View 8: St.Cuthbert’s Way/Inner Ring Road.
Closely related to View 6, and View 7, but closer to the church and town centre this is
a valuable view and is important to the setting of the historic town centre and
designated historic assets within it, clearly showing an historic market town and river
crossing next to its medieval church. As described at View 6 (above), since
Wilkinson’s view of 1760 was illustrated (figure 42), the setting of the church of
St.Cuthbert and the historic town centre (which is largely synonymous with the
conservation area), has altered dramatically. The view has been through many
changes in the last 200 or so years, with the development of mill buildings, the
canalisation of the Skerne, demolition of the Bishop’s Palace, construction and then
demolition of terraced housing across the fields of the Low and High Parks, the
removal of the nine arch bridge, the building of the inner ring road and the general
urban sprawl of the 20th century, the viewer might be forgiven for thinking this aspect
of the town’s setting retains little of value! However while it may not be green fields
the open space of the ring road and the visual boundary of the Skerne both still
clearly identify the edge of the town’s historic core and permit views of the town and
St.Cuthberts in particular to a large number of passing pedestrians and motorists
every day.
As with view 7 the proposed development does provide an opportunity to contribute
to opportunities identified in the CACA such as ‘Consideration for the introduction of
planting... to existing copses within the churchyard to the east would enhance the
character of the locality and soften the impacts of some of the 1960s and 1970s
development’ and notes development opportunities around the Bus Station to
introduce local character and further soften the impacts of less than sympathetic
1960/70’s development40. The design of the new building does perhaps provide some
opportunities for enhancement of the historic environment. It will clearly be separated
from the church, and by being both lower in roof height and different in materials will
break up the ‘wall of concrete’ that is the town hall from this perspective. The use of a
terracotta cladding on this east elevation will provide some degree of sympathy with
local brick buildings and add further to the visual breakup of the town hall facade into
a number of rooflines and angles, more in keeping with the historic ‘jumbled’ roofline
of the town centre.
40
CACA, 2010, 40
51
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 42. (above) Samuel Wilkinson 1760, South-East Aspect of Darlington. A view across
the Low Park to the River Skerne, unrestrained by engineered banks and beyond the historic
core of Darlington dominated by the soaring spire of St.Cuthbert’s. The area shown of the
town shown largely represents today’s conservation area. (below), It is not possible to
replicate Wilkinson’s view of 1760 today due to the housing development leading up to Bank
Top Station, the demolition of the Bishop’s Manor (left centre) and the construction of the
inner ring road in the late 1960’s. The 9 arch bridge is long gone, its memory preserved in the
street name ‘Stonebridge’ and the Skerne constrained within engineered banks. Nevertheless
the view provided to motorists and pedestrians today travelling along the inner ring road is
more open and accessible then it has been for over 100 years following clearance of terraced
housing and mill buildings in the 60’s and 70’s
Figure 43. To the left of St.Cuthbert’s church the pale grey concrete of the Town Hall can be
just discerned through the mature tree cover. The new building would lie between the trees
and town hall.
52
AE0137 August 2013
The final selection of the terracotta cladding material will be important to ensure the
building integrates with the town, rather than stands out. There are a large number of
terracotta brick finishes in Darlington, from 18th century handmade bricks to the highly
polished or glazed brick work of the Crown Street Library which can inspire a choice
here, generally a less reflective surface would be best to avoid competition with
St.Cuthbert’s as the pre-eminent townscape feature. Providing the correct facing
materials and lighting schemes are adopted and a well thought through landscaping
scheme is adopted between the new building and the River Skerne, the development
has the potential to make a positive contribution to the setting of designated heritage
assets from this view point and form a more distinctive edge to the town centre
conservation area.
8.2
St.Cuthbert’s Church (Grade I)
The nearest listed building to the proposed development is St.Cuthbert’s church
which at its nearest point is only 70m from the northernmost section of the new
building. The church sits on the eastern edge of the Town Centre conservation area
and much of the assessment of impact on heritage significance of the conservation
area also applies to views and setting of the church as well. The analysis of view 5
(between the church and the proposed new office), is also relevant here as is the
wider discussion in views 6, 7, 8 and 9. The proposed new building will have no
identifiable impact on the physical structure of the church or its curtilage either during
or following construction.
8.2.1
St.Cuthbert’s in its current form is largely the product of a single phase of
construction begun by Bishop Hugh Le Puiset in 1192 and completed by c1250. Both
the architect Sir G.G.Scott responsible for its restoration between 1862-5 who
described it as ‘one of the most uniform and most beautiful parish churches he knew’,
and Sir Nikolas Pevsner who described it as ‘one of the most import E.E churches in
the North of England...and uncommonly beautiful’ are amongst many who have
highly valued it over the years.
8.2.2
Appreciation of views and intentional improvements to its setting with regard to the
Market Place can be traced at least as far back as the 18th century when in 1791
gates and walls of cost £51 9s41, and still in place today, replaced an earlier wall seen
in the Wilkinson drawing of 1760 (figure 42). In the late 19th century Edward Wooler
purchased the Hat and Feathers pub with the specific intention of having it
demolished to open out and improve the view of St.Cuthbert’s.
8.2.3 The setting of the church has altered considerably over the centuries and in particular
during the last 200 years. This has seen the growth and demise of visually and
culturally dominant 18th and 19th century mill buildings, the canalisation of the Skerne,
demolition of the Bishop’s Palace, construction and then demolition of terraced
housing across the fields of the Low and High Parks, the removal of the nine arch
bridge, construction and then demolition of Haughton Road power station, the
41
Cookson 2003,52.
53
AE0137 August 2013
building of the inner ring road and the general urban sprawl of the 20th century. These
have all affected the setting of the Church, sometimes as in views of the mid 20th
century when Priestgate Mill and Haughton Road power station dominated the
skyline in a significantly negative way. While the iconic view seen in Wilkinson’s view
of 1760 is longer possible, the broad setting of the church and the contribution this
brings to its heritage significance can be argued to be in better health than it has
been for perhaps a century.
The proposed new building will have no impact on any aspects of heritage
significance internal to the church (including lighting of stained glass), similarly it will
have no physical impact on the building either during construction or once completed.
This assessment of heritage significance and impact is therefore concerned with
identifying the contribution of setting to the heritage significance of St.Cuthbert’s and
how this may be impacted upon. This lies in its relationship to the historic town centre
(now largely synonymous with the town centre conservation area), especially
between the High Row and the Skerne; and the church’s pre-eminence as historically
the largest, most physically dominant structure in the town’s historic core and whose
spire in particular is visible form a wide area against the backdrop of Georgian and
Victorian roofs of the town centre. The new building will only have the potential to
significantly affect the setting of St.Cuthbert’s from the south and east, from other
directions it will be shielded either by the church itself, or by the bulk of the town hall.
8.2.5 The design of the proposed new building provides some opportunities for
enhancement of the historic environment. It will clearly be separated from the church,
and by being both lower in roof height and different in materials to church and town
hall will break up the ‘wall of concrete’ that is the town hall’s east elevation when
seen from south and east, without feeling that built development is encroaching any
closer to the church then has historically been seen along the length of the former
Lead Yard. The use of a terracotta cladding on the east and north elevations will
provide some degree of sympathy with local brick buildings and add further to the
visual breakup of the town hall facade into a number of rooflines and angles, more in
keeping with the historic ‘jumbled’ roofline of the town centre. Final selection of the
terracotta cladding material will be important to ensure the building integrates with the
town, and provides a better ‘edge’ to the conservation area than the town hall
currently achieves. There are a large number of terracotta brick finishes in Darlington,
from 18th century handmade bricks to the highly polished or glazed brick work of the
Crown Street Library which can inspire a choice, generally a less reflective surface
would be best to avoid competition with St.Cuthbert’s as the pre-eminent townscape
feature. Providing the correct facing materials and lighting schemes are adopted and
a well thought through landscaping scheme is adopted between the new building and
the River Skerne, the development has the potential to make a positive contribution
to the setting of designated heritage assets and form a more locally distinctive edge
to the town centre conservation area.
54
AE0137 August 2013
8.3
The Victoria Embankment Conservation Area.
At its nearest point the Victoria Embankment conservation area lies 190m to the
south of the proposed development site from which it is separated by the major
roundabout at the junction of Parkgate and Victoria Road. The conservation area was
designated on 10th May 1990 and the conservation area character appraisal (CACA),
was completed in 2007. The terrace was laid out around 1890 on land acquired by
the Town Council when the owners of the Polam Estate went bankrupt in 1878. In
part the embankment was created after 1880 when the borough surveyor, Thomas
Smith designed the layout for the new South Park, and the soil removed from the
landscaping works was moved to provide a bank for what would become a fine row of
middle-class housing at Victoria Embankment. The river Skerne, which at this point
was a gently meandering river was canalised to alleviate flooding to the Stonebridge
area. This street was originally intended to be Park Avenue, then changed to Skerne
Embankment, and finally at the suggestion of renowned local architect GG Hoskins,
changed again to Victoria Embankment.
8.3.1 The CACA notes several areas of character important to the area, in particular and
with relevance to the development proposal are identified views north and south
along the length of the embankment and the mature landscaping along the canalised
Skerne composed of grassy banks, parallel lines of Lime tree on either bank and the
surviving uninterrupted row of ornamental cast iron posts and parallel double lengths
of wrought iron chains which are believed to have come from the old Cattle Market in
High Row in the 1890’s. Loss of character has been a product of individual house
modernisations reducing the architectural rhythm and consistency of the terrace and
the removal of the stonebridge at the north end during construction of the 1960’s ring
road, and which previously formed a pleasing visual stop to the gentle sweep of the
embankment (figure 44).
8.3.1 Architectural interest
The buildings of Victoria Embankment form a well planned terrace with surviving
elements of soft and hard landscaping from the original design. In particular the
bollards and parts of the riverside railings can be seen to have survived in part from
the original scheme. Individual house modernisations, especially those using modern
materials such as uPVC and mid steel or wooden railings detract from the
architectural interest. Key to the architectural interest are the long views from north
and south ends of the embankment. These are however largely constrained by the
now mature lime trees planted along the banks as part of the original landscaping
scheme (figure 44).
8.3.2 Historic interest
As a planned high quality civic late Victorian development with associations with
improvements to South Park and notable figures of the day such as GG Hoskins and
the borough surveyor, Thomas Smith, Victoria Embankment has considerable but
local historic significance.
55
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 44. (Left), extract from the conservation
area character appraisal of 2007 showing
boundaries of the area and identified important
views.
(Below) 1906 view north from the conservation
area showing how the stone bridge and distant
spire of St.Cuthbert’s were originally an important
visual stop to the view along the embankment.
(Bottom) the same view today, the bridge has
been lost to the dual carriageway and roundabout
of the 1960’s inner ring road, while the lime tree
avenue has matured cutting off any distant views.
56
AE0137 August 2013
8.3.3 Archaeological interest
Victoria Embankment has little archaeological significance with no known associated
archaeological sites, and due to the large earth moving activity which created the
canalised River Skerne in the late 19th century, only very limited potential for paleoenvironmental remains.
8.3.4 Artistic interest
Some small number of historic photographs have been identified but no other artistic
images or associations with literature or music have been noted.
8.3.5 Heritage Impact;
Historic photographs demonstrate that at one time a view along the embankment
northwards was possible which incorporated the spire of St.Cuthbert’s church (figure
44). In the intervening 100 or so years this view has altered significantly as the Lime
tree avenue has matured closing off the view. The view itself even when the limes
are without leaves has been impaired by the loss of the Stonebridge in the 1960s and
separation of the Victoria Embankment from the Town Centre by the construction of
the ring road and the culverted Skerne. Neither of the important views identified in
the CACA will be impacted upon by the proposed development which will be invisible
from most of Victoria Embankment. Should the limes ever be removed or lost then
from the northernmost end of the conservation area the southern gable of the
development will be visible but will not mask the spire of St.Cuthbert’s.
9.0
Impacts on Non-Designated Heritage Assets in the Immediate Vicinity
9.1
The Site of the Bishop’s Manor or Palace.
As discussed in detail above at paragraphs 5.10 to 5.21, the proposed development
largely occupies the site of the medieval manor house of the Bishop’s of Durham.
This was constructed in the late 12th century, repaired after the English Civil War
before beginning a gradual period of decline and disuse by the diocese which saw
that by the late 18th century it was being used as a poor house. It was purchased by
the town in 1808 and partially demolished as part of a redevelopment of the site,
which saw the north wing and chantry chapel of St.James retained until around 1870
when it too was finally demolished. As with any medieval manorial site, the manor
would have been the focal point of an administrative and farming complex and there
is a record of a tithe barn surviving into the 16th century, but stables, gatehouse,
brewhouse and possibly an enclosing wall might also be expected. Evaluation
excavation as part of this project has identified substantial stone foundations of
medieval date surviving on the site together with ditch and pit features all containing
or associated with medieval pottery and other finds evidence such as animal bones.
Some map evidence and a number of drawings of the building survive from the 18th
century which allows its footprint to be conjecturally plotted against a modern
background (figure 45), some of the walls identified in the evaluation work are to the
west of this suggesting other evidence for other medieval buildings survives as well
as elements of the manor house.
57
AE0137 August 2013
Figure 45. Ordnance Survey of 1856 showing the work house and the surviving north wing of
the Bishop’s manor House (marked Old Hall), overlain with footprint of new development (red
hatched area but not showing storm water and drainage to east side). The conjectured outline
th
of the Bishop’s manor north-south range is shown in red and based on surviving 18 century
elevation drawings. Walls of medieval date identified in the evaluation excavation of July 2013
(not shown), also suggest surviving medieval building foundations under the proposed new
building.
9.1.1 Heritage Interest
The Bishop’s Manor is an important historical and archaeological site both in terms of
the study and understanding of our medieval past, and also the specific history of
Darlington. The Bishop of Durham aside from his places at Durham and Auckland
Castles, had several manor houses across his estates within the county such as at
Bishop Middleham, Evenwood and Seaton Holme (Easington). The manor appears to
date from the late 12th century and its construction by Hugh Le Puiset, as such it is an
early high quality domestic building and relatively rare across the country. A search of
English Heritage’s Pastscape database42 suggests there are 116 recorded medieval
Bishop’s manors or palaces in England of which approximately 85% are earthworks
or ruinous and 28 are scheduled ancient monuments. While these statistics provide
only a crude comparison to place the site on a national stage, it would seem to
indicate that should buried archaeological deposits survive well on the site then it
would be of high significance and perhaps meet non statutory criteria43 for being
treated as nationally important. The evidence from the evaluation work, together with
knowledge of site demolition episodes in 1808, 1880 and most significantly in c.1966
together with the major intrusions of storm drains and sewers along the east side of
the site all strongly suggest that while the remains surviving on site are of high
42
43
http://www.pastscape.org.uk/ Accessed 14-08-2013
DCMS 2010, 18.
58
AE0137 August 2013
significance, the quality of their survival is not sufficiently high to warrant statutory
protection.
The site has significant potential to address a number of identified themes from the
North East Regional Research Framework for the Historic Environment (NERRF) as
follows:
NERRF objectives.

Settlement and urbanism; as a manorial centre the remains of the bishop’s
manor are likely to contain evidence for the development of Darlington.

MDi. Settlement; relating to the date and origins of the medieval settlement

MDiv. Castles and defensive structures; relating to the pre 16th century form
of the manor house and any defences it may have had.

MDvii. Medieval ceramics and artefacts.

MDxi The medieval to post medieval transition. Looking at how the site
evolved from bishop’s residence to poor house and later.
9.1.2 Heritage Impact
The proposed development will lead to the removal of a large area of archaeological
interest as identified in this assessment and the accompanying evaluation related to
the medieval manor house of the bishops of Durham. The depth of construction
disturbance while not sufficient to destroy the deepest identified archaeology across
the site will both disturb the stable burial conditions which are currently preserving the
site, and will be associated with substantial site foundation piling and service works
that preserving what remains of the manor in-situ will not be feasible. Part of the
conjectured extent of the manor house itself lies outside the footprint of the
development, between the new building and the River Skerne. This appears to have
already been disturbed with a known storm water drain and sewer running through it.
This area is however likely to be part of a riverside landscaping scheme to
accompany the new development and if this is progressed then archaeological
excavation of this area will also be required. As such the proposed development will
cause more than substantial harm to the identified archaeological interest of the site
and in line with the NPPPF para 141, should only be given planning consent if an
agreed scheme of archaeological excavation, survey and publication is required as a
planning condition.
59
AE0137 August 2013
9.2
The Darlington Poor House.
The earliest reference to the poor or work house in Darlington at Feethams for the
relief and help of the poor is from 1703 when the antiquary Ralph Thoresby was
concerned to see ‘the …house of the bishop of Durham converted in to a Quaker’s
workhouse’44. A parliamentary report in 1777 recorded a local workhouse in operation
at Darlington with accommodation for up to 100 inmates and appears to have
referred to the workhouse on the banks of the River Skerne in Lead Yard, Darlington,
previously the Bishop's Palace. Initially leased from the bishop, it was bought by the
town in 1808, when a large extension was built on the south, partly financed by a
bequest of £100 from a Quaker Gideon Gravett Phillips45. The form of the workhouse
is shown on the 1856 OS 25” mapping (Figures 8 &16). Men were accommodated at
the north of the site and women at the south, with children's playgrounds at the
centre.
Darlington Poor Law Union formally came into existence on 20th February 1837. Its
operation was overseen by an elected Board of Guardians, 50 in number,
representing its 41 constituent parishes. The population falling within the Union at
the 1831 census had been 18,883 — with parishes ranging in size from Coatsamoor
(population 13) to Darlington itself (8,574). The average annual poor-rate expenditure
for the period 1833-35 had been £6,882 or 7s.3d. per head of the population.
The Old Workhouse was taken over by the Darlington Union and continued in use
until a replacement was opened in 1870 on a new site on the south side of Yarm
Road. Designed following a competition by Charles J Adams of Stockton-on-Tees,
the new building was for 250 inmates and 50 vagrants at a cost over £12,00046.
Following this the site was sold to Alderman Richard Luck who proceeded to
demolish elements of the old building and erect housing.
9.2.1 Heritage Interest.
Work houses are not uncommon buildings across England, although increasingly few
survive, many being abandoned after the introduction of the welfare state in 1948,
others with existing infirmaries being adapted into hospitals to serve the new NHS
and which have now (such as Bishop Auckland), in turn been demolished to make
way for a new generation of hospitals in the late 20th and early 21st century. The pre1870 union workhouse in Darlington is perhaps slightly unusual as it began life as an
institution within a leased existing building of some interest in its own right, the
Bishop’s Manor or palace. This was adapted at least once in 1808 with construction
of a new purpose built wing, before the entire institution was relocated to new
premises on a significantly larger scale in 1870 on Yarm Road. The workhouse has
therefore no surviving architectural interest and only very limited artistic interest being
depicted in only one identified painting of 1916 (figure 47). It is however of historic
interest and if remains exist on site, especially of how the institution made use of the
existing Bishop’s Manor it would also have archaeological interest.
44
Longstaffe, 153
Cookson 61
46
http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Darlington/ accessed 2013-6-23.
45
60
AE0137 August 2013
The proposed development will largely cover the footprint of the pre-1870 workhouse
and due to foundation design removed any remaining traces of its presence. The
evaluation excavation has only identified limited surviving archaeological deposits
which might be associated with the workhouse, which seemingly was largely
removed during the 1960’s redevelopment of the site. Any surviving evidence for the
workhouse can be retrieved through appropriate archaeological recording in advance
of construction. The historic interest of the workhouse to be found in documentary
material will be unaffected by the proposed development, and may if structural or
artefactual evidence comes to light be enhanced. The archaeological interest
appears to be already largely lost and an appropriate scheme of archaeological
excavation and recording to retrieve any remaining traces of the structure and its use
would be suitable mitigation for any loss of significance.
Figure 46. The Union Workhouse in 1856
showing how it incorporated the north wing of
the old Bishop’s Hall and added to this a new
north-south range facing west, behind which
were segregated yards for women, girls,
boys and men.
Figure 47. The Workhouse was moved to new purpose built accommodation on Yarm
Road in 1870 following which the old building was sold to Alderman Richard Luck who
demolished the Old Hall and erected housing on the site. This however appears to have
incorporated the west facing range of the workhouse, which was simply renamed ‘Luck’s
terrace’ and can be seen in the illustration above in 1916. It was finally demolished
c.1966.
61
AE0137 August 2013
9.3
The Lead Yard.
The road leading from the south-east corner of the Market Place from Feethams
Lane towards the River Skerne was by the mid 18th century known as the Lead Yard.
This is first depicted on an estate map of 1769 (Figure 6), where it is shown as a wide
area, occupying a sizeable amount of the south side of St.Cuthbert’s churchyard.
While this may have originated in medieval times as a distinct area between the
Hallgarth surrounding the Bishop’s Manor to the south and the churchyard of
St.Cuthbert’s to the north, there is no conclusive evidence to suggest its original
function, despite its name. By 1826 and John Wood’s map the Lead Yard had
slimmed down to a narrow road and was functioning to provide access fromthe
corner of the Market Place to a new bridging point of the Skerne which provided
convenient access to Pease’s Low Mill on the east bank, built c.1812. It remained as
a discernible topographic feature, being latterly used as the terminus for the Town’s
buses through much of the 20th century. Finally the development of the Town Hall in
1969 partially cut off the Lead Yard at its junction with Feethams Lane, the general
alignment of the path from the bridge over the Skerne to Feethams Lane has been
retained however if slightly diverted, as it runs between Town Hall main block and the
Council Chamber.
Figure 48. looking east and west along the alignment of the old Lead Yard, still identifiable as
a thoroughfare today. The proposed development will respect this line and maintain a
thoroughfare. The Lead Yard c1955 when it was the town’s bus station.
Heritage Impact
The path from the footbridge to Feethams Lane known historically as the Lead Yard
has historic significance as part of Darlington’s well preserved medieval street plan,
but no artistic, or architectural significance. There may be some small amount of
archaeological significance relating to buried deposits regarding the earlier function of
the Lead Yard, but substantial disturbance in the 20th century, not least from the
Town Hall development makes any such survival unlikely. The proposed
development will not impact on the significance of the Lead Yard as the north
elevation of the building respects the line of the path from Feethams Lane to the
bridge.
62
AE0137 August 2013
9.4
The River Skerne River Terraces.
Several 18th century images of Darlington, show views from the east across the
former Bishop’s parkland and the meandering course of the River Skerne towards
St.Cuthbert’s Church and the higher ground on which the historic core of the town
sits on the west bank. These views and map evidence show that until the early 19th
century when its banks became increasingly constrained, the Skerne occupied a
wide flood plain, forming the Bishop’s park on its east side with the higher ground
occupied by the Town to the west. Observations during excavations along the
Skerne have observed prehistoric peat and human occupation deposits clearly
associated with the river and its exploitation. In the market place, late Mesolithic or
early Neolithic flint bladelets were found47 (HER 4812), suggesting a hunting camp on
the higher ground of the west bank. An elk jaw bone and associated peat deposits
were discovered on the banks of the River Skerne 2km north of the proposed
development area, at a depth of c.3m: these were dated between 10,000 and 6700
BP48 (HER 4817). It is likely that the Skerne, which runs immediately to the east of
the proposed development area, was exploited in prehistory, and there is potential for
palaeoenvironmental and prehistoric deposits to survive. The site provides potential
opportunities to further identified research objectives from the North East Regional
Research Framework (NERRF 2006) in particular, ‘Science and Environment: SEii
palynological evidence in particular from lowland environments’ is identified as an
important potential resource from any buried peat beds on the site associated with
the River Skerne as would be any surviving faunal evidence.
Figure 49. Despite the canalisation of the Skerne, the site (to the right above), is on the
immediate west bank and may contain water logged palaeo-environmental remains at deep
levels.
47
48
Archaeological Services 1994
Huntley & Gidney 1995
63
AE0137 August 2013
9.1.4 Heritage interest
The potential deposits have no architectural or artistic interest, they do however have
some historic significance and hold considerable archaeological significance for an
understanding of early land use in the town of Darlington, and the prehistoric
landscape of the lower Skerne valley in particular.
9.1.5
Heritage Impact
The trial excavation work on the site did not identify the presence of any significant
palaeo-environmental remains surviving on the site, nor any clear evidence of
waterlogged conditions which would provide an optimum survival environment for
organic remains. The canalisation of this stretch of the River Skerne and extensive
20th century redevelopment of the site (which includes a large storm water drain and
a public sewer running underground and parallel with the river only a few metres from
the site boundary) are also likely to have had a further negative impact on the
survival of any palaeo-environmental material. Based on current knowledge the
proposed development will have no harmful impact on any prehistoric or palaeoenvironmental remains. If these are discovered during any construction works then
the agreed Written Scheme of Investigation for archaeological recording will provide
sufficient safeguard to ensure they are excavated, recorded, analysed and the
information disseminated.
10.0
Heritage Impact Assessment Summary
There are no identified areas of total loss or substantial harm to any designated
historic assets or non designated assets of demonstrably equivalent significance.
There are several potential incidents of minor negative impact to the setting of
heritage assets, but these can be mitigated for through planning conditions relating to
materials, landscaping and lighting for the proposed new building.
Only one incident of serious harm has been identified to a heritage asset, the nondesignated archaeological remains of the medieval manor house of the bishops of
Durham. This in its current condition and extent of survival does not meet criteria for
national importance and designation. It is however of some considerable
archaeological significance which can be appropriately mitigated for through a
programme of archaeological excavation in advance of construction work.
11.0
Proposed Mitigation
Those identified adverse effects of the proposed development can be successfully
mitigated by the following.

A full scheme of archaeological excavation and recording in advance of
construction to be followed by an agreed programme of post-excavation and
publication.
64
AE0137 August 2013
12.0

The development of a lighting scheme for the new building to ensure it does
not challenge the dominance of St.Cuthbert’s as the preeminent structure
within and adjacent to the Town Centre conservation area.

The development of a suitable landscaping scheme to integrate the new
building into the landscape between River Skerne, St.Cuthbert’s and the
Town Hall, and enhance the historic environment and setting of the Town
Centre conservation area.

Signage for the Lead Yard to retain its historical presence.
Conclusion
The impacts of the proposed development has been assessed against a full
understanding of the heritage interest of the site and heritage assets in the
surrounding area achieved through documentary research, survey and trial
excavation. This work has been informed by consultation with specialist advisors to
the planning authority and statutory heritage agencies and undertaken to approved
methodologies and identified best practice and guidance.
The proposal will not result in the total loss or substantial harm to any designated
heritage asset nor their settings, and where lesser degrees of harm have been
identified these can be mitigated for through appropriate planning conditions.
The significance of non-designated heritage assets has also been taken into account
and although there will be a substantial negative impact to archaeological remain
sonthe site, this can also be successfully mitigated for by planning conditions
requiring a full scheme of archaeological excavation, survey and recording followed
by appropriate post excavation and publication. This also presents a significant
opportunity for community engagement and involvement with the heritage of
Darlington.
The NPPF seeks new development which will make a positive contribution to local
character and distinctiveness and while the proposed design is in a modern style and
use of materials, it will improve the setting of the town centre conservation.
65
AE0137 August 2013
Bibliography
Archaeo-Environment (2010). Darlington
Management Plan. Report AE0086.
Town
Centre
Fringe
Conservation
Archaeological Services Durham University (1994) Darlington Market Place,
Darlington; archaeological excavations, unpublished report 306, on behalf of
Darlington Borough Council.
Archaeological Services University of Durham. (2008). Feethams, Darlington Town
Centre; archaeological desk-based assessment. Report 1922.
Archaeological Services University of Durham. (2009). Feethams, Darlington, an
Archaeological Evaluation. Report 2221.
Archaeological Services University of Durham. (2013) Darlington Town Hall,
Archaeological evaluation. Report 3220
Butler, David M. 1999. The Quaker Meeting Houses of Britain vol I
Chapman, V. (2005). Images of England; Darlington Remembered. Tempus
publishing.
Clack, PAG, & Pearson, NF, (1978) Darlington: A topographical study. Durham.
Cookson, G. (2003). The Townscape of Darlington. Victoria County History/University
of London.
DCMS (2010). Scheduled Monuments; Identifying, protecting, conserving and
investigating nationally important archaeological sites under the Ancient Monuments
and Archaeological Areas Act 1979.
Darlington Borough Council (2007) Victoria Embankment Conservation Area
Character Appraisal.
Darlington Borough Council (2010) Darlington Town Centre Conservation Area
Character Appraisal.
Flynn, G. (1989). Darlington in Old Photographs. Allan Sutton Publishing.
Graham, F. (1968). Picturesque North Country. Frank Graham, Newcastle.
Hoole, K. (1986) A Regional History of the Railways of Great Britain. The North East.
Vol 4
Longstaffe, WHD, (1854) The History and Antiquity of the Parish of Darlington
in the Bishopricke of Durham. London.
Longstaffe, WHD (1858) The Buildings of Bishop Hugh le Puiset. In the Transactions
of the Architectural & Archaeological Society of Durham & Northumberland.
Miket, R & Pocock, M (1976) An Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Greenbank, Darlington,
Med Archaeology XX, 62
66
AE0137 August 2013
Page, W, (1905) The Victoria History of the County of Durham, Vol I, 387-393
Pevsner, N (1986). The Buildings of England. County Durham.
Ryder, P F, (1997) St Cuthbert’s, Darlington; unpublished archaeological assessment
Ryder, P.F. (2010). The Bishop’s Palace at Darlington. Unpublished Article.
Slatcher, D, (1997) A desk-based archaeological assessment of Land off Feetham’s,
Darlington, County Durham. Unpublished report for Simons Estates, John Samuels
Archaeological Consultants.
Surtees, R, (1823) The History and Antiquity of the County Palatine of Durham Vol. III
Wooler, E, and Boyd A C, (1913) Historic Darlington, London
Web sites:
http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Darlington/ Accessed 2013-6-22
Images of England/ Heritage Gateway and Sitelines for heritage asset data
http://lewis.dur.ac.uk/pip/index.html Pictures In Print (Durham University Library).
Accessed 2013-6-26.
National Heritage List for England http://www.heritagegateway.org.uk accessed up to
and including 12/8/2013
The Durham Record http://www.durham.gov.uk/pages/Service.aspx?ServiceId=6270
Accessed up to and including 16/8/2013
67
AE0137 August 2013
Appendix A
DCCAS provided pre-application advice response on 21/6/2013
68
AE0137 August 2013
ARCHAEOLOGY CONSULTATION RESPONSE
Locations
Maps
Consultation
Recommendation/Comments
Application No: 13/00054/PREAPP
Site Name: Feethams East / DfE site
Place Parish District Postcode
Darlington Darlington (CB) Darlington DL1 9TG
Map Type Reference
Grid reference NZ2911514350
Consultation Type Direct consultation - pre planning application
Development Type Standing building - construction
Application Details New office building with physical link to Town hall to form Public
Sector Hub
Applicant Agent Planning Area Case Officer Completed Date DCC Officer
Darlington Borough Council Darlington Adrian Hobbs 21-Jun-2013 Lee McFarlane
Copyright Durham County CouncilAdrian
I have been in discussion with Jill Thwaite about this site. I have advised that
archaeology WILL BE an issue potentially. We are looking at potential remains of the
Medieval Bishop's Palace, potential remains associated with the Medieval/Post Medieval
collegiate /deanery and the workhouse. It is in the developer's and LPA's interest to
know what they may or may not have to deal with. Will it be a showstopper? for DBC's
sake I hope not, but at this stage cannot guarantee anything...
I have advised that a full heritage statement including an archaeolgoical element must
be submitted with any planning application. This must include results of an
archaeologicla evaluation. Additionally, English Heritage must be consulsted as early as
possible as I am aware that they have issues with regards to the setting of the GR I St
Cuthbert's Church. I have copied below what I have sent to Jill thwaite thus far.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Many thanks for your email regarding the proposed DfE development at Feethams. The
2008 archaeological assessment could be used in support of the application on
archaeological issues, but I would recommend that it is updated by the authors to reflect
the results of some work they did on Feethams West site in 2009 if possible.
Additionally, you need to bear in mind that planning policy has changed significantly
since 2008 when this report was written. PPS5 and now the NPPF require a far more
holistic approach to heritage assets which this report does not cover. Forgive my query,
but has a heritage statement including statement of significance in relation to the setting
of the Conservation Area and, most importantly, the Gr I listed Church of St Cuthbert's
been commissioned? I would expect that English Heritage will look most closely at this,
and I recommend very strongly that you initiate discussions with EH as soon
as possible (if you haven't already done so). The Heritage Statement/Statement of
Significance should be used to inform the design of the buildings being proposed so that
conflicts over setting can be minimised at the earliest possible stage in the process. The
archaeological assessment report can feed into the Heritage Statement/Statement of
Significance. If this report were to be commissioned by DBC I can recommend some
contractors who have recently produced very good work in this regards; however, if it
were to be external (DfE) I can¿t recommend but I can provide a non approved list of
contractors. Please also bear in mind that given the potential for archaeological deposits,
the developer would need to undertake pre-determination evaluation to assess the
nature, significance and preservation of potential deposits as per paragraph 128 of the
NPPF. Difficult to do in a working car park but can be achieved with some flexibility.
Have DfE appointed an agent to deal with the planning application? I would be quite
happy to have discussions with them or DBC at any point, but the earlier the better I
would suggest so that there is plenty of time to undertake evaluation work to inform the
planning decision.
69
AE0137 August 2013
Please feel free to come back to me or David (Principal Archaeologist) at any time with
any questions etc. about the archaeological issues.
The Heritage Statement should inform the discussions about design of the buildings so I
really do recommend that this commissioned as soon as feasible (with regards to impact
on settings of the Conservation Area and the Gr. I listed building and other listed
structures in particular). The archaeological evaluation may also impact on design issues
if significant deposits are found which may require specific mitigation measures. Again,
the earlier the results feed into the design process the
better.
Copyright Durham County Council 21/06/2013 Page 2 / 2
70
AE0137 August 2013
Appendix B
Archaeological Evaluation Report-Separately bound
Oasis ID archaeol3-155921
Archaeological Services University of Durham.
on behalf of Willmott Dixon for Darlington Borough Council
Darlington Town Hall
Darlington
Archaeological evaluation
Report 3220
August 2013
71
AE0137 August 2013
Appendix C
Written Scheme of Archaeological Investigation to accompany
development works
72
AE0137 August 2013
DfE Office Development, Feethams, Darlington; WSI for Excavation.
Proposed Office Development,
Feethams, Darlington.
NGR NZ 29081 14353
Written Scheme of
Archaeological Investigation
for Archaeological Excavation
Archaeo-Environment for
Willmott-Dixon and Darlington
Borough Council.
August 2013
Archaeo-Environment Ltd for Willmott-Dixon and Darlington Borough Council.
15-08-2013
DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION (DfE) OFFICE DEVELOPMENT, FEETHAMS,
DARLINGTON;
ARCHAEOLOGICAL WRITTEN SCHEME OF INVESTIGATION.
1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1
In line with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and
local plan policy, Archaeo-Environment (AE) have been appointed by Willmott-Dixon
on behalf of Darlington Borough Council to produce a Heritage Statement and
supporting studies to accompany a planning application for the construction of new
office accommodation to the rear of Darlington Town Hall at Feethams (NGR NZ
29081 14353 figure 1).
1.2
The timetable for this new development is constrained and at the time of preparing
this Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI), planning permission has yet to be
granted. It is anticipated that the window of opportunity for archaeological work will be
8 weeks from 26th of September 2013 with site clearance of the current car park
surface two weeks prior to this.
1.3
Initial research identified that the development site is of some considerable potential
archaeological interest based on evidence from a number of documentary and
mapping sources. This interest lies largely in the site being previously occupied by
the medieval manor or palace of the Bishop of Durham from the late 12th century to
its final demolition in 1880. The site also has some potential for additional information
relating to the early settlement of Darlington as a town in the Anglo-Saxon period,
and to contain palaeo-environmental and prehistoric remains associated with
adjoining River Skerne.
1.4
AE have produced a heritage statement to accompany the planning application which
provides a desk based assessment of the site and a heritage impact study taking into
account the effect of the new building on the setting of neighbouring heritage assets.
An evaluation excavation of the site has also been undertaken in July 2013 by
Archaeological Services University of Durham (ASDU). This has confirmed the
presence of substantial, stratified archaeological deposits across the site consisting
of stone wall foundations, ditches, pits and medieval and later pottery. The top of
these deposits was between 0.66m and 0.84m below ground level (bgl). The top of
undisturbed natural subsoil was identified at between 0.75m and 1.34m bgl.
Archaeological deposits in features cut into this material were identified to a depth of
1.7m bgl, but may exist to greater depths. Archaeological deposits are therefore
known to exist across the site between 37.2m OD and 36.16m OD, but may exist at
higher and lower levels than this.
15-08-2013
1.5
Contractors tendering for this work should ensure they have access to both the
Heritage Statement by AE and the Evaluation Report by ADSU to inform their bids.
1.6
The progress of the work through excavation, post-excavation and if required
publication will be advised by a Project Board constituted by representatives from the
client (Darlington Borough Council), the main contractor (Willmott-Dixon), The
council’s archaeological advisors (Durham County Council Archaeology Service) and
the archaeological consultant’s for the project (Archaeo-Environment). Other parties
may be invited to attend or advise the board as required.
1.7
In brief summary the site occupies a position on a raised are of boulder clay and river
gravels forming the west bank of the River Skerne overlooking a wide flood plain and
former parkland on the east bank which was only permanently occupied from the
later 19th century when the Skerne was constrained between engineered banks. The
River Terrace itself on the west bank being higher and better drained appears to
have been a location of some early prehistoric, probably temporary settlement as
seen in evidence from excavation in Darlington Market Place (Archaeological
Services 1994; SMR 4812). The possibility of palaeo-environmental deposits is also
likely, an elk jaw bone and associated peat deposits were discovered on the banks of
the River Skerne 2km north of the proposed development area, at a depth of c.3m:
these were dated between 10,000 and 6700 BP (Huntley & Gidney 1995; SMR
4817). The main archaeological interest is however medieval as the site is close to
the historic town centre of Darlington, a late Anglo-Saxon foundation, and more
specifically was occupied from as early as the 12th century by the manor house
(sometimes referred to as a palace), of the Bishop’s of Durham. This was a large
stone residence and probably the focal point of a complex of buildings which may
have included brewhouse, stables, tithe barn etc. The manor house survived largely
intact until 1808 when it was purchased and used as the first town work or poor
house. At this time a large part of the building appears to have been demolished and
replaced, leaving only the north wing which included the chantry chapel of St.James.
In turn the poor house and surviving remains of the manor were demolished around
1870 when a new workhouse was constructed at a new location on Yarm Road. The
site was then redeveloped with residential buildings (Luck’s Square), a small chapel
and school buildings. These in turn were demolished in the early 1960’s before
construction of the current town hall began in 1969. The development site was at first
laid out as lawns, but by the late 1970’s had been converted into a car park which it
remains today.
1.8
Discussions have taken place with English Heritage regarding impacts on the setting
of designated historic assets and contextual design; and with Durham County Council
Archaeology Section (DCCAS), who advise Darlington Borough Council on
archaeological planning matters who this WSI for archaeological mitigation has been
developed in discussion with.
15-08-2013
1.9
The detail of the required work is described below in section 4.0, but in summary this
will be focussed on the following:

Removal under archaeological supervision of modern car park surfaces and
overburden across the footprint of the development and associated areas of
disturbance, followed by archaeological cleaning to expose the extent of
surviving in-situ remains.

Excavation of archaeological deposits within two identified areas guided by
the agreed research and investigation strategy to include appropriate palaeoenvironmental sampling and application of scientific dating techniques.

Conservation of finds and any samples recovered.

An archaeological watching brief of associated development works.

Providing public interpretation and if possible a range of opportunities for
community involvement or access.

Production of a post excavation analysis report including specialist
assessment of finds and samples, identification of the need, appropriate scale
and costs of any further work, publication and archiving.

Further analysis and publication of results as required, and to be the subject
of a future costing and contract award.
1.10
All archaeological works will be undertaken with clear research aims in mind and to
appropriate standards. Identified research aims and standards are described in
sections 2 and 5 respectively below.
2.0
RESEARCH AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
2.1
The site provides opportunities to further identified research objectives from the North
East Regional Research Framework (NERRF 2006). In particular the following should
be addressed in all archaeological works on the site.
15-08-2013
Settlement and urbanism; as a manorial centre the remains of the bishop’s manor are
likely to contain evidence for the development of Darlington.
Science and Environment: SEii palynological evidence in particular from lowland
environments is an important potential resource from any buried peat beds on the
site associated with the River Skerne as would any surviving faunal evidence.
Any surviving remains and artefacts from the medieval manor are likely to inform a
number of identified medieval research priorities;
MDi. Settlement; relating to the date and origins of the medieval settlement
MDiv. Castles and defensive structures; relating to the pre 16th century form of the
manor house and any defences it may have had.
MDvii. Medieval ceramics and artefacts.
MDxi The medieval to post medieval transition. Looking at how the site evolved from
bishop’s residence to poor house and later.
3.0
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
3.1
The proposed development is for an ‘L’ shaped office block of four stories to be
constructed to the rear (east) of the existing Town Hall building at Feethams in
central Darlington. The new building will be attached for a short link building to the
existing Town Hall (constructed c.1969-70), by a two storey structure.
3.2
The proposed footprint of the development together with the area(s) of excavation is
shown at Fig 2 below. This area of excavation takes account of the intended
foundation design for the building which is at present piles extending 12m into the
ground connected with a pile cap/beam which itself will cause disturbance
approximately 1.7m from the current ground surface. Within the piled perimeter will
be a pile mat which would extend c.600mm into the ground, and outside of the piled
perimeter are various services and storm drains.
15-08-2013
4.0
ARCHAEOLOGICAL BRIEF.
The archaeological brief requires three elements of work which should be costed for
separately, although it is hoped to commission all three at the same time. These are
a main area excavation on the site of the proposed development (Area 1), this
includes a surrounding area of disturbance for drainage, services etc. A secondary
area of excavation (Area 2), outside of the specific area of disturbance caused by the
development, but of archaeological interest between the development site and the
River Skerne and which will possibly be the subject of a separate planning
application relating to landscaping. A third element to be costed includes provision of
a watching brief in several peripheral areas during site works.
4.1
Excavation.
As the evaluation work has identified that stratified archaeological deposits appear to
extend across the whole site, it has been agreed that mitigation will take the form of
an initial stripping exercise of car park surface and modern overburden under
archaeological supervision, accompanied by archaeological cleaning of exposed
deposits. At this stage a site meeting with the Project Board will be held to confirm
the detail of the excavation strategy and identify/agree areas of no archaeological
interest and those which should be prioritised.
4.2
Area 1.
This represents the main area of excavation and includes the proposed building
footprint and associated drainage/service works. The area is shown on Figure 2 and
measures approximately 2080 m2 in plan. The evaluation works undertaken by ADSU
(2013) suggests that the top of archaeological deposits exist between 0.66m and
0.84m below current ground level (bgl). The top of undisturbed natural subsoil was
15-08-2013
identified at between 0.75m and 1.34m bgl. Archaeological deposits in features cut
into this material were identified to a depth of 1.7m bgl, but may exist to greater
depths. Archaeological deposits are therefore known to exist across the site between
37.2m OD and 36.16m OD, but may exist at higher and lower levels than this.
Observations from the evaluation appear to suggest much better and deeper
surviving stratigraphy in the east half of the area rather than towards the Town Hall.
It is intended that the car park surface and modern overburden will be removed by
machine and under archaeological supervision. The main site contractor will be
responsible for machine hire and spoil storage/disposal costs for this part of the
operation. Following clearance of car park surface and overburden, further machine
hire and spoil storage/disposal costs will be the responsibility of the archaeological
contractor unless negotiated separately with the main site construction contractor on
appointment.
Excavation should be undertaken to the standards described in the following
section(s).
4.3
Area 2.
A separate planning application is likely to be lodged for landscaping works between
the new development and the River Skerne. This is outside of the footprint of the DfE
office development planning application but is also in the ownership of Darlington
Borough Council. The area is included within master planning for the wider area as
part of a riverside walkway area. It is likely therefore that a separate planning
application will be lodged for landscaping work. The DBA and evaluation work have
indicated that this area is also of archaeological significance for the same reasons as
Area 1. The area is shown on figure 2 and measures approximately 709 m2 in plan.
Trench 4 of the evaluation was placed partially in this area and identified substantial
15-08-2013
stone walls most likely part of the north wing of the Bishop’s Manor which survived
until 1870. Tendering bodies should therefore include a proposal for excavation to
the same standards and criteria as Area 1.
While the area is conjectured to contain a significant portion of the Bishop’s Manor
House the area appears to have had more modern disturbance with a 150mm
diameter storm water drain and a 600mm diameter sewer, both running
approximately north-south and parallel to the river Skerne within the area at a depth
of approximately 1.7m below current ground level. Neither of these services are to be
moved as part of planned works and so areas available for archaeological
observation are likely to be reduced by the cut and cover construction of these drains
and of maintaining safe distance from them during any work.
4.4
Watching brief.
Associated with the development are a number of elements where a watching brief is
considered to be prudent and appropriate mitigation.

Area 1: During initial strip of existing car park surface and overburden. (planned two
week duration)

Area 2: During strip of existing car park surface and overburden.

Churchyard path: to the north of the development site is a pathway through
St.Cuthbert’s churchyard. An electric cable and pedestrian lighting will need to be rerouted along this from its current location within the development area. The planned
trench will be approximately 300mm wide and deep and approximately 70m long.
This must be excavated under archaeological supervision. Although unlikely to
disturb any archaeological deposits as the area is part of a graveyard it is expected
small fragments of human bone/charnel deposits may be disturbed. These should be
collected respectfully, assessed on site without removal from the graveyard for any
contribution they can make to study and understanding of the site and reinterred
within the graveyard.
15-08-2013

Storm Water Drain connection: A connection will be required from the storm drain on
the east side of the new building into an existing storm water drain which runs
parallel with the river Skerne. This will cross an area of potential archaeological
deposits associated with the Bishop’s Manor House and which is partially within Area
1 but extends into Area 2. If full excavation of Area 2 is not commissioned then a
watching brief will be required on excavation of this storm drain connection, a length
of 5m x 2m by 1.7m deep.
4.5
The contractor appointed for the work will notify DCCAS and provide a list of their
specialists and any sub-contractors in advance of the commencement of works on
site.
4.6
Contingency sums will be set aside for all of the identified specialist areas including
finds assessment, conservation and archiving. Specialists involved will be told of start
dates and the need for their input at an early stage.
4.7
All personnel involved in the excavation, watching brief and subsequent post
excavation and assessment must be suitably qualified and have relevant experience.
Information on contract manager and specialist staff to be used on the project should
be included in any tender and made available to the archaeology officer of the
planning authority.
15-08-2013
Fig 1; Proposed development site location plan. 1:5000 @ A4.
© Crown copyright 2011. All rights reserved. Licence number 100042279.
15-08-2013
Fig 2; Proposed development showing outline of new building and location of areas of excavation against new building outline and engineering
detail. Area 1 in green, Area 2 in yellow. Scale 1:500 @ A4. © Crown copyright 2011. All rights reserved. Licence number 100042279.
15-08-2013
5.0
STANDARDS AND METHOD
5.1
Archaeological works will be carried out according to archaeological best practice as
set out in the following publications: Yorkshire, the Humber and the North-East: A
Regional Statement of Good Practice for Archaeology in the Development Process
(Regional Archaeological DM Officers 2011) and Standard and Guidance: for
archaeological excavation (IFA 2008).
5.2
Recording Standards.
All areas to be excavated will have the upper car park surface and modern
overburden removed by machine under archaeological supervision. Further
excavation will be by hand using experienced archaeological staff. Further use of
machine and plant is acceptable where required to remove substantial masonry
elements or ditch fills hand if obvious archaeological features are identified, or by
machine using where possible a non-toothed ditching bucket under archaeological
direction. Once archaeological deposits have been identified all excavation will
proceed by hand until natural or the maximum safety depth or depth required by
proposed foundation design is reached. All archaeological deposits and features will
be subjected to appropriate levels of investigation in order to meet the aims of the
evaluation.
5.3
A minimum 20% sample of all linear features will be excavated at appropriate
intervals and all intersections, overlaps and terminals will be investigated. A minimum
50% sample of all non-linear features will be excavated and 100% of post-holes. All
features must be proven to natural/sterile deposits or to a maximum achievable
health and safety or proposed foundation depth whichever is reached first. Tenderers
should note the results of the evaluation and make appropriate provision for any
temporary shoring/engineering works required to excavate to the required levels.
5.4
Sections of all pits and trenches will be recorded by measured drawing and
photography. Both text and illustrations must clearly describe and identify the depth
below modern ground level of the top of significant archaeological deposits and
thickness of said deposits.
5.5
The location of all excavations and observed archaeological features should be
accurately recorded in the first instance against an established site grid and later to
the OS national grid in reporting. Vertical survey control must be tied to the Ordnance
Survey datum. Details of the method employed will be recorded, including the
location and height of the reference point(s) and bench marks.
5.6
Sections will be recorded by means of a measured drawing at an appropriate scale.
The height of a datum on the drawing will be calculated and recorded.
Representative drawn sections of all trenches/test-pits will be recorded and
presented in the report even if blank/negative. The locations of sections will be
recorded on the site plans, relative to the site grid. Cut features will be recorded in
profile, planned at an appropriate scale and their location accurately identified on the
appropriate trench plan.
5.7
All drawn records will be clearly marked with a unique site number, and individually
identified. The scale and orientation of the plan will be recorded. All drawings will be
drawn on dimensionally stable media. All plans will be drawn relative to the site grid
and at least two grid references marked on each plan.
5.8
Each archaeological context will be recorded separately by means of a written
description. The stratigraphic relationships of each context will be recorded. Proforma record sheets will be used throughout and an index kept of all record types.
5.9
A Harris Matrix showing the stratigraphic relationships in each trench will be
produced and included in the site report.
5.10
All archaeological features will be photographed and recorded at an appropriate
scale. Sections will be drawn at 1:10, and plans at 1:20 or 1:50 using pencil (and later
water proof inks) on polyester drawing film. Photography should be undertaken using
conventional film (B & W) and digital imagery. Digital photographic recording should
used as a minimum medium resolution images between (5mb – 10mb). Unedited
digital images will be archived, preferably as RAW or tiff files, as well as processed
images. A full photographic and drawing catalogue will be provided as part of the
archive. All photographs will include a suitably sized metric photographic scale.
5.11
Human Remains.
It is not expected that human remains will be an issue on this site. Should any human
remains be encountered a Section 25 licence will be applied for from the Ministry of
Justice. Remains uncovered will be examined in situ by a palaeopathologist to be
named in advance by the appointed contractor, and the remains excavated, recorded
and recovered along with any associated artefacts. Both the client and the
15-08-2013
Archaeology Officers for the local planning authority will be informed if human
remains are found at the earliest opportunity.
5.12
Samples and Finds
Pottery and animal bone will be collected as bulk samples by context. Significant
small finds will be three dimensionally located prior to collection. All finds will be
processed to standards identified in English Heritage MoRPHE documentation (PPN
3 2008) and be subject to preliminary specialist assessment in order to help date
archaeological features and contexts. No artefacts will be discarded without the
permission of the DCC Archaeology Officer representing the local planning authority.
Provision will be made for appropriate levels of artefact and ecofact conservation.
5.13
Palaeo-environmental sampling will be undertaken in accordance with the Centre for
Archaeology Guidelines Environmental Archaeology: a guide to the theory and
practice of methods from sampling and recording to post-excavation (English
Heritage 2011). The English Heritage Regional Scientific Advisor will be informed and
given the opportunity to visit the site.
5.14
Secure contexts will be sampled for dating purposes as appropriate (whether on site
or as sub-samples of processed bulk samples). This will include scientific dating
techniques such as the use of high-resolution radiocarbon dating, archaeomagnetic
dating thermo-luminescence dating. Any concentrations of charcoal or other
carbonised material recovered on site will usually be retained. Samples for
dendrochronological dates would be taken from recovered timbers by the relevant
specialist in accordance with published guidelines (English Heritage, 2011).
5.15
All finds recovered will be appropriately packaged and stored under optimum
conditions. Finds recovery and storage strategies would be in accordance with
published guidelines (English Heritage 1995; Watkinson and Neal 1998). Provision
will be made for site visits from specialists and the conservator as necessary.
5.16
Bulk palaeoenvironmental samples will be taken if appropriate deposits are identified
(e.g. primary ditch fills) and submitted for assessment. Recovery and sampling of
environmental remains would be in accordance with guidelines prepared by English
Heritage (2011). This would suggest minimum 40 litre samples and ideally 60 litres
where possible.
15-08-2013
5.17
Full analysis of ceramic assemblages (i.e. petrological analysis), will be applied if
appropriate as will X-ray photography of metal objects.
5.18
Treasure.
Any artefacts of gold or silver recovered during the site works identified in this WSI
and which are considered to be treasure will be dealt with in accordance with the
Treasure Act (1996) code of practice including reporting to the Portable Antiquities
Scheme through their Find Liaison Officer in the DCC archaeology section. All finds
remain the property of the landowner, but should ultimately be deposited in an
appropriate museum.
6.0
POST EXCAVATION ASSESSMENT
On completion of the field work elements of the project, an assessment of the site
records and finds will be undertaken in accordance with national guidance as
specified in MoRPHE (English Heritage 2006) and MoRPHE PPN3 (English Heritage
2008)
6.1
The work specified here should be considered as a piece of work in its own right as
should the development project not proceed any further it will form an independent
standalone record. As such appropriate levels of assessment, reporting and archiving
should all be considered at the conclusion of fieldwork in the PX assessment.
6.2
The post-excavation assessment will include a fully costed programme of postexcavation and publication work for discussion and agreement with the client as
advised by the Project Board.
6.3
A draft copy of the post excavation assessment will be issued to ArchaeoEnvironment by 21/2/2014 as the project consultants for information and comment
before final issue to the client and Project Board. AE will have 2 weeks from date of
issue to make comments. Final copy of the post-excavation assessment will be to the
project Board by 7-3-2014 (all dates subject to change reflecting site start date)
7.0
PROJECT TIMETABLE
15-08-2013
Subject to the granting of planning permission and contractual arrangements the
following broad timetable is to be adopted and will be confirmed at time of
appointment.
Date
9-9-2013
18-9-2013
26-9-2013
11-10-2014
25-10-2014
27-10-2014
19-11-2013
21-02-2014
7-03-2014
21-3-2014
March/April
2014
2014-15
8.0
Task
Watching brief during surface striping of car park and overburden
Project Board Meeting to assess exposed archaeology
Start of on-Site Excavation of Area 1 (and Area 2 if commissioned)
Project Board Meeting to assess progress issues
Project Board Meeting to assess progress issues
Public Site Open Day
End of Site Excavations
Production of draft Post-Excavation Assessment Report and Costs and
issue to AE
Comments by AE to contractor on draft PX assessment
Issue of PX assessment to Project Board and client
Project Board Meeting to discuss PX costs and programme
Completion of Report/publication and public presentation through lecture
REPORTING & PUBLICATION
Following agreement between the developer, their advisors and the planning
authority on the post excavation and publication programme identified at 6, a report
will be produced to include the following elements as required and appropriate:














Executive summary
A site location plan showing the site against a regional map and at a
minimum of 1:10,000 scale with 10 figure central grid reference
Planning reference number
OASIS reference number
Site code
Contractor’s details including date work undertaken
Description of the nature and extent of the proposed development,
including developer/client details
Description of the site location and geology
A general site plan showing location of areas of survey and excavation to
a suitable scale and tied into the national grid
A specific plan of excavations correctly showing the location and number
of all trenches, sections and features within each trench
Specific discussion of the results including context & feature descriptions
Specialist reports, including assessments of each artefact type as well as
environmental data
General overall discussion of the results pulling together all data including
the previous evaluation and desk based assessment, features, number
and class of artefacts, spot dating & scientific dating of significant finds
presented in tabular format
Harris matrices for all trenches, plans and section drawings of features
drawn at a suitable scale with height recorded in metres AOD
15-08-2013





Representative sections of trenches, even if negative results, with height
recorded in metres AOD
Additional plans/map extracts to display noted and recorded
archaeological features as appropriate
Digital images to clarify information, not to be used in lieu of recorded
sections/plans
Bibliography and references
Full listing of archive contents including a catalogue of all digital
photographs.
8.1
A firm post excavation timetable will be agreed as part of the PX assessment. On
completion of the final report a draft copy of the report will be issued in .pdf format to
the Project Board. The Board will have 3 weeks to review and make comments
before the contractor makes final edits.
8.2
The hard copy of the report will be presented in an ordered state and contained
within a protective cover/sleeve or bound in some fashion (loose-leaf presentation is
unacceptable). The report will contain a title page listing site/development name,
Local Authority/County together with a general NGR, the name of the archaeological
contractor and the developer or commissioning agent. The report will be page
numbered and supplemented with sections and paragraph numbering for ease of
reference. Durham County Council Archaeology Section (DCCAS) require 1x
hardcopy bound and 1 x PDF digital copy of the report for the HER. Further hard
copies will be required for the client and Darlington Local Studies Library in addition
to digital copies in MS Word and pdf.
8.3
Photographs of trenches and sections may be included, but will not be used as the
sole graphic representation, except for where photography is the only safe or
practical means of making a record.
8.4
DCCAS and Darlington Borough Council will be given copyright permission /
authorisation to use the report and its contents to fulfil their function as an HER this
includes giving copies to third parties as part of this function or using the information
for educational / outreach purposes.
8.5
The report on the site work will also include proposals for further archaeological
investigation, if required, and the necessity of publishing the results of the evaluation
within a local, regional or national journal as appropriate. A contingency sum should
be identified for such publication.
8.6
DCCAS produce annual publications which highlight the archaeological work
conducted in the county over the previous 12 months. DCCAS require that a précis of
archaeological works conducted in the county as a result of planning policy must be
submitted.
8.7
The précis is not normally more than 500 words in length, but the quality of the site
may suggest a rather longer article. It would be appreciated if TIFF images of a
minimum of 300dpi are also included. The summary must be sent to the County
Archaeologist by the beginning of December of the same year in which the work was
15-08-2013
conducted. It is also possible that a talk may be required at the Durham Archaeology
Day usually in March each year. Budgetary provision should be made for this.
8.8
In addition to the report, the results of the excavation may warrant publication in an
appropriate journal such as the Durham Archaeological Journal or if results regarding
the Bishop’s Manor are of sufficient importance Medieval Archaeology. This will be
to a minimum standard to include a summary of the work, findings, dates, illustrations
and photographs and references to where the archive is lodged. The post-excavation
assessment should clearly identify costs of preparing and publishing such an article.
9.0
OASIS
The appointed archaeological contractor will agree to complete the online OASIS
form at http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/project/oasis/ within 3 months of completion of post
excavation and reporting process. Budgetary provision should be made for this.
9.1
Once a report has become a public document by submission to or incorporation into
the HER, DCCAS will validate the OASIS form thus placing the information into the
public domain on the OASIS website.
10.0
MONITORING
The County Archaeologist for Durham normally requires two week’s notice in writing
of the commencement of fieldwork. During such works the County Archaeologist or
their nominated representative shall be allowed access to the site and excavations at
all reasonable times. It is noted that DCC make a charge for monitoring visits and this
should be included in any quoted fees49.
11.0
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AND INTERPRETATION
11.1
The NPPF strongly encourages community benefit from development affecting
heritage assets, in particular paragraph 141. states that ‘Local planning authorities
should make information about the significance of the historic environment gathered
as part of plan-making or development management publicly accessible’ (NPPF,
2012).
11.2
Tenderers for the work described in this WSI are requested to identify how they will
make information about the site and discoveries made, accessible to the public. The
following is a suggested list of expected outputs. Additional costed suggestions may
be made in individual tender submissions.



49
Site open day with guided tours once sufficient remains have been exposed.
Information panels on site hoardings.
Daily updated website or blog regarding the site.
http://content.durham.gov.uk/PDFRepository/04Current_HERcharging2013-14.pdf
15-08-2013




12.0
Public lecture to present results at end of project or as an interim.
Temporary exhibition of any finds in Crown Street library/local venue.
Organised school visits
Volunteer digging and training opportunities
CONTRACT
The contract for the works specified in this WSI will be between the archaeological
contractor and Willmott-Dixon on behalf of Darlington Borough Council.
12.1
Subject to contract and access arrangements it is proposed that the works identified
in this WSI will begin on 5th of September 2013 and progress as identified onthe
Timetable at section 7.0.
13.0
HEALTH AND SAFETY
Contractors should ensure they take due accord of the 1974 Health and Safety Act
and the Construction and Design Management Regulations 2007 and any
subsequent amendments. In this case the Federation of Archaeological Managers
and Employers (FAME) manual on archaeological health and safety (FAME 2010) is
followed for site works and, as normal practice, First Aid boxes, an Accident Book
and a telephone must be provided for the project. Appropriate PPE will be worn at all
times.
13.1
The archaeological contractor should establish clear lines of responsibility with the
client and main site contractor and ensure that all open trenches will be enclosed
within barrier fencing for the duration of works and be clearly marked with ‘Danger
deep excavation’ signs affixed to the fencing. This is the responsibility of the main
contractor not the archaeologist.
13.2
A number of services have been identified on site by Willmott-Dixon and details of
these will be passed to the contractor on appointment. Final responsibility lies with
the archaeological contractor and Willmott-Dixon to liaise about safe working
practices and risk assessments.
14.0
THE ARCHIVE
The site archive comprising the fully catalogued and original paper records and
plans, photographs, negatives and digital material etc, must be deposited at the
completion of the work in agreement with DCC County Archaeological Archive policy.
In this instance Bowes Museum in Barnard Castle is the appropriate repository and
who should be contacted to confirm arrangements and any costs for archiving
material from the evaluation works.
15-08-2013
14.1
On conclusion of the project the records generated must be assembled into an
indexed and cross referenced archive in accordance with the guidance of English
Heritage (2008) MoRPHE PPN3: Archaeological Excavation and the Standards and
Guidance of the Institute for Archaeology (IFA, 1999).
14.2
Archiving must meet the relevant standards set out in Guidelines for the Preparation
of Excavation Archives for long-term storage (UKIC 1990) and Archaeological
Archives: A guide to best practice in creation, compilation, transfer and curation (AAF
2007).The archive must be deposited with the appropriate museum in accordance
with their deposition conditions.
14.3
A budget should be clearly identified to cover the costs of archiving which should be
estimated in advance and confirmed at the stage of post-excavation assessment.
14.4
Digital archiving should include all data produced as part of the project including text,
plans, plots and primary data and be provided in appropriate digtal format (MS word,
.pdf, .dwg, .shp, ASCII, RAW etc).
15.0
REFERENCES
Archaeo-Environment (2013) Heritage
Development, Feethams, Darlington.
Statement
for
a
Proposed
Office
Archaeological Services University of Durham. 2008. Feethams, Darlington Town
Centre; archaeological desk-based assessment. Report 1922.
Archaeological Services University of Durham. 2009. Feethams, Darlington, an
Archaeological Evaluation. Report 2221.
Archaeological Services Durham University
Archaeological Evaluation. Report 3220
(2013)
Darlington
Town
Hall
Archaeological Archives Forum (2007) Archaeological Archives: A guide to best
practice in creation, compilation, transfer and curation.
Chapman, V. 2005. Images of England; Darlington Remembered. Tempus
publishing.
Cookson, G. 2003. The Townscape of Darlington. Victoria County History/University
of London.
Defoe, D. (1978). A Tour Through the Whole Island of Britain. Originally published
1724-6. Penguin
English Heritage (2006) Management of Research Projects in the Historic
Environment The MoRPHE Project Managers’ Guide. Version 1.1 with minor
corrections issued April 2009.
English Heritage (2008) MoRPHE PPN3: Archaeological Excavation. Version 1.0
English Heritage (2008) Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field Evaluation.
15-08-2013
English Heritage (2011) Guidelines for Environmental Archaeology: a guide to the
theory and practice of methods from sampling and recording to post-excavation
(second edition).
Institute of Field Archaeologists (2008) Standard and Guidance: for archaeological
Excavation and watching briefs
Petts, D and C Gerrard (2006) Shared Visions: The North East Regional Research
Framework for the Historic Environment.
United Kingdom Institute of Conservation (1990) Guidelines for the Preparation of
Excavation Archives for long-term storage
Specification prepared for Willmott-Dixon and
Darlington Borough Council by Niall Hammond/
Archaeo-Environment Ltd.
2013-8-15
15-08-2013

Feethams, Darlington - Archaeo Environment

Transcription

Similar documents

HOTEL • CINEMA • LEISURE • RESTAURANTS • BARS Feb 2016

Newsletter - Distinct Darlington

44 Beaumont Hill Darlington, Co Durham

Leasing - Feethams Darlington

last unit remaining - wsb property consultants

Beer World: Amsterdam - Adrian Bell`s Website

Champaner-Pavagadh Archaeological Park

1 Fayette Saloon 2 Yellowstone Golf Course 3 Woodford State Bank