7. Cultural heritage

Transcription

1 7. Cultural heritage

2 7 Cultural heritage Introduction 7.1 The following assessment in relation to potential impacts on cultural heritage has focused on existing environmental resources in the form of archaeological remains, historic buildings and monuments. 7.2 All known sites, features, buildings, structures and areas of cultural heritage potential within the proposed development areas and within 500m of the development boundaries have been identified and assessed (figure 7.1). This includes both designated and non-designated assets, buried archaeological remains, upstanding archaeological remains and built heritage. Consideration has also been given to known sites and monuments outside of the study area, where it has been recognised that the proposed development may have a wider impact on setting. For these purposes, a 1km search area from the application boundary was used to identify all designated assets (figure 7.1). The search radius has been agreed with the Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service (GLAAS), English Heritage. 1 Legislation and policy 7.3 The following statutes, policies and plans have been considered as part of the assessment. A detailed explanation of each and their specific relevance to the assessment is provided in technical appendix D. National legislation Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act, This legislation sets out guidance and policy for protecting nationally important monuments through scheduled status. Consent must be obtained from English Heritage for all works on Scheduled Ancient Monuments. Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act The Act makes provision for the protection and conservation of historic buildings and areas by way of a process of listing and designation. Identified buildings are classified as being Grade I, Grade II* or Grade II and historic areas are designated conservation areas. Once listed, Listed Building consent must be obtained from the local planning authority before works to demolish, alter or extend a listed building can be carried out. Similarly, consent must be obtained for the demolition of buildings in a Conservation Area. National planning policy National Planning Policy Framework Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment was superseded by the National Planning Policy Framework on 27th March The framework incorporates some of the policies from PPS5 and continues to provide guidance to local authorities and developers on the conservation of heritage assets requesting an assessment of heritage as part of planning 1 correspondence from Diane Abrams at GLAAS, English Heritage dated 20 th April 2012.

3 applications and recording and investigation where conservation is not possible. 7.7 English Heritage is of the view that: Following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework, PPS5 was deleted. However the Practice Guide remains a valid and Government endorsed document pending Government's review of guidance supporting national planning policy, as set out in its response to the Select Committee Report. The references in the document to PPS5 policies are obviously now redundant, but the policies in the NPPF are very similar and the intent is the same, so the Practice Guide remains almost entirely relevant and useful in the application of the NPPF. Regional and local planning policy Draft Replacement London Plan, Policy 7.8 of the London Plan outlines the requirements for identification, assessment and protection of heritage assets within London. as follows: London s historic environment, including natural landscapes, conservation areas, heritage assets, World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Ancient Monuments and memorials should be identified, preserved and restored Development should incorporate measures that identify, record, interpret, protect and, where appropriate, present, the site s archaeology Development should preserve, refurbish and incorporate heritage assets, where appropriate New development in the setting of heritage assets, and conservation areas should be sympathetic to their form, scale, materials and architectural detail New development should make provision for the protection of archaeological resources and significant memorials. Where the artefact or memorial cannot be moved from the site without damaging its cultural value, the assets should where possible be made available to the public onsite South London Waste Plan, March Policy WP7 of the London Waste Plan states that : Developments for waste facilities will be required to demonstrate that any impacts of the development can be controlled to achieve levels that will not significantly adversely affect people and the environment. A waste facility should be within a fully enclosed covered building. Particular regard will be paid to the impact of the development in terms of: (c) Archaeological sites, the historic environment and sensitive receptors, such as schools, hospitals and residential areas.

4 London Borough of Sutton (LBS) Adopted Core Planning Strategy, December The Core Planning Strategy includes Policy BE40 Archaeological Field Evaluations. The policy states that before development proposals that are considered within Archaeological Priority Areas the Council may require a preliminary archaeological field evaluation to be undertaken, in accordance with a written scheme of investigation to be approved in advance by the Council. Standards and guidance 7.11 The following archaeological assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the standards and guidance for archaeological desk based assessments set by the Institute for Archaeologists (IfA) (rev 2011) and the Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service (GLAAS) Standards for Archaeological Work, External Consultation Draft July In accordance with the Institute of Field Archaeologist s standard the definition of a Desk-Based Assessment is to determine, as far as is reasonably possible from existing records, the nature of the archaeological resource within a specified area. It will be undertaken using appropriate methods and practices which satisfy the stated aims of the project, which comply with the Code of Conduct, Code of Approved Practice for the Regulation of Contractual Arrangements in Field Archaeology, and other relevant by-laws of the IfA. Methodology 7.13 The objective has been to investigate, as far as is reasonable and practical, the nature and extent of any known or potential archaeological and historical resource within the development site and wider study area. Consideration has been given to the extent to which past and present land-uses may have diminished or enhanced the site s archaeological potential. Where impacts on known or potential interests have been identified relevant archaeological mitigation strategies have been proposed The aims of this assessment are to: Establish the baseline environment relative to archaeological remains, historic buildings and historic landscapes Assess the potential for submerged archaeological remains to be encountered within the site and study area Evaluate the value (sensitivity) of the known resources and areas of potential identified during the baseline surveys Assess the impact of the proposed development on the heritage resources Recommend mitigation measures in the form of further surveys, investigations and recording to be undertaken in light of identified impacts or the introduction of design components (ie planting to reduce impact upon setting) Describe any potential residual impacts and their effects

5 Baseline environment 7.15 In order to assess the potential for discovering archaeological remains, it is necessary to identify and understand the known archaeological remains that have been encountered within the development area and a 500m radius (figure 7.1). As part of this desk-based review the following resources have been consulted: Greater London Historic Environment Record (for HER data and local lists of heritage assets) National Monuments Record (for NMR lists of designated heritage assets) Sutton Central Library and Archives (for historic maps, photographs and other documents) Surrey History Centre (for historic maps, photographs and other documents) Brayley and Walford 1844 A Topographical History of Surrey. R. B Ede. Communities and Local Government 2012 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). English Heritage 2006 Understanding Historic Buildings: a guide to good recording practice. London Borough of Sutton (LBS) 2009 Local Development Framework: Borough Heritage Study. London Borough of Sutton (LBS) 2009 Adopted Core Planning Strategy. Mitchell, R 1981 The Carews of Beddington. London Borough of Sutton Libraries and Arts Services. Phillips, J, Shawcross, K and Harris, N 1995 Carshalton, Wallington and Beddington. Tempus. Secretary of State 1979 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act Secretary of State 1990 Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act South London 2012 South London Waste Plan. Tucker S Interim Storage Pond (Beddington Sewage Works), Site Code BST 88. Victoria County History (VCH) 1967 A County History of Surrey. Volume 4. Wessex Archaeology 1999 Watching Brief on Ponds 1 & 2 and Klampress, Site Code: BDN92, Wessex Archaeology Beddington Sewage Farm, Sutton, Third Interim Report: Archaeological Watching Brief, Phase C, E & F. Wessex Archaeology Beddington Sewage Farm, Sutton, Interim Report: Archaeological Watching Brief, Phase 8. Wessex Archaeology Beddington Sewage Farm, Sutton, Interim Report: Archaeological Watching Brief. Cartographic References 1840 Beddington Tithe Map (Ref Sutton Archives Q30372) 1868; 1894; 1910 and 1955 Ordnance Survey map Beddington Sheet XIV.5 Table 7.1: References and data sources Site visit 7.16 A site visit was undertaken on 3 August 2011 in order to identify any visible remains (such as earthworks, standing remains and historic buildings) and present land use which may have an impact on potential buried remains. A site visit was also necessary to understand the potential for visual impacts.

6 Assessment methodology Assessment of value 7.17 Assessment of value has involved consideration of how far the asset(s) contribute to an understanding of the past, through their individual or group qualities, either directly or potentially. These are professional judgements, but they are also guided by legislation, national policies, acknowledged standards, designations, criteria and priorities. The assessment of value of receptors is set out in figure 7.2. Magnitude of impact 7.18 The determination of magnitude of impact has been based on the vulnerability of heritage assets within the study area, the current state of survival/condition and the nature of the impact upon them. The survival and extent of the archaeological deposits is often uncertain and consequently, the magnitude of change can be difficult to predict with any certainty. The magnitude of change is set out in figure 7.3. Mitigation 7.19 Where the assessment has identified impacts, suitable mitigation measures have been identified and detailed. This may involve protecting a particular asset(s) or a requirement for further investigation or recording. Significance of effect 7.20 The significance of effects on the archaeological resource has been derived by combining the value of the resource with the magnitude of the impact for each cultural heritage asset Figure 7.4 illustrates how information on the value of the asset and the magnitude of the effect has been combined to arrive at an assessment of the degree of effect and significance. The matrix is not intended to mechanise judgement of the significance of effect but act as an indicator to ensure that judgements regarding value, magnitude of impact and significance of effect are reasonable and balanced. Baseline conditions Study area 7.22 The proposed scheme is located to the west of Beddington Lane, north of Beddington, in the London Borough of Sutton. The site is currently occupied by a Waste Management Site which includes a site office, a large industrial warehouse and a Green Waste Composting plant. These structures are all early 21st century constructions. There is a large plant access road running through the site and east to west from Beddington Lane. The pond to the eastern side of the site was created in Part of the site to the north-west was recently used as sludge beds by Sanex but is no longer in use. The majority of the proposed development area has been redeveloped in the late 20th and early 21st century. The most recent construction work was subject to archaeological investigations under PPG16 (1990) The study area for this assessment includes a 500m radius around the boundaries of the proposed development site. The topography of the area is

7 largely flat. The site is approximately 30m above Ordnance Datum (OD). The underlying geology is river terrace gravels overlying Eocene London Clay. The natural soil consists of podzols and argillic/ palaeolo-argillic brown-earths over braided course gravels, generally referred to as Wandle Gravels (Wessex Archaeology 2005) The location of the sites taken from the Greater London Historic Environment Record (HER) which lie within the site and within a 500m study area and designated sites which lie within 1km of the site are tabled in the baseline information and indicated in technical appendix D of this chapter. The numbers referenced on the plan and in brackets in the text (e.g Reference 1) have been added for the purposes of this report only. Historic Environment Record and National Monument Record references relating to each site where applicable are listed within the gazetteer (technical appendix D). There are 117 entries on the Greater London HER and 18 within the National Monument Record. Some of these entries are included in both the HER and the NMR and, therefore, include two numbers. Known archaeological sites and features 7.25 There are no Listed Buildings, Scheduled Monuments, World Heritage Sites, Registered Parks and Gardens or Registered Battlefields within the proposed development area. There are, eight listed buildings within 500m of the proposed site boundary. The Conservation Area of Beddington Park is located along the southern site boundary. The Scheduled Monuments of a Roman Bath House is located immediately to the south-east and the Pigeon House/ Dovecote at Beddington Park is located to the south (this is also a Grade II* listed building). The site is located on Wandle Gravels and is therefore considered an Archaeological Priority Area in the London Borough of Sutton Local Planning Strategy. It is, however, also necessary to identify any features of archaeological and historical importance that are not designated and those which are locally listed by Greater London HER and the National Monument Record. Some of the sites listed were previously unidentified by the HER or NMR and were identified as part of this assessment on the grounds of historic, architectural, archaeological or artistic merit. Under the National Planning Policy Framework these undesignated assets must also be given consideration The principal sites and features within the study area are described below in the context of a timeline of archaeological periods from prehistoric through to modern. The location of the recorded sites and features can be cross referenced with figure The time periods which are discussed are: Prehistoric: Palaeolithic 250,000 10,000 BC Mesolithic 10,000 4,000 BC Neolithic 4,000 2,500 BC Bronze Age 2, BC Iron Age 800 BC AD 43 Roman AD Early Medieval AD

8 Medieval AD Post-Medieval AD Modern Prehistoric 7.28 Palaeolithic flint implements, scrapers and associated animal remains have, been discovered to the western side of the proposed development area (Reference 4) and approximately 280m east of the proposed site boundary (Reference 27) An archaeological evaluation undertaken on land approximately 270m northwest of the proposed development area, revealed evidence that there was probably a river running through this area during the Mesolithic period and artefacts dating to this period have also been discovered within this area (Reference 23 to 25 and 65) Neolithic evidence within the proposed development area has been discovered to the south-west corner of the proposed site and has included pottery fragments (Reference 29 and 55); ditches and pits (Reference 38); flints and flint blades (Reference 44, 51 and 57) and evidence for a possible field system (Reference 47). Neolithic flint implements, artefacts and pits have also been discovered to the west and north-east of the proposed development area, within 500m of the proposed development boundary (Reference 11, 80, 94 and 99) The Bronze Age marks the beginning of metallurgy in Britain from c.2400bc to c.700bc. Field systems and domestic sites showing territorial organisation are often found upon the gravel terraces of the Wandle Valley. A prehistoric field system and associated Bronze Age features have been uncovered to the north-west area of the proposed development site (Reference 7). Bronze Age pits and ditches, an amount of burnt worked flint and Bronze Age pot dating to c.600bc (Reference 13) have also been discovered within the proposed development area (Reference 8, 18 and 19). A series of ditches were uncovered during a watching brief to the south portion of the proposed development area. The ditches contained struck and burnt flint, a ground axe, pottery and a worked timber (Reference 16). A series of gullies, pits and ditches have also been discovered in the southern part of the proposed development area (Reference 39, 45, 49, 50, 53 and 54). Ditches and post holes containing Bronze Age pottery were discovered approximately 142m to the west of the proposed development (Reference 21) suggesting that there were prehistoric structures in this location and a number of round houses were discovered 411m to the east of the proposed development area (Reference 111) The Iron Age, as with the Bronze Age, was characterised by continued woodland clearance around the island. The area which is now occupied by London was held by the Catuvellauni tribe. There are no known Iron Age features or findspots within the development area or the wider study area but the Roman villa to the south-east of the proposed development area overlies an Iron Age Farm (Reference 124 and 129).

9 The Roman period 7.33 The Romano-British period began with the invasion of Britain in AD 43. The following four centuries saw the establishment of towns, forts and roads, all supporting a central administration which aimed to cement the Roman occupation of Britain. London or Londinium was the Provincial capital of Roman Britain and there is a major Roman road running south-west from London to Exeter called Stane Street which runs close to Beddington A possible Roman ditch (Reference 8) and a possible hypocaust (Reference 52) have been discovered within the proposed development area. These features are believed to be associated with the nearby villa site and bath house further to the south (Reference 125 and 126). The site of the extensive Roman villa complete with bath house is located immediately alongside the south-east boundary of the proposed development site and is a Scheduled Monument (Reference 149). The villa was occupied throughout the 1st to 5th centuries and overlies an earlier Iron Age Farm. Features discovered within the area of the villa and the immediate vicinity include fragments of tile and tessarae (Reference 108); coins (Reference 109); boots and sandals (Reference 117); animal bone (Reference 121); surfaces and walls (Reference 122) and a group of burials (Reference 147). The villa is outside the area of the proposed development but its presence may suggest a larger Roman settlement and potential for undiscovered associated Roman features. The Early Medieval period 7.35 The name Beddington is believed to have Anglo-Saxon origins meaning the settlement of Bedda. The first mention of Beddington is in an alleged charter of 675AD which mentions that Frithwald, the underking of Surrey, and Bishop Erkenwald gave land to the Bishop of Chertsey (VCH 1967, 22). An Anglo- Saxon cemetery has been identified approximately 350m south of the Beddington Roman Villa site where internments of cremation and burials were made between the 5th to 7th centuries. There are no Anglo-Saxon remains or findspots within the proposed development area but a single Anglo-Saxon brooch has been found in Beddington Park, approximately 400m south of the proposed site boundary (Reference 138) In 901AD a letter from Danewulf to the Bishop of Worcester suggests that land in Beddington was under Royal tenure (VCH 1967, 22). Medieval period 7.37 During the medieval period, feudal settlements were set up and were managed by the lord of the manor who received dues from the people living and working on his land. Many modern rural settlements are based upon the layout of the medieval village with a church and a manor house surviving as a result of being constructed in stone. It is possible that Beddington village has a medieval layout with St Mary s church possibly having Anglo-Saxon origins In 1086 Beddington was divided into two manors which were formerly held by two Saxon lords: Ulf and Azor but which were given to William de Wateville and Milo Crispin respectively by the Conqueror (Mitchel 1981, 4). The land remained with the de Wateville family until 1159 when the rectory was granted to Bermonsey. But in 1245 Henry III granted the land to Raymund de Lukehand. It then passed to Nicholas Carew in 1363 in whose

10 family it remained until 1859 when the estate was divided and sold (VCH 1967, 22). The second manor of Beddington was held by the Huscarle family but it eventually became part of the Carew estate by marriage in 1381 (Brayley and Walford 1844). The Carew manor house still stands to the south of the proposed development at Beddington Park (Reference 145). This was originally a moated manor house 7.39 A medieval corn mill at Mitcham Common is mentioned in documentary evidence and is believed to date from the 13th century. The same mill is listed in 17th century documents and is part of the vill of Witford or Lower Mitcham (Reference 26). Its present location is unknown A number of ditches probably medieval field boundaries and associated 13th and 14th century pottery were discovered within the proposed development area (Reference 17 and 14 and 40). Other finds have included evidence of metalworking (Reference 58) and of former timber framed houses (Reference 59). Other medieval finds within the study area have included pottery (Reference 72 and 127); coins (Reference 132); a 12th/ 13th century floor (Reference 146) and timber framed cottages (Reference 140). Post Medieval Period 7.41 There are 16th century timber framed buildings surviving within the village of Beddington. Beddington Park was originally a Tudor deer park with the Carew Manor standing within the park (Reference 145) There was a rise in population over the course of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries which led to the development of agriculture and industry throughout Britain in order to feed the growing population. More land was necessary for agriculture and much of the land remained open or owned by the state or church The Enclosure Acts of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, entitled landowners to buy and enclose portions of land for agricultural purposes. Beddington and Wallington were enclosed in 1812 (VCH 1967, 168) Just south of Beddington Corner, there is the site of a former Gunpowder Works which was established in the mid 17th century. The works established by re-using an existing corn mill which had also previously served as a fulling mill and a dyewood mill (Reference 5). Operation of the Gunpowder Works ceased by the 18th century. Post-medieval finds located along the western boundary of the proposed development area including a clay pipe, tile and brick suggests the area was occupied during this period (Reference 12) The excavation of tree boles to the south of the proposed development area suggests that the area remained largely agricultural during the 18th century with managed woodland (Reference 15) By the 19th century, science brought new techniques, products and machinery meaning agriculture and industries expanded and productivity increased. The area of the proposed development, however, remained undeveloped pasture land during the early 19th century and is illustrated as such on the Beddington Tithe Map of 1840 (Sutton Archives Q30372) Croydon Council bought 700 acres of the Carew estate land when the estate was divided and sold in 1858 and used it to establish the Beddington Lane

11 Irrigation Farm (Phillips et al 1995, 7). The first edition Ordnance Survey map of 1868 confirms that the Croydon Corporation Sewage Farm had been established in the area of the proposed development by this date (see Geotechnical Technical Appendix for Envirocheck report with historical mapping). The development of Beddington village throughout the late 19th and early 20th century therefore largely concentrated in the south in order to avoid the smells The Sutton Iron Railway formerly ran to the north-east of the proposed development area (Reference 1). The Railway ran from Frying Pan Creek to Croydon but was dismantled in The Wimbledon and Croydon Railway runs to the north of the proposed development area and was opened in 1855, replacing part of the former Sutton Iron Railway (Reference 3). The Railway Station for the line also opened in 1855 (Reference 6). The line is currently part of the Wimbledon and Elmers End Tramlink which opened in Also to the west of the proposed development area is the Sutton Branch Railway which opened in 1868 (Reference 2). Modern 7.49 During the Second World War many properties in Beddington were destroyed by bombs, particularly along Croydon Road. A possible bomb crater was excavated in the area of Beddington Sewage Farm (Reference 20). New watercress beds and settling tanks were established at the sewage farm in the 1930s Several refuse tips of 19 th and 20 th century date have been excavated to the north-east and west of the proposed development area indicating its most recent use (Reference 22 and 28). The area of proposed development, along with an area to the north of the village were used for gravel extraction during the 1960s/70s The north-east corner of Beddington Sewage Farm became the Virador Waste Management site in the 1990s. A new pond was dug to the eastern edge of the proposed development area in The large industrial warehouse/ waste storage unit to the north edge of the site was constructed in The site has remained in use as a waste management site and was used as such at the time of writing. Previous investigations within the proposed development area 7.52 Various areas of proposed development were subject to an archaeological investigation between 1998 and 2009, and were undertaken by Wessex Archaeology during construction works for the current Waste Management site In 1998, the area of Spring Mead (to the west of the proposed development area); Arbor Field (the northern section of the proposed development area) and a narrow strip running north-south through the proposed development area were monitored. Twenty-four ditches, one pit and one post hole were uncovered during the watching brief. Some of the ditches contained burnt flint and the archaeologist interpreted the site as a possible Bronze Age field system (Reference 7). The majority of the ditches were discovered in the

12 western part of Arbor Field and Spring Mead but there were also some discovered within the northern part of the proposed development area During 1999, three areas were monitored by a watching brief: the excavation of two ponds and a Klampress (machine for processing sewage). No archaeological features were discovered during these excavations but there were modern ditches and a possible Second World War bomb crater (Reference 20) In 2000 the south-west corner of the site known as Keeper s Gate and Great Bushey, was excavated. The finds included pottery and worked flint of Neolithic date, some possible Roman and medieval ditches and modern features (Reference 44 and 45) During Phase 4 of the archaeological investigations at Beddington Sewage Farm, in 2001, a watching brief was undertaken on the area known as Parklands. A number of pits and ditches were discovered containing struck and burnt flint and some pottery dating to the Bronze Age. In the following year the area to the east of Parklands was also monitored and additional pits and ditches containing worked flint and animal bone were uncovered In 2003 a large area of Beddington Sewage Farm was monitored by archaeological watching brief including an area to the western edge of the proposed development area and an area to the south-east corner of the proposed development area. Two possible prehistoric pits containing burnt flint were discovered in the proposed development area (Reference 32) The area to the east and north of Great Favourite were excavated in The excavation revealed further evidence of Bronze Age activity including worked flint, pottery, animal bone, pits and ditches (Reference 38) The watching brief undertaken in 2005 monitored the area currently occupied by the industrial building/ waste storage unit at the north end of the proposed development area and a small area to the west of the development area. The watching brief uncovered post medieval glass and iron and worked and burnt prehistoric flint (Reference 30) In 2006 a watching brief was maintained on the area of Shepherd Ley where pits of Neolithic or Bronze Age date were uncovered (Reference 15a). The watching brief was extended to the east in 2007 and 2008 but recovered mainly modern features including some tree throw holes (Reference 15b) The areas excavated in 2009 found no features of archaeological significance with the exception of tree throw holes dating from the 18th century. The report explains that the areas were heavily disturbed as a result of previous gravel extraction and the construction of the sewage beds (Reference 31a and 31b). Geotechnical ground investigation 7.62 A series of window samples were excavated as part of works along the northern and western boundary of the proposed development area. Two boreholes were also excavated along the eastern side of the site (BH09 and BH10) which revealed excavated made ground (silt gravel and flint) to a depth of 3.0m over clay. Window samples WS16 to WS21 were investigated along the western boundary of the proposed development site. This area stands

13 between the railway line and the interim pond suggesting that the land may have been previously disturbed. WS16 contained made ground to 0.5m following by a layer of sand. WS17 and WS18 contained layers of sand to 3.5m and 3.7m respectively, underlain by clay. WS19 to WS21 contained between 0.85m and 1.3m of made ground followed by sand to a depth of approximately 3.0m underlain by clay. Areas of archaeological potential 7.63 Previous archaeological investigations have been undertaken throughout the area of proposed development in advance of the existing Virador Waste Management Site with the exception of the area of the proposed access road. The Beddington Sewage Farm Watching Brief report (2005) suggests that all areas of archaeological potential within the site have been exhausted with the exception of an area to the south-west near Spring Mead. It is possible; however, that stray prehistoric features and finds may be uncovered during new construction works, particularly since an extensive amount of prehistoric finds have been discovered to date. Since the previous archaeological investigations were a series of watching briefs, the areas of investigation will have only concentrated on the areas that were being developed; hence some features may have not been excavated as part of the redevelopment. Built heritage 7.64 There are no designated or undesignated built heritage assets of historical or architectural significance within the application site area. Within 1km of the site boundary are 39 listed buildings and the 18 th century dovecote, an upstanding scheduled monument. The closest of these includes the grade I listed Great Hall of Beddington Place (reference 145) and the two wings of the house (grade II, reference 151), which are built of red brick with stone dressings and slate or red tile roofs. The great hall was built in the 14th century as the Carew family seat but was extended with the two wings in the 19th century when it was used as the female orphan asylum. There are also many associated grade II and II* structures including; 19th century East Lodge (grade II, reference 141); garden walls (grade II, reference 142); 18th century dovecote/ pigeon house (grade II*, reference 143) 17th century Park Cottages (grade II, reference 144); and Gates West Entrance to Beddington Place (grade II, reference 150) and orangery walls (grade II, reference 157). There was a dovecote documented at Carew Manor in Tudor times and stood in Pigeon House Meadow, which was probably demolished and replaced by the existing building between 1707 and 1727, when the first Baronet, Sir Nicholas Carew, reorganised the grounds around the house. The existing Dovecote almost certainly dates from the early 18th century. It originally contained about 1360 nesting boxes built into the inner face of the wall, giving it a complex honeycomb-like structure. The dovecote is exceptionally large, as most buildings of this type contain under 1000 nesting boxes, and it may have been erected as a commercial operation rather than simply to supply the house with fresh meat. It is now designated as a scheduled monument The parish church of St Mary (Grade II*) (Reference 147) was constructed in the 14th/ 15th century and was directly used by the Carew family. The church was restored and extended in the 19th century by Joseph Clarke. In contrast to

14 the manor house, the church is constructed of flint with stone dressings and red tiled roof. Other listed buildings associated with the church include a lamp standard in the churchyard (Grade II) (Reference 152); lychgate at west entrance to churchyard (Grade II) (Reference 153); lychgate at entrance to churchyard extension (Grade II) (Reference 154) and boundary walls to churchyard (Reference 155 and 156). These buildings and the conservation area of Carew Manor have a special group value that encompasses evidence dating from the medieval period to the present day. All the buildings were constructed as part of the Beddington Park landscape over the course of these periods. The buildings tend to be built of red brick or flint with slate or red tile roofs and stone window dressings Other listed buildings with close proximity of the site include the 19th century mill building on London Road (Reference 67); 18th century cottages on Hackbridge Green (Reference 70); the 18th century Old Red Lion Inn (Reference 71); 19th century houses at Mill Green (Reference 177); 19th century houses at Riverside (Reference 178) and Mill House (Reference 45). All of these buildings are constructed of red brick with slate roofs and were built in the 18th or 19th century. The function of these buildings includes residential; commercial and industrial and relate to the development of Hackbridge and Mitcham during the 18th and 19th centuries Listed buildings further a field also date from the 17th to the 19th centuries and are generally residential houses, commercial premises or mills (References 160 to 176). These buildings also tend to be built in the vernacular style using red brick and slate for roofs There are four designated Conservation Areas within 1km of the application boundary. The closest of these is Beddington Park which is located immediately to the south of the application boundary. Immediately to the south-east of the Beddington Park Conservation Area is the Carew Manor Conservation Area, mentioned above. Both of these Conservation Areas relate to the occupation of the Carew Manor country house estate for which the land was used until the 19th century. Both Conservation Areas are largely open grassed areas with mature trees marking each of its boundaries and the buildings and features within them relating to the former country house estate. The majority of these buildings are listed and have been discussed above Further to the south-east is the Conservation Area of Beddington village. This area is largely built up with few green spaces. The houses date from the 1800s onwards with the majority being 19th century terraced or 1930s semi-detached houses. Carshalton village Conservation Area is located to the south-west of the application boundary and its northern tip is within 1km of it. This Conservation Area is again largely built up but with some green spaces. There is a mixture of built heritage in this area including some 17th century timber framed houses but the majority date to the 18th and 19th centuries and are constructed of red brick The majority of the undesignated buildings surrounding the proposed development area date from the mid to late 20th century with some Victorian semi-detached and terraced houses along London Road and few 1930s-40s style housing (albeit modernised) to the far north-east and south-east of Beddington Lane. Along Beddington Lane buildings tend to be large industrial

15 buildings, warehouses or offices with few houses in between. London Road, to the west of the proposed development area, is lined with late 19th/ early 20th century terraced houses and semi-detached houses with mid 20th century shop units further to the north. Foxglove Way, to the west of the proposed development area, contains modern multi-storey flat blocks and modern housing which is separated from the proposed development site by a railway line. The northern side of the proposed development area has most recently been used as sludge beds and the Mitcham golf course is located further north of these. Receptor On site Archaeology Study area Archaeology Scheduled Monuments Listed buildings Conservation areas Non-designated buildings of local importance Table 7.2: Cultural heritage, summary of importance Importance of receptor Low/Medium Low/medium High Medium/High Medium Low Potential effects 7.71 The proposed development could be a source of impacts on the cultural heritage value or significance of the site and the surrounding area through: Ground disturbance for construction activities The removal of existing buildings or landscape elements The new built form, its scale, extent, appearance and character The new road layout, access and patterns of circulation Changes to the visual qualities of the site 7.72 The assessment of effects that follows considers the effect without mitigation. An appropriate programme of mitigation could reduce the severity of an adverse effect or remove it completely. The principal adverse effects of the proposal on the landscape and visual resources of the site have been identified. These effects relate primarily to the loss of features and the introduction of development proposal that will significantly and permanently transform the appearance and character of the site and its locality. Measures to minimise the landscape and visual effects have been developed during the design process and are incorporated into the final master plan. Effects of the proposals during construction 7.73 There are no designated archaeological assets within the proposed development areas and the impact upon known archaeological remains, as illustrated on figure 7.1, is negligible since recent construction has resulted in the removal or severe truncation of these assets The ERF development area will be located in areas where previous archaeological features and deposits have been discovered and remains within an Area of Archaeological potential. However, these investigations concluded that the majority of this area was truncated and disturbed by several

16 redevelopments including the sewage works and later waste development site 2 (Reference 30a and 30b). Since 2005 the site has been further disturbed by the construction of buildings and areas for the waste development site. Several schemes of archaeological investigation in the form of evaluation, excavation and watching briefs recorded archaeological features prior to being consumed within that particular development area There is, however, a low potential for further features and stray deposits to be uncovered during this redevelopment given the high concentration of features that were discovered across the Beddington Lane Sewage Farm between 1998 and The proposed access road and some small areas across the site have not previously been investigated and, therefore, may retain undisturbed features associated with the prehistoric finds, ditches, pits and possible field system. There may be an impact on potential remains from construction activities such as topsoil stripping, groundworks and drainage The importance of the archaeology on site is considered to be low to medium, with a small magnitude of change predicted to occur as a result of the development on known remains and a potential of a large magnitude change should new features be discovered. The effects, without applying any form of mitigation, will therefore be of slight to moderate significance The off site grid connection will connect the ERF to the Croydon B substation, which is approximately 2.6 km to the south east of the site, off Latham s Way, Croydon (see figure 3.9). The cables will run underground and along existing routes. The area is predominantly industrial and any buried archaeological remains are likely to have been disturbed during previous road or building construction. The impact of the off site cable route on potential buried remains is, therefore, likely to have a small to negligible magnitude of change. The effects without mitigation are likely to be of slight to negligible significance According to the noise assessment (see chapter 12), the short term effects of construction activities could result in significant impacts depending upon the works being undertaken at the time and the area in which they occur. With the implementation of the proposed noise mitigation measures, careful consideration of the construction programme, and adherence to a CEMP, the resulting impact significance will be reduced to within acceptable levels Traffic routes will remain the same with the exception of Beddington Lane and Coomber Way, which will experience an increase in traffic. There are no built heritage assets in this area that will be affected by the increased traffic. The impact of increased traffic levels will therefore remain negligible. Effects of the proposals during operations 7.80 There are expected to be no operational impacts on known archaeological features once the redevelopment has been completed. This includes the scheduled monument (Roman villa) to the south east of the development area since the site is currently occupied by sludge lagoons and the majority of the landscaping will be retained, partitioning it from the ERF site. No effects are therefore predicted. 2 Wessex Archaeology Beddington Sewage Farm, Sutton, Interim Report: Archaeological Watching Brief, Phase 8.

17 7.81 The visual impacts upon designated built heritage assets (listed buildings and conservation areas) within 1km of the application boundary is expected to be small given that the majority of the trees and landscaping bounding the site will be retained. The Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI) assessment shows that there is a possibility, however, that the two 85m tall stacks of the proposed waste plant will be seen from long distances and may appear in long distance views (please see chapter 10 for further analysis and figure 7.5). This impact on the setting of built heritage assets and conservation areas is expected to be a small magnitude of change. The potential effects, without applying any form of mitigation, will therefore be of slight to moderate significance Following the restoration of the site to the country park with increased amounts of planting, in 10 years time, the visual impact is likely to be beneficial and will improve the setting of the built heritage assets as they are screened from the area and as the industrial elements of the site are removed from view. The adverse visual impact of the country park will therefore be negligible Again with reference to chapter 12, noise, the operational noise at the site and operational traffic movements are considered to give rise to effects of neutral significance. The exception to this is at noise assessment location M02, Primrose Close Residential Estate, where during the night period impacts of neutral/minor in the short term and neutral in the longer term may be expected. There are no listed buildings within close proximity of Primrose Way and the operational noise within the site is expected to have no impact on the built heritage assets. Mitigation measures 7.84 There is a potential for unknown archaeological remains to survive, across the proposed ERF development area given the high concentration of previously discovered prehistoric features and finds and the presence of the site within an Area of Archaeological Potential. The site has previously been subject to archaeological investigations but there is still some limited, localised potential for stray finds and features that may have been missed by previous works at the site. It is, therefore, recommended that an archaeological watching brief be maintained during the initial landscaping/ground breaking works, particularly in the area of the proposed access road where no previous archaeological investigations have been undertaken All of the mitigation measures related to investigations would be detailed in a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) outlining specific excavation and sampling strategies that would apply to fieldwork carried out as part of the programme of site mitigation works. The Written Schemes of Investigation would be prepared prior to any archaeological or construction works commencing for the scheme and agreed with the Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service The results of the archaeological investigations would be disseminated by means of analysis and report Appropriate mitigation measures in terms of landscaping have been incorporated into the final scheme design with the aim of reducing the visual impact of the ERF facility on the designated built heritage assets.

18 Residual effects 7.88 Following the construction works and the completion of the mitigation measures, it is expected that residual effects will be minimal. By the very nature of the scheme, there will be a loss of unknown archaeological deposits if encountered during construction work but these will be fully recorded as part of the watching brief. The residual effects are expected to be slight The two tall stacks will appear in long distance views of designated built heritage assets and the residual effects are therefore expected to be slight.

19 ± # 179 Legend # Listed Site Boundary Buildings Conservation Area Heritage Assets Scheduled Monument Areas of Previous Archaeological Investigations 1998 Watching Brief 1999 Watching Brief Watching Brief 2001/2 Watching Brief 2003 Watching Brief 2003/4 Excavation 2004 Watching Brief & Excavation 2005a Watching Brief 2008/9 Watching Brief 2007/8 Watching Brief Meters # # # # # # # # # # ## 167 ## ## # a b c b a b 31a a b b 32a ( 139 # 144 # # # 150 # # ### # # # 147b a c # ## Crown Copyright All rights reserved. Licence number A Version Client Project Drawing Title FIRST ISSUE Amendment South London Waste PFI Purpose of Issue Office Tel No Drawing No SPB Drawn Date KL Checked Date BEDDINGTON LANE - HERITAGE ASSETS Scale (at A3 size) 1: INFORMATION RB Approved Date WOKING BD-032 A Version South London Energy Recovery Facility Environmental Impact Assessment Fig 7.1 Heritage assets

20 Sensitivity of receptor Cultural heritage High Medium Low Negligible World heritage site or its setting Scheduled monument or its setting Grade I or II* listed building or its setting, grade I or II* historic park and garden or its setting Other heritage asset with archaeological interest of national importance Typical description of the receptor Grade II listed building or its setting Grade II park and garden or its setting, shipwreck or battlefield of historic interest Conservation area Other heritage asset with archaeological interest of regional or county importance, locally listed building Locally important or interesting site with educational or cultural value not qualifying as a heritage asset under PPS5 Annex 2 Site or feature with no significant value or interest South London Energy Recovery Facility Environmental Impact Assessment Fig 7.2 Sensitivity of receptor Cultural heritage

21 Magnitude of change Cultural heritage Large Medium Small Negligible Complete destruction of a heritage asset and its setting and historic context A fundamental change in the ability to understand and appreciate a heritage asset and its setting and historic context Scale of change Such a change to a heritage asset that it makes an appreciable difference to the ability to understand and appreciate the asset and its setting and historic context A minor change to a heritage asset such that it makes a small difference to the ability to understand and appreciate the asset and its setting and historic context No material change to a heritage asset, or to the ability to understand or appreciate the asset and its setting and historic context South London Energy Recovery Facility Environmental Impact Assessment Fig 7.3 Magnitude of change Cultural heritage

22 Determination of significance matrix Cultural heritage Sensitivity of receptor High Medium Low Negligible Large Very substantial Substantial Magnitude / scale of change Medium Small Moderate Slight Professional judgement can be used to vary the category where specific circumstances dictate, for example due to the vulnerability or condition of the receptor. Negligible Negligible The reason for and nature of any variation will be made clear in the assessment. Degrees of effect Very substantial: The complete destruction of, or a fundamental change to the setting of a world heritage site, scheduled monument, listed building, grade I or II* historic park and garden or any other heritage asset with archaeological interest, so that the ability to understand and appreciate the asset is greatly altered or lost. Substantial: The complete destruction of, or a fundamental change in the ability to understand and appreciate a heritage asset which is a grade II park or garden or shipwreck or battlefield of historic interest, a conservation area, or other formally identified heritage asset. Moderate: A minor change to a heritage asset of international, national or regional importance, or the complete destruction of, or a fundamental change to a heritage asset of identified local interest. Slight: A minor change to a heritage asset of local interest or any change to a site with local value for education or cultural appreciation. Negligible: No material change to a heritage asset or any change to a site or feature with no significant value or interest. Significance If the degree of effect is moderate or above, then the effect is considered to be significant. South London Energy Recovery Facility Environmental Impact Assessment Fig 7.4 Significance matrix Cultural heritage