The site was visited on the 8th April 2025 by E. Wapshott MCIfA. The assessment was undertaken in accordance with CIfA (2014) and Historic England (2008; 2015; 2016) guidance. Information was recorded on proforma record sheets and located on the current plans. Photographs were taken, both of the exterior elevations and of internal details. This building can be classified as an non-designated heritage asset, as it is present on the 1804 and 1839 tithe maps, at least elements of the building are of pre-1800 date and is of local, traditional form. The timber-framed cart shed, B2, is of particularly good form with some surviving adze cut vernacular posts. The building has relatively good agricultural aesthetics, appearing authentic, even if its current appearance reflects significant phases of change and not its domestic dwelling origin. The current building has a high level of integrity, but no internal fitments remain. The building also contributes positively to the setting of the Listed farmhouse and other farm buildings. It has no known individual historical-associative value but does have illustrative value - clearly identifiable for its various functions, cart-shed, and granary. With regards to footprint, size and rooflines, if it is to be developed, it would be expected that this would be enacted within the current footprint and spatial mass of the building, any subsequent dwelling being of proportionate size - the accommodation must respond to the existing building - a small percentage of space could be gained on the rear field-side, if carefully designed, to link the cart shed and garage buildings, so that all of the space can be effectively used. The break in rooflines between the various elements of the building must be retained to ensure the narrative of development through time. Otherwise, although some of the fabric in the building is of some age, surprisingly even pre-1800 in places, it is substantially altered, indeed reconverting this into a home, will in some way 'restore' its earlier function. Significant features should be engaged with positively to ensure retention of character in any design but there is significant flexibility for change within the envelope of the building, as long as the facades are respected. There may be flexibility to recreate a ground floor opening to the west elevation and discussion with some level of non-domestic character opening to the south wall of B2.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Emily Wapshott
Department of Archaeology
Department of Archaeology
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Emily Wapshott (Wed,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/69a91e2cd6127c7a504c1f08 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.5284/1139757
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: