1RUWKZLFN3DUN +DUURZ Archaeology Desk - Based ......Prepared By Paul Cooke Illustrated By Pighill Illustrations Approved By Alex Farnell GLHER Data Licence Number 14930 Rev Number

GLHER Data Licence Number: 14930

Northwick Park, Harrow

Archaeology Desk-

Based Assessment

Client: NETWORK NEW BUILD LTD

AB Heritage Project No:60776

Date:22/07/2019

NORTHWICK PARK, HARROW

ARCHAEOLOGY DESK-BASED ASSESSMENT

©AB Heritage Limited 2019 | i | www.abheritage.co.uk

Northwick Park, Harrow

Archaeology Desk-Based Assessment

Client Network New Build Ltd

Project Number 60776

Prepared By Paul Cooke

Illustrated By Pighill Illustrations

Approved By Alex Farnell

GLHER Data Licence Number 14930

Rev Number Description Undertaken Approved Date

1.0 DRAFT PC KKP 06-06-2019

2.0 FINAL PC AF 22-07-2019

This document has been prepared in accordance with AB Heritage standard operating procedures. It remains confidential and the copyright of AB Heritage Limited. Any unauthorised reproduction or usage by any person other than the addressee is

strictly prohibited

Enquiries To:

AB Heritage Limited (Head Office)

Jarrow Business Centre, Rolling Mill Road

Jarrow, South Tyneside, NE32 3DT

Email: [email protected]

Tel: 03333 440 206



©AB Heritage Limited 2019 | ii | www.abheritage.co.uk

CONTENTS

1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Background ............................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Site Location & Description .................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Geology & Topography .......................................................................................................................... 1

1.4 Proposed Development ......................................................................................................................... 1

2. Aims & Methodology ...................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Aims....................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.2 Approach ............................................................................................................................................... 3

2.3 Study Area ............................................................................................................................................. 4

2.4 Assessment of Archaeology .................................................................................................................. 4

2.5 Impact Assessment Criteria ................................................................................................................... 5

2.6 Limitations ............................................................................................................................................. 6

3. Planning & Legislative Framework ................................................................................................................. 8

3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 8

3.2 Statutory Protection for Heritage Assets ................................................................................................ 8

3.3 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2019 ............................................................................... 8

3.4 The London Plan ................................................................................................................................... 9

3.5 Draft New London Plan........................................................................................................................ 10

3.6 London Borough of Brent: Development Management Plan 2016 ....................................................... 10

4. Cultural Heritage Resource Baseline ........................................................................................................... 11

4.1 Known Cultural Heritage Assets .......................................................................................................... 11

4.2 Previous Works in the Study Area ....................................................................................................... 11

4.3 Archaeology & History Background ..................................................................................................... 11

4.4 Site Visit ............................................................................................................................................... 15

5. Cultural Heritage Potential & Impacts ........................................................................................................... 27

5.1 Known Cultural Heritage Resource ..................................................................................................... 27

5.2 Past Impact Within the Site Boundary ................................................................................................. 27

5.3 Potential Archaeological Resource ...................................................................................................... 27

5.4 Predicted Impact of Proposed Development ....................................................................................... 28

6. Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 29

6.2 Outline Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 29

7. References ................................................................................................................................................... 30



©AB Heritage Limited 2019 | iii | www.abheritage.co.uk

PLATES

Plate 1: 1800 Milne map .......................................................................................................................... 12

Plate 2: 1868 6’ OS map .......................................................................................................................... 13

Plate 3: 1897 25’ OS map ........................................................................................................................ 14

Plate 4: 1937 25’ OS map ........................................................................................................................ 14

Plate 6: Possible World War 2 camp in 1945 aerial photo ....................................................................... 15

PHOTOS

Photo 1: Northern part of area A1, looking north-east ............................................................................... 16

Photo 2: Southern part of area A2, looking east ........................................................................................ 17

Photo 3: General view of area A2, looking north-east ............................................................................... 17

Photo 4: View of northern parking zone in area A2, looking east .............................................................. 18

Photo 5: view of southern parking zone in area A2, looking east .............................................................. 18

Photo 6: View of north-east corner of area A2, looking north-west ........................................................... 19

Photo 7: General view of area A3, looking north ....................................................................................... 20

Photo 8: General view of area A3, looking west ........................................................................................ 20

Photo 9: General view of area A3, looking north ....................................................................................... 21

Photo 10: General view of area B, looking south ........................................................................................ 21

Photo 11: General shot of area C from north-west corner, looking east ...................................................... 22

Photo 12: General shot of area C from north-east corner, looking west ...................................................... 23

Photo 13: General shot of campus buildings from centre of area C, looking north-west ............................. 23

Photo 14: South-west of area C, looking south-west ................................................................................... 24

Photo 15: South-west corner of area C, looking south-east ........................................................................ 24

Photo 16: Southern part of area C, looking east ......................................................................................... 25

Photo 17: Linear parch-marks in area C, looking north ............................................................................... 25

Photo 18: South-east corner of area C, looking north-west ......................................................................... 26

Photo 19: View west along Highway Works area ........................................................................................ 26

FIGURES

Figure 1: Site Location Plan

Figure 2: Cultural Heritage Features Map

Figure 3: Site Redline Boundary Map

Figure 4: Photo Plan

Figure 5: Perceived Level of Past Impacts



©AB Heritage Limited 2019 | iv | www.abheritage.co.uk

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Cultural Heritage Gazetteer ........................................................................................................ 33



©AB Heritage Limited 2019 | 1 | www.abheritage.co.uk

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Background

1.1.1 AB Heritage has been commissioned by Network New Build Ltd to produce an Archaeology

Desk-Based Assessment (DBA), covering a proposed development at Land at Northwick

Park, Brent, HA1 3UJ.

1.1.2 This report includes a description of the archaeological baseline conditions; an examination of

readily available documentary, cartographic and known archaeological evidence; and

identifies any known and potential cultural heritage receptor(s) within the application site and

its surrounding area. It proposes a suitable mitigation strategy for archaeology, where such

works are deemed appropriate.

1.2 Site Location & Description

1.2.1 The site covers the eastern end of an area currently occupied by Northwick Park Hospital and

the University of Westminster Harrow Campus (Figures 1 & 3). Existing residential units are

present within the southern portion of the masterplan area (within plot ref A3 (Nightingale

Avenue, St Marks Close, Northwick Close).

1.2.2 The site assessed as of June 2019 is centred approximately on NGR TQ 16643 87751 and

covers an area of c. 16.4 hectares.

1.2.3 The site is bounded to its south and east by Northwick Park; to its north by railway tracks; its

north-west by the University of Westminster Harrow Campus; and to its south-west by

Northwick Park Hospital.

1.3 Geology & Topography

1.3.1 The bedrock across the site is recorded as composed of sedimentary deposits of the London

Clay formation, comprising blue-grey or grey-brown silts and clays. There is no superficial

geology recorded within the site or the immediate area surrounding it (British Geological

Survey, 2019).

1.3.2 The site sits on ground sloping down towards the south-east, with the north-west corner of the

site c. 62m above Ordnance Datum (aOD) and the south-east corner c. 48m aOD.

1.3.3 The topography of the site is variable with a general rise in levels from west to east. This was

most noticeable by the differing levels of the car park areas. Where the site has been built up,

there is evidence that localised landscaping has been used to raise the level around buildings

This would suggest that the site may have been levelled before development, with excess

material forming banks or bunds at the site boundaries and around buildings

1.4 Proposed Development

1.4.1 The Proposed Development will involve demolition of the existing buildings and structures to

facilitate the provision of new build, and providing for a range of land uses, including

residential, commercial (i.e. retail), non-residential and community facilities, and assembly

and leisure uses.




1.4.2 The Proposed Development will also involve works to the ring road (along the Northern

Boundary with the Northwick Park Hospital and St Mark’s Hospital).




2. AIMS & METHODOLOGY

2.1 Aims

2.1.1 Early consultation on the results of cultural heritage research and consideration of the

implications of proposed development are the key to informing reasonable planning decisions.

2.1.2 The aim of this report is to facilitate such a process by understanding the historical

development of the application site and the likely impact upon any surviving archaeological

resource resulting from the proposed development, devising appropriate mitigation responses

where necessary.

2.2 Approach

2.2.1 The assessment has been carried out, in regard to the collation of baseline information, in line

with the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists’ Standard and Guidance for Historic

Environment Desk Based Assessment (2017) and the Greater London Archaeological

Advisory Service (GLAAS) Guidelines for Archaeological Projects in Greater London (2015).

2.2.2 This assessment includes relevant information contained in various statutory requirements,

national, regional and local planning policies and professional good practice guidance,

including:

• Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act, 1979

• Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act, 1990

• The National Planning Policy Framework, 2019

2.2.3 The Greater London Historic Environment Record (GLHER) is the primary source of

information concerning the current state of archaeological and architectural knowledge in this

area. The GLHER Commercial dataset search reference number for this project is 14930. For

reporting purposes, the GLHER information has been re-numbered with AB numbers, which

can be viewed in Appendix 1. The information contained within this database was supported

by examination of data from a wide range of other sources, principally:

• The archaeology of Greater London: An assessment of archaeological evidence for

human presence in the area now covered by Greater London (Museum of London

Archaeology (MOLA), 2000);

• Heritage Gateway for information from Historic England National Monuments Record,

Pastscape and other research resources, including the National Archives;

• The Historic England website professional pages, including the National Heritage List for

England;

• The Archaeology Data Service (ADS) to research whether any archaeological

investigations had taken place in or around the site;

• A site-walk over was undertaken on Monday 3rd June 2019;




• A visit to the Metropolitan Archives on Monday 3rd June 2019;

• Aerial photograph online resources were accessed on Thursday 30th 2019 (Britain from

Above (BFA); The National Collection of Aerial Photography (NCAP); The Cambridge

University Collection of Aerial Photography (CUCAP)), and;

2.2.4 Information from these sources was used to provide:

• Information on statutory and non-statutory designated sites;

• A greater understanding of key cultural heritage issues of the site and surrounding area;

• The impact of proposed development on the known and potential cultural heritage

resource, resulting in the formulation of a mitigation strategy, where required, which

appropriately targets any future works to those required to gain planning consent.

2.3 Study Area

2.3.1 In line with GLAAS recommendations it was considered that a 1km study area was the most

appropriate due to the size of the site and the relative paucity of archaeological data available

within the surrounding area.

2.4 Assessment of Archaeology

2.4.1 This desk-based assessment contains a record of the known heritage resource of the area. It

also assesses the potential cultural heritage resource of the site, using the following scale:

• No Potential - Clear evidence of past impacts / site sterilisation

• Low - Very unlikely to be encountered on site

• Medium - Features may occur / be encountered on site

• High - Remains almost certain to survive on site

2.4.2 In relation to buried archaeological remains, where an archaeological site has been previously

identified, or there is a medium or above potential for archaeology to survive, full impact

assessment will be undertaken.

2.4.3 Heritage importance is a collective term for the sum of all the heritage values attached to a

place, be it a building an archaeological site or a larger historic area such as a whole village

or landscape. There is currently no standard adopted statutory or government guidance for

assessing the importance of an archaeological feature and this is instead judged upon factors

such as statutory and non-statutory designations, architectural, archaeological or historical

heritage values as defined by Historic England (HE, 2019a), and the contribution to local

research agendas. Considering these criteria each identified feature can be assigned to a

level of importance in accordance with a five-point scale (Table 1, below).




Table 1: Assessing the Importance of a Cultural Heritage Site

SCALE OF SITE IMPORTANCE

NATIONAL

The highest status of site, e.g. Scheduled Monuments (or undesignated assets of

schedulable quality and importance). Grade I and Grade II* Listed Buildings. Other listed

buildings that can be shown to have exceptional qualities in their fabric or historical

associations not adequately reflected in the listing grade. Conservation Areas containing

very important buildings. Undesignated structures of clear national importance. Extremely

well preserved historic landscape, whether inscribed or not, with exceptional coherence,

time depth, or other critical factor(s).

REGIONAL

Grade II Listed Buildings or other designated or undesignated archaeological sites (in

addition to those listed above), or assets of a reasonably defined extent and significance,

or reasonable evidence of occupation / settlement, ritual, industrial activity etc. Examples

may include areas containing buildings that contribute significantly to its historic character,

burial sites, deserted medieval villages, Roman roads and dense scatter of finds.

LOCAL

Evidence of human activity more limited in historic value than the examples above, or

compromised by poor preservation and/or survival of context associations, though which

still have the potential to contribute to local research objectives. Examples include sites

such as ‘locally designated’ buildings or undesignated structures / buildings of limited

historic merit, out-of-situ archaeological findspots / ephemeral archaeological evidence

and historic field systems and boundaries etc.

NEGLIGIBLE

Assets with very little or no surviving archaeological interest. Examples include destroyed

antiquities, structures of almost no architectural / historic merit, buildings of an intrusive

character or relatively modern / common landscape features such as quarries, drains and

ponds etc.

UNKNOWN Insufficient information exists to assess the importance of a feature (e.g. unidentified

features on aerial photographs).

2.4.4 The importance of already identified cultural heritage resources is determined by reference to

existing designations. Where classification of a receptor’s value covered a range of the above

possibilities or for previously unidentified features where no designation has been assigned,

the value of the receptor was based on professional knowledge and judgement.

2.4.5 For some types of finds or remains there is no consistent value and the importance may vary,

for example Grade II Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas. For this reason, adjustments

are occasionally made, where appropriate, based on professional judgement.

2.5 Impact Assessment Criteria

2.5.1 The magnitude of impact upon the archaeological and heritage resource, which can be

considered in terms of direct and indirect impacts, is determined by identifying the level of

effect from the proposed development upon the baseline conditions of the archaeological site

and the cultural heritage resource identified. The criteria for assessing the magnitude of

impact are set out in Table 2 (below).

2.5.2 In certain cases, it is not possible to confirm the magnitude of impact upon a cultural heritage

resource, especially where anticipated buried deposits exist. Where possible a professional

judgement as to the scale of such impacts is applied to enable the likely ‘Significance of

Effects’ to be established; however, a magnitude level of ‘uncertain’ is included for situations

where it is simply not appropriate to make such a judgement at this stage of works.




Table 2: Criteria for Determining Magnitude of Impact

IMPACT

LEVEL DEFINITION

HIGH

Changes to most or all of the key archaeological or key heritage baseline elements, or

comprehensive changes to the setting of such key features that lead to total or almost

complete alteration of a features physical structure, dramatic visual alteration to the setting

of a heritage asset, or almost comprehensive variation to aspects such as noise, access, or

visual amenity of the historic landscape.

MEDIUM

Changes to many key archaeological materials/historic elements, or their setting, such that

the baseline resource is clearly modified. This includes considerable visual change to many

key aspects of the historic landscape, noticeable differences in noise or sound quality, and

considerable changes to use or access changes to key historic landscape elements

LOW

Detectable impacts which alter the baseline condition of an archaeological or heritage

receptor to a slight degree – e.g. a small proportion of the surviving heritage resource is

altered; slight alterations to the setting or structure, or limited changes to aspects such as

noise levels, use or access that results in limited changes to historic landscape character.

NEGLIGIBLE

Barely distinguishable change from baseline conditions, where there would be very little

appreciable effect on a known site, possibly because of distance from the development,

method of construction or landscape or ecological planting, that are thought to have no

long-term effect on the historic value of a resource.

UNCERTAIN Extent / nature of the resource is unknown and the magnitude of change cannot be

ascertained.

2.5.3 The overall Significance of Effects from the proposed development upon the cultural heritage

resource is determined by correlating the magnitude of Impact against value of the Cultural

Heritage resource. Table 3 highlights the criteria for assessing the overall Significance of

Effects. Where effects are moderate or above these are classified as significant.

Table 3: Significance of Effects

IMPORTANCE

MAGNITUDE

HIGH MED LOW NEG

NATIONAL Severe Major Mod Minor

REGIONAL Major Mod Minor Not Sig.

LOCAL Mod Minor Minor Not Sig.

NEGLIGIBLE Minor Not Sig. Not Sig. Nt.

Not Sig. = Not Significant; Nt. = Neutral; Mod = Moderate

2.6 Limitations

2.6.1 It should be noted that the report has been prepared under the express instruction and solely

for the use Network New Build Ltd, and any associated parties they elect to share this

information with. Measurements and distances referred to in the report should be taken as

approximations only and should not be used for detailed design purposes.




2.6.2 All the work carried out in this report is based upon the professional knowledge and

understanding of AB Heritage on current (June 2019) and relevant United Kingdom standards

and codes, technology and legislation. Changes in these areas may occur in the future and

cause changes to the conclusions, advice, recommendations or design given. AB Heritage

does not accept responsibility for advising the client’s or associated parties of the facts or

implications of any such changes in the future.

2.6.3 This report has been prepared utilising factual information obtained from third party sources.

AB Heritage takes no responsibility for the accuracy of such information. It should also be

noted that this report represents an early stage of a phased approach to assessing the

archaeological and cultural heritage resource of the application site to allow the development

of an appropriate mitigation strategy, should this be required. It does not comprise mitigation

of impacts in itself.

2.6.4 During the Metropolitan Archives visit (3rd June 2019) it was found that no tithe map exists for

the area of the site, while the 1817 enclosure map held by the archive was recorded as too

fragile to consult (Metropolitan Archives reference: MR/DE/HAR/1).




3. PLANNING & LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 The following section highlights the key planning and legislative framework relevant to this

project, including legislative framework, national planning policy and relevant sector guidance.

3.2 Statutory Protection for Heritage Assets

3.2.1 Current legislation, in the form of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979,

provides for the legal protection of important and well-preserved archaeological sites and

monuments through their addition to a list, or 'schedule' of archaeological monuments by the

Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. This necessitates the granting of

formal Scheduled Monument Consent for any work undertaken within the designated area of

a Scheduled Monument.

3.2.2 Likewise, structures are afforded legal protection in the form of their addition to ‘lists’ of

buildings of special architectural or historical interest. The listing of buildings is carried out by

the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport under the Planning (Listed Buildings and

Conservation Areas) Act, 1990. The main purpose of the legislation is to protect buildings and

their surroundings from changes that would materially alter the special historic or architectural

value of the building or its setting. This necessitates the granting of formal Listed Building

Consent for all works undertaken to or within the designated curtilage of a Listed Building.

This legislation also allows for the creation and protection of Conservation Areas by local

planning authorities to protect areas and groupings of historical significance.

3.2.3 The categories of assets with some form of legal protection have been extended in recent

years, and now include Registered Parks and Gardens, and Historic Battlefields. While

designation as a UNESCO World Heritage Site is not a statutory designation under English

planning law, such a designation is regarded as a material consideration in planning

decisions, and World Heritage Sites are in practice protected from development that could

affect any aspect of their significance including settings within the Site and a buffer zone

around it.

3.3 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2019

3.3.1 The Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government NPPF sets out government policy

on the historic environment, which covers all elements, whether designated or not, that are

identified as ‘having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions,

because of its heritage interest’.

3.3.2 One of the over-arching aims is to ‘Conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their

significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of this and

future generations’. To achieve this, local planning authorities can request that the applicant

describe ‘the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by

their setting’. The level of detail required in the assessment should be ‘proportionate to the

assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the

proposal on their significance’. It goes on to say 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.’

3.3.3 A key policy within the NPPF is that ‘when considering the impact of a proposed development

on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s

conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be.

3.3.4 With regard to non-designated heritage assets specific policy is provided in that a balanced

judgement will be required having due regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the

significance of the heritage asset affected.

3.3.5 Paragraph 194 states that ‘Any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage

asset (from its alteration or destruction, or from development within its setting), should require

clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a Grade II listed building, park

or garden should be exceptional, while substantial harm to or loss of designated heritage

assets of the highest significance, should be wholly exceptional’.

3.3.6 Paragraphs 195 & 196 explain that ‘where a proposed development will lead to substantial

harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities

should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is

necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss.

3.3.7 It also advises that where a proposal involve less than substantial harm to the significance of

a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the

proposal, including securing its optimum viable use. In weighing applications that affect

directly or indirectly non designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required

having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.

3.4 The London Plan

3.4.1 The current London Plan was adopted in 2016 and revised in January 2017. It presents the

overall strategic plan for London and contains the following relevant policy:

Policy HC 1 – Heritage Conservation and Growth

Strategic

A. London’s heritage assets and historic environment, including … archaeological remains

… should be identified, so that the desirability of sustaining and enhancing their

significance and of utilising their positive role in place shaping can be taken into account.

B. Development should incorporate measures that identify, record, interpret, protect and,

where appropriate, present the site’s archaeology.

Planning decisions

C. Development should identify, value, conserve, restore, re-use and incorporate heritage

assets, where appropriate.




3.5 Draft New London Plan

3.5.1 A draft new London Plan was published by the Mayor for consultation in December 2017. The

consultation period ended on Friday 2 March. The current 2016 Plan is still the adopted

Development Plan; however, the draft London Plan is a material consideration in planning

decisions. It contains the following relevant policy:

Policy HC1 Heritage conservation and growth (abridged)

C. Development proposals affecting heritage assets, and their settings, should conserve

their significance, by being sympathetic to the assets’ significance and appreciation within

their surroundings. The cumulative impacts of incremental change from development on

heritage assets and their settings, should also be actively managed. Development

proposals should seek to avoid harm and identify enhancement opportunities by

integrating heritage considerations early on in the design process.

D. Development proposals should identify assets of archaeological significance and use this

information to avoid harm or minimise it through design and appropriate mitigation. Where

applicable, development should make provision for the protection of significant

archaeological assets and landscapes. The protection of undesignated heritage assets of

archaeological interest equivalent to a scheduled monument should be given equivalent

weight to designated heritage assets.

3.6 London Borough of Brent: Development Management Plan 2016

The current London Borough of Brent Local Plan is a collection of planning documents which

operate in conjunction with NPPF and the Mayor's London Plan. The Core Strategy was

adopted on 12th July 2010, while the Development Management Plan (DMP) was adopted in

November 2016. The DMP contains the following relevant policy:

DMP 7: Brent’s Heritage Assets

Proposals for or affecting heritage assets should:

a) demonstrate a clear understanding of the archaeological, architectural or historic

significance and its wider context;

b) provide a detailed analysis and justification of the potential impact (including incremental

and cumulative) of the development on the heritage asset and its context as well as any

public benefit;

c) retain buildings, structures, architectural features, hard landscaping and spaces and

archaeological remains, where their loss would cause harm.




4. CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCE BASELINE

4.1 Known Cultural Heritage Assets

Within the Site

4.1.1 The north-east corner of the site (Area B – see Fig 3) is located within Northwick Park [AB 8].

This was created in 1936 when Middlesex County Council and Wembley Borough Council

acquired 192 acres of the Northwick Park Estate for public open space, carrying out

landscaping and tree planting (GLHER Record ref: MLO107308).

4.1.2 Historic imagery of the site also provided evidence for a former farm, Sheepcote Farm [AB 7]

in the western part of the Highways Works area, and a possible World War II camp [AB 11]

partially within the north-west corner of Area C. The original route of Watford Road [AB 5],

which may be Medieval, may also be located in the western part of the Highways Works area.

Within the Study Area

4.1.3 Cultural heritage assets recorded in the GLHER within the 1km study area are limited,

consisting of six non-designated monuments. These comprise primarily find-spots [AB 1 – 4 &

6] dating from the Prehistoric to Post-Medieval periods, as well as the grounds of the 20th

century Northwick Park [AB 9], which borders the site along its southern and eastern edges.

4.1.4 A review of other sources (outlined in Section 2.2.3) also identified two features of limited

heritage interest within the study area; Northwick Park Station [AB 10] and Harrow Bathing

Pool [AB 8]; providing evidence of activity around the site during the Modern era.

4.2 Previous Works in the Study Area

4.2.1 No previous below-ground archaeological investigations are recorded within the site boundary

or the remainder of the study area. This means that there has been no prior testing of the

below-ground conditions and survival of remains within the area.

4.3 Archaeology & History Background

The Prehistoric Period (c .500, 000 BC – AD 43)

4.3.1 There is a conspicuous lack of prehistoric evidence from the wider area around the site; a

consideration of the boroughs of both Brent and Harrow demonstrates that only a small

number of sites have been recorded, the nearest of which consist of findspots of a

Palaeolithic flake and a Neolithic scraper c. 1.6 & 1.2km to the west of site (MOLA, 2000). It is

not known whether this lack of data is a reflection of site distribution or a lack of

archaeological work.

4.3.2 Evidence for prehistoric activity is negligible within the study area, consisting of a single piece

of worked flint [AB 1] and Iron Age potsherds [AB 2], located 730 – 750m south-west of site,

respectively.

The Roman Period (c. AD 43 – AD 410)

4.3.3 There is some evidence for Roman activity from the boroughs of both Brent and Harrow,

although this is currently focused towards the centre and north of these boroughs,




respectively, with a dearth of finds in the area around the site, the closest activity being a coin

hoard recorded 2km to the west of site (MOLA, 2000).

4.3.4 The only Roman evidence from within the study area consists of the recovery of some

fragments of tile [AB 3] from a playing field c. 480m west of the site.

The Medieval Period (AD 410 – AD 1536)

4.3.5 Within the wider vicinity of the site, the settlement of Harrow is mentioned both in the

Domesday book and earlier Anglo-Saxon documents and is likely to be Early Medieval in date

(MOLA, 2000).

4.3.6 Within the study area only a single findspot of Medieval potsherds [AB 4] recovered c. 330m

south-west of site is recorded. Watford Road [AB 5], located c. 180m west of site, is also

suggested as representing the course of a main Medieval routeway (MOLA, 2000). This

routeway is certainly present on late Post-Medieval mapping (Plate 1, below), however, with

the exception of Sheepcote Farm [AB 7] (see below), there is no evidence of for Medieval

activity in proximity to the road or the site.

4.3.7 Later Medieval settlement patterns can be seen to largely correlate with watercourses. The

nearest settlement of this period to the site is Harrow-on-the-Hill, located c. 1.4km west of

site. This included the c. early 14th century Flambards Manor, located c. 1.3km west of site

(MOLA, 2000).

The Post Medieval Period (AD 1537 – AD 1800)

Plate 1: 1800 Milne map (MA, 2019)

4.3.8 An 1800 map by Thomas Milne (Plate 1) is the first available map to show the entire area of

the site. The land to the east of Harrow can be seen to comprise primarily farmland and

roads. A track is shown running east-west through the northern part of the site, leading from

an apparent farmstead, undoubtedly Sheepcote Farm [AB 7].




4.3.9 A find-spot of brickwork, nails and a late 17th century coin near a stream in Northwick Park

[AB 6] c. 50m south of site is suggested as representing the site of a former structure,

however there is nothing on Plate 1 to suggest activity/presence of any buildings in this area

(GLHER Record fef: 050757/00/00 - MLO11301).

4.3.10 The fields that make up the site are recorded as being utilised for either arable land or

meadow and pasture.

The Modern Period (AD 1801 – present)

4.3.11 The earliest available modern map depicting the site is the 1868 Ordnance Survey (OS) map

(Plate 2). The only change of note is the former track across the northern part of site is no

longer indicated. Field boundaries can also be seen to have changed slightly both within the

site and the surrounding area.

4.3.12 In the wider area, a railway line can be seen to have been established c. 300m east of the

site, while the ‘Harrow School Bathing Place’ [AB 8] is depicted c. 200m west of site.

Plate 2: 1868 6’ OS map (NLS, 2019)

4.3.13 The 1897 OS map (Plate 3) depicts the establishment of the Metropolitan Railway since the

prior map (Plate 2). This line still forms the northern boundary of the site. This can be seen to

have resulted in some limited alterations to field boundaries within the site, but no other

features other than footpaths are indicated. This is repeated on the 1914 OS map (not

depicted – available online at NLS, 2019), which shows no changes.




Plate 3: 1897 25’ OS map (NLS, 2019)

4.3.14 The 1937 OS map (Plate 4) shows that much of the area of farmland between Watford Road

and the railway line to the east of site has been turned into Northwick Park Golf Course after

1914. A pair of fields remain at the very north of the site, adjacent to the Metropolitan Railway

line, while some remain to the south and east of the Bathing Place [AB 8]. Northwick Park

underground station [AB 10] was opened in 1923 beginning the urban expansion of the

surrounding area (Historic England, 2019b) and to the east and north of the railway lines on

Plate 4 housing terraces can be seen to have been constructed.

4.3.15 Watford Road [AB 5] to the west of the site, previously depicted within the site boundary, is

now depicted as repositioned slightly to the west of its original route, in the location that it

occupies today.

Plate 4: 1937 25’ OS map (NLS, 2019)




4.3.16 Aerial photographs dating to the late 1930s (not depicted, available online at BFA, 2019:

image references EPW062755 & EPW062760 - 61) confirm that most of the site was located

within Northwick Park golf course at this time, with no other structures or features visible.

4.3.17 A 1945 aerial photograph (Plate 5) shows a possible military camp [AB 11] partially within the

north-west area of the site. This was not visible on pre-1940s aerial photographs and no

records could be found for it. This may represent a temporary camp relating to World War II,

with the structures almost certainly ‘Nissen’ huts; prefabricated temporary structures.

Plate 5: Possible World War 2 camp in 1945 aerial photo (Google Earth, 2019)

4.3.18 The first substantial development of the site began with the establishment of Harrow technical

college in 1959. Northwick Park hospital was built from 1962 onwards, while Northwick Park

Village at the southern end of site was built in 2001 (Hidden London, 2019).

4.4 Site Visit

4.4.1 A site visit was undertaken by Paul Cooke (Heritage Consultant, AB Heritage) on the 3rd June

2019. The purpose of this visit was to gain a greater understanding of the existing land use

and past impacts within the current site limits, along with an appreciation for the potential

survival of below ground archaeological deposits. Photograph locations are shown on Figure

4.

4.4.2 The site visit will be sub-divided into the following site divisions as per the masterplan used for

this assessment (Figure 3), comprising:

• A1 – Boiler House Land;

• A2 – Car Park land;

• A3 - Nightingale Avenue;

• B – LB Brent Site;




• C - University of Westminster Land, and;

• Highway Works Area.

A1 – Boiler House land

4.4.3 This part of the site contains a waste disposal area, including boiler house with tall chimney,

as well as an education and development training block at its southern edge (Photos 1 – 2).

4.4.4 Much of the area between the buildings consists of tarmacked areas of hard standing (Photo

1).

Photo 1: Northern part of Area A1, looking north-east




Photo 2: Southern part of Area A2, looking east

A2 – Car Park land

4.4.5 This area of the current site contains two car-parking areas to the north and south, with an

east-west alignment of buildings of varying form and function between them. The northern

part of this area is also occupied by temporary portacabin-type buildings, with a rough yard

area at their eastern end (Photos 3-6). A pair of buildings also exists to the south of the

southern car park.

Photo 3: General view of Area A2, looking north-east




Photo 4: View of northern parking zone in Area A2, looking east

Photo 5: view of southern parking zone in Area A2, looking east




Photo 6: View of north-east corner of Area A2, looking north-west

4.4.6 The buildings present on site were a mix of construction types and period, with a large

generator/transformer complex between the carparks, contrasting with relatively

temporary/light-weight buildings at the east (a nursery) and the northern part of the area.

4.4.7 Evidence for below-ground services such as drainage were present throughout, whilst it

appeared probable that there had been some landscaping; the main northern car-parking

area sits up to c. 1m higher than the access road (Photo 4), whilst the central buildings and

southern car-park were at a lower level / terraced in, at the same level as the road. A grassed

area at the western edge of the area, in front of a building, was also raised above surrounding

ground level.

A3 – Nightingale Avenue

4.4.8 This area, known as Northwick Park Village, is located at the southern end of the site, and

comprises residential properties, gardens and access roads (Photos 7 – 9).




Photo 7: General view of Area A3, looking north

Photo 8: General view of Area A3, looking west




Photo 9: General view of Area A3, looking north

4.4.9 The properties comprise two to four-storey buildings. Much of the site appears to have been

levelled and landscaped, with some properties and gardens, such as to the north-west of the

area, slightly raised, but most of the rest of the site, including access roads and parking on

the same level. A grassed mound at the far south-west corner of the area (where Photo 9 has

been taken from) has likely been raised.

4.4.10 Evidence for below-ground services was visible around the site, including on the grassy

mound at the far south-west corner of the area.

B – LB Brent Site

4.4.11 This part of the site comprises a sub-triangular area of grassy meadow to the north of Area

A1 (Photo 10).

Photo 10: General view of Area B, looking south




4.4.12 There were no archaeological earthwork-features evident. A manhole cover in the north-east

corner of the site (foreground in Photo 10) demonstrated that there is at least one below-

ground service present.

4.4.13 The hedge which forms the eastern border of this area, as well as Areas A1 – A3, is likely to

be the field boundary depicted on 19th – 20th century imagery (Plates 1 – 5).

C - University of Westminster Land

4.4.14 This area forms the northern and largest part of the site. It is roughly split into two different

areas which will be considered separately.

Area C – Northern half

4.4.15 This part of Area C consists primarily of campus buildings, interspersed with grassed areas

and pedestrian/vehicle access, while the north-west corner is occupied by a carpark (Photos

11 – 13). In places, buildings can be seen to be terraced into the prevailing slope which rises

to the west/north-west.

4.4.16 As with areas A1 – A3, some grassed areas appear to be slightly raised or mounded, such

as in to the south of the accommodation blocks (Photo 13). Services were visible around the

site, including in the grassed areas.

Photo 11: General shot of Area C from north-west corner, looking east




Photo 12: General shot of Area C from north-east corner, looking west

Photo 13: General shot of campus buildings from centre of Area C, looking north-west

Area C – Southern half

4.4.17 This part of the site consists primarily of grassed areas with sparse planting, which contained

evidence of buried services (such as manhole covers); at its western end there is also a

single building with a covered area to its south, with a carpark to the west of these structures

(Photos 14 – 16). The grassed area has a short, relatively steep slope down to the south to

the boundary with the hospital, suggesting there has been some landscaping.




Photo 14: South-west of Area C, looking south-west

Photo 15: South-west corner of Area C, looking south-east




Photo 16: Southern part of Area C, looking east

4.4.18 Linear parch-marks were visible to the east of the building and associated covered area, at

the base of a rise to the west (Photo 17). These may relate to the 20th century use of the site,

as they do not appear to correlate with any former boundaries or features on historic

mapping.

Photo 17: Linear parch-marks in Area C, looking north

4.4.19 The south-eastern corner of Area C is a meadow which is at a lower level than the ground to

its west, and has a soil bund to its north, separating it from a footpath serving the campus

(Photo 17). It is unclear if the meadow area has been lowered, or if the area around it raised.




Photo 18: South-east corner of Area C, looking north-west

Highway Works Area

4.4.20 The proposed highway works is aligned east to west, with Northwick Hospital to the south and

Area C to the north (Photo 19). The area covers the existing access arrangement of Watford

Road.

4.4.21 This area comprises roads, carparking areas and grassed areas with relatively mature

planting, primarily along its northern and western edges,

4.4.22 While this area does not contain any buildings, it is relatively flat, and is at a lower level than

Area C to its north which may indicate that this area of the site was reduced in level during

construction. There was also evidence for below-ground services, such as drainage.

Photo 19: View west along Highway Works Area




5. CULTURAL HERITAGE POTENTIAL & IMPACTS

5.1 Known Cultural Heritage Resource

Within the site

5.1.1 The north-eastern corner of the site (Area B) falls within the 20th century Northwick Park [AB

9].

5.1.2 A possible former World War II camp [AB 11], shown in an aerial photograph taken in 1945

(Plate 5), was located in the north-west part of Area C.

5.1.3 The Highways Works area overlies the former location of Sheepcote Farm [AB 7], depicted

on the Milne map of 1800 (Plate 1), as well as the former route of Watford Road [AB 5].

Within the study area

5.1.4 Sites identified within the study area are limited to find-spots from the Prehistoric to Post-

Medieval periods [AB 1 – 4 & 6]. Find-spots [AB 1 – 4] were all located in fields at between c.

330m to 750m west of the site.

5.1.5 Modern activity within the study area near the site consists principally of Harrow Bathing Pool

[AB 8], Northwick Park Station [AB 10] and Northwick Park itself [AB 9].

5.2 Past Impact Within the Site Boundary

5.2.1 The site visit has identified that all areas of the site are considered likely to have had a degree

of past impacts. These are expected to consist primarily of the following:

• Landscaping to provide level/terraced/built-up areas;

• The excavation of foundation trenches for building construction;

• Excavation for the provision of below-ground services, and;

• Potential historic ploughing/drainage work.

5.2.2 The severity of potential past impacts from all of the above are judged to be greater in areas

A1, A2, A3, C (northern half) and the Highway Works Area. Area B and the southern half of

Area C have been less visibly subjected to modern development.

5.3 Potential Archaeological Resource

5.3.1 Due to the relative paucity of evidence recorded within the 1km study area in the GLHER and

other sources, combined with the likely past impacts within much of the site boundary, it is

considered that there is a Low probability of encountering archaeology from the Prehistoric to

Medieval periods (i.e. Very unlikely to be encountered on site). There will therefore be no

Impact Assessment in relation to such remains.

5.3.2 The former Sheepcote Farm [AB 7] is known from historic mapping to have been located

within the Highway Works Area of the site. The origins of the farm are not well known, and it

is not included in the GLHER. However, as a former farmstead of at least late 18th century




date, and possibly earlier, its remains, should they survive, would be considered to be a

heritage asset of at least Local Importance.

5.3.3 Considerable modern development in the Highway Works Area has potentially adversely

impacted the survival of any remains of Sheepcote Farm. It is considered, therefore, that

there is a Medium probability of encountering remains.

5.4 Predicted Impact of Proposed Development

5.4.1 For the purposes of this report, predicted impacts are considered where there is a Medium or

greater potential for remains to be present. Therefore, impacts are considered in relation to

the potential remains of Sheepcote Farm only.

5.4.2 The Proposals for the Highway Works Area are to construct a new road infrastructure. At his

stage there are no detailed designs for this work however it is likely to involve some

excavations for roads and associated drainage. As the level of survival of the potential

remains of the farm is not known and the scope of the proposed works has not been

provided, there is currently an Uncertain Magnitude of Impact to the buried remains of

Sheepcote Farm, should they be present.




6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1.1 This desk-based assessment has established that archaeological evidence within the site and

its study area is very limited. Furthermore, much of the site has potentially been subject to a

range of below-ground impacts, particularly in Areas A1; A2, A3 & the northern part of Area C

and the Highway Works Area.

6.1.2 There is considered to be a Medium potential for the remains of Sheepcote Farm to survive

within the Highway Works Area of the site. However, the overall potential for the survival of

other archaeological deposits from all periods is thought to be Low.

6.1.3 Given the low level of information regarding the archaeological resource and the lack of

previous investigations on the site, the presence of previously unknown archaeological

remains of the Prehistoric to Medieval periods cannot be ruled out.

6.2 Outline Recommendations

6.2.1 Due to the uncertainty regarding the survival of remains across the site and in particular the

remains of the former Sheepcote Farm, it is recommended that an Archaeological Trial

Trench Evaluation be conducted to investigate the levels of previous impacts and establish

the survival or absence of below-ground archaeological remains within the site.

6.2.2 The Trench Evaluation should focus on Areas B, the southern part of Area C and the former

location of Sheepcote farm but would also need to investigate other areas to ascertain the

level of past impacts, where ground conditions allow. This work would require the formulation

of a Written Scheme of Investigation, to be approved by the LPA, which would detail the

timing, coverage and methodology of such a scheme of works. This work could be delivered

as part of a programme of archaeological works via a condition attached to the grant of

planning consent.

6.2.3 As part of a programme of works the results of the Trench Evaluation would be used to inform

any further mitigation strategy should archaeological remains be encountered, and dependant

on their scale, extent and importance. This could take the form of further trenching, targeted

excavation, or a watching brief, if required and as agreed with the LPA.

6.2.4 All recommendations are subject to approval from the Local Planning Archaeologist.




7. REFERENCES

Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/46/contents

The Archaeology Data Service, 2019. https://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/

BGS (British Geological Society) 2017. Geology of Britain viewer

http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html

Brent Borough Council, 2016. Development Management Plan.

https://www.brent.gov.uk/services-for-residents/planning-and-building-control/planning-

policy/local-plan/development-management-policies/

Britain from Above, 2019. https://britainfromabove.org.uk/en

The Cambridge University Collection of Aerial Photography (CUCAP), 2019.

https://www.cambridgeairphotos.com/

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, 2017. Standard and Guidance for Historic

Environment. Desk Based Assessment. http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/node-

files/CIfAS&GDBA_2.pdf

Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service, 2015. Guidelines for Archaeological

Projects in Greater London. https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/glaas-

standards-for-archaeological-work/

Greater London Authority, 2017. The London Plan: The Spatial Development Strategy for

London consolidated with alterations since 2011. https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-

do/planning/london-plan/current-london-plan/london-plan-2016-pdf

Greater London Authority, 2019. Draft New London Plan. https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-

do/planning/london-plan/new-london-plan/consultation-draft-new-london-plan

Heritage Gateway, 2019. https://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/gateway/

Hidden London, 2019. Northwick Park, Brent. http://hidden-london.com/gazetteer/northwick-

park/

Historic England, 2019a. Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic

Environment - Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning: 2.

https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/gpa2-managing-significance-in-

decision-taking/gpa2/

Historic England, 2019b. Pastscape – Northwick Park Station.

http://www.pastscape.org.uk/hob.aspx?hob_id=509553

London Metropolitan Archives, 2019. Review of historic mapping and records.

Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government, 2019. National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF).

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.

pdf




MOLA, 2000. The archaeology of Greater London: An assessment of archaeological evidence

for human presence in the area now covered by Greater London.

https://www.mola.org.uk/archaeology-greater-london-assessment-archaeological-evidence-

human-presence-area-now-covered

The National Collection of Aerial Photography (NCAP), 2019. https://ncap.org.uk/

National Library of Scotland, 2019. Ordnance Survey mapping. https://maps.nls.uk/

Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act, 1990

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/9/pdfs/ukpga_19900009_en.pdf

Appendices




Appendix 1 Cultural Heritage Gazetteer

This gazetteer incorporates all archaeological and historical sites identified on the Greater London HER (GLHER), and other sources within the 1km

study area.

Abbreviations

NGR - National Grid Reference HLC - Historic Landscape Character Area MLO – GLHER monument prefix ELO – GLHER event prefix

AB No. Period Description NGR Reference No.

1 Prehistoric E of Peterborough Rd: Prehistoric flint scraper TQ 1573 8739

052006/00/00 - MLO15605

2 Prehistoric E of Peterborough Rd: Iron Age pottery sherds TQ 1580 8730

052005/00/00 - MLO23398

3 Roman E of Peterborough Rd: 4 pieces of Roman Tile found TQ 1580 8780

052032/00/00 - MLO14324

4 Medieval Field W of Watford Rd: 4 13th century pot sherds recovered during fieldwalking. It was noted that such sherds are not uncommon.

TQ 1600 8770

052879/00/00 - MLO68478

5 Medieval Watford Road: Suggested in MOLA 2000 as being a main Medieval routeway CP - TQ 16146 87673

6 Post-Medieval Northwick Park: Pottery, brickwork, nails & a William and Mary coin found, may indicate a building

TQ 1680 8740

050757/00/00 - MLO11301

7 Post-Medieval - Modern

Sheepcote Farm: Former farm at west edge of site, and lane which ran through site

TQ 16228 87698

8 Modern Harrow Bathing Pool: Still extant former bathing pool at south-west corner of hospital grounds

TQ 16255 87466

9 Modern Northwick Park: Early 20th century to current park CP - TQ 16878 87507

MLO107308

10 Modern Northwick Park Station: Underground railway station 28th June 1923 as Northwick Park and Kenton on the Metropolitan line.

TQ 16647 87966

11 Modern Northwick Park: Possible World War 2 camp in aerial photo at north-west of site

TQ 16205 87874

KEY

0 500m

1:10,000

Site Boundary

© Crown Copyright 2019. Ordnance Survey Licence Number 100050237

Date 29/05/19

Figure 1: Site Location

Drawn by: Pighill

Job No: 60776

Project: Northwick Park, Harrow

87000

88000

1700

0

1600

0

KEY

0 500m

1:10,000

Site BoundarySite Boundary

Northwick Park (AB 9)

Search Area (1000m)

Monument

© Crown Copyright 2019. Ordnance Survey Licence Number 100050237

Date 05/05/19

Figure 2: Cultural Heritage Features Map

Drawn by: Pighill

Job No: 60776

Project: Northwick Park, Harrow

87000

88000

1700

0

1600

0

AB 1

AB 2

AB 3

AB 4 AB 7

AB 11

AB 8

AB 10

AB 6

AB 9

AB 1

AB 2

AB 3

AB 4 AB 7

AB 11

AB 8

AB 5AB 5

AB 10

AB 6

AB 9

AB Heritage Limited (Head Office)

Jarrow Business Centre, Rolling Mill

Road, Jarrow, South Tyneside, NE32 3DT

Tel: 03333 440 206

e-mail: [email protected]

Documents

1RUWKZLFN3DUN +DUURZ Archaeology Desk - Based ......Prepared By Paul Cooke Illustrated By Pighill Illustrations Approved By Alex Farnell GLHER Data Licence Number 14930 Rev Number