Botchergate Conservation Area Management Plan & Conservation

BOTCHERGATE CONSERVATION APPRAISAL AND MANAGEMENT PLANJULY 2012

BOTCHERGATE CONSERVATION AREA APPRAISAL

ContentsPage

Introduction 01

Planning Policy Context 01

PART 1 - Character Appraisal 04

Summary of Special Interest 04Definition of Botchergate's Special Interest 04Assessment of Special Interest 04Location and Setting 04Character Areas 06Historic Development and Archaeology 08Economic Regeneration 11Spatial Analysis 12Key Views and Vistas 13Character Analysis (by areas) 14Area One (northern portion of conservation area) 14Area Two (central portion of conservation area) 15Area Three (southern portion of conservation area) 17Public Realm 19Green Infrastructure 20Extent of Intrusion or Damage (negative factors) 20Neutral Areas 21

PART 2 - Management Plan 22

Conservation Area Boundary Review 22Public Realm 24Protection of Historic Fabric 24Article 4 Directives 25Development Opportunities 26SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) 29Implementation Matrix 30Bibliography 31


01

i. Introduction ii. Botchergate Conservation Area wasdesignated in January 1994. The designationwas preceded by work by the Carlisle andDistrict Civic Trust, the City Council, and oth-ers who had pressed for the designation inorder to protect the special architectural char-acter of Botchergate and resist threats to itarising from unsympathetic redevelopment orneglect.

iii. One of the primary threats to the con-servation area was the neglect, decay andloss of its historic fabric through the weak anddeclining economic position that Botchergatethen occupied. While subsequent years haveseen significant investments in parts of theconservation area, much of Botchergate stilllacks the economic robustness that wouldprovide a solid foundation for improvementand protection of those elements of qualitywithin the area which remain.

iv. This document is in two parts. The firstpart is a character appraisal of theBotchergate Conservation Area. The secondpart is a management plan which puts forwardproposals that will enhance and preserve thecharacter and appearance of the conserva-tion area. It identifies those sites and build-ings that may be the subject of developmentproposals and it expands on how CarlisleDistrict Local Plan Policy LE19 should beinterpreted in this conservation area.

v. Planning Policy Context

vi. The Planning (Listed Buildings andConservation Areas) Act 1990 imposes a dutyon Local Authorities to designate as conser-vation areas any "areas of special architectur-al or historic interest, the character or appear-ance of which it is desirable to preserve orenhance". The Act emphasises that theappraisal and designation of conservationareas are not to be considered ends in them-

Fig 01. A view across Christ Church Gardens - former site of the demolished Christ Church. To the left of the image is the‘Crown Works’ warehouse and to the right, Stanley Hall.

Fig 03. An incongruous 1960s structure, with significantpotential for redevelopment.

Fig 02. Botchergate has a legacy of both grand and modestcommercial buildings, but with many marred by poor qualityalterations.

selves. It places a duty on local authorities todraw up and publish proposals for the preser-vation and enhancement of conservationareas in their districts, and to consult the localcommunity about these proposals.

vii. Regional Planning Guidance for theNorth West (2003) has as one of its CoreDevelopment Principles Policy DP2'Enhancing the Quality of Life'. This includesthe need to identify important elements ofenvironmental, social and economic 'capital'so that Development Plans can introduce poli-cies which set out clearly those elements of'capital' where there is a presumption againstany harm arising from development. Wherepossible these policies should enhance thequality of life.

viii. At County level the Cumbria and LakeDistrict Joint Structure Plan (2005) Policy E34states that "measures will be taken to identify,record, protect, conserve or enhance areas,sites, buildings and settings or archeological,historic and architectural importance.Proposals which fail to preserve or enhancethe character or appearance of Conservationareas… will not be permitted unless the harmcaused to their importance and intrinsic inter-est is clearly outweighed by the need for thedevelopment". Policy E35 supports develop-ment which "includes measures to regenerateand upgrade rural, urban and urban fringeenvironments, both built and natural".

ix. The Carlisle District Local Plan(September 2008) has several policies relat-ing to Conservation Areas, the most importantbeing LE19 -

“LE19 Conservation Areas

The City Council will continue to review exist-ing and designate new conservation areas.


02

Development proposals within and adjoiningconservation areas will be granted planningpermission provided they preserve orenhance their character and appearance. Anynew development or alterations to existingbuildings should harmonise with their sur-roundings and be in sympathy with the set-ting, scale, density and physical characteris-tics of conservation areas, and protect impor-tant views into or out of such areas.Applications for outline planning permissionwill not be accepted for proposals in conser-vation areas. Proposals for new developmentand/or alterations to buildings in conservationareas will be judged against the following cri-teria:

1. the development should preserve orenhance all features which contribute posi-tively to the area's character or appearance,in particular the design, massing and height ofthe building should closely relate to adjacentbuildings and should not have an unaccept-able impact on the townscape or landscape;

2. the development should not have anunacceptable impact on the historic streetpatterns and morphology, roofscape, skylineand setting of the conservation area, impor-tant open spaces or significant views into, outof and within the area;

3. development proposals should notresult in the amalgamation or redrawing ofboundaries between traditional buildings andplots, or demolition and redevelopmentbehind retained facades;

4. wherever practicable traditional localmaterials such as brick, stone and slateshould be used and incongruous materialsshould be avoided;

5. individual features both on buildings


03

the Plan period the Council will actively seekto reduce the number of Buildings at Risk onthe national or local registers by assisting withproposals for their re-use which are sympa-thetic to their historic character and setting. Inaddition the Council will prepare a local list ofbuildings which are important for their historic,architectural design or location. Proposals forthe demolition of locally listed buildings will beresisted in order to maintain the contributionthey make to the local environment.

xiii. POLICY LE21 TownscapeImprovement Areas Within Carlisle's the CityCentre, Botchergate, Brampton andLongtown Conservation Areas, the CityCouncil will encourage the redevelopment orimprovement of buildings identified asfrontage improvement areas.

and contributing to their setting, should beretained e.g. doorways, windows, shopfronts,garden walls, railings, cobbled or flaggedforecourts, sandstone kerbs, trees andhedges, etc. Where features have deteriorat-ed to the extent to which they have to bereplaced, the replacement should match theoriginal;

6. proposals which would generate a sig-nificant increase in traffic movements andheavy vehicles or excessive parking demandswill not be permitted since these would beprejudicial to amenity;

7. proposals which would require sub-stantial car parking and servicing areas whichcan not be provided without an adverse effecton the site and its surroundings will not bepermitted”.

x. The direction given by this policy formsthe core of development guidance for theBotchergate Conservation Area. TheConservation Area Appraisal, theManagement Plan and detailed developmentbriefs, where appropriate, will give more spe-cific guidance as to matters of detail.

xi. Policy LE16 Historic Structures andLocal Listings is significant in an area with ahigh proportion of nineteenth century build-ings that retain considerable architectural,historical or townscape character.

xii. Policy LE17 Development Involvingthe Demolition of Unlisted Buildings inConservation Areas provides a general pre-sumption in favour of retaining buildings,which make a positive contribution to thecharacter or appearance of the ConservationArea.

xiii. Policy LE18 Buildings at Risk During

PART 1 - CharacterAppraisal1.1 Summary of Special Interest

Definition of Botchergate's Special Interest

1.1.2 Botchergate Conservation Area isfocused on the linear strip of Botchergate butexpands to encompass the triangularWoodrouffe Terrace development and alsoincludes St Nicholas Street as it ascendstowards Currock. It is bounded by CollierLane to the northwest, and encompasses TaitStreet and South View Terrace, but more gen-erally it follows the line of the backs of plots ofdevelopment fronting Botchergate (see planopposite).

1.1.3 It is characterised by a transition frommixed residential and modest retail provisionin the southern portion (Area 3), via an area ofcurrently weak retail in its central portion(Area 2), through to a more buoyant northernportion (Area 1). The northern portion of theBotchergate Conservation Area abuts the CityCentre Conservation Area and it has histori-cally aspired to the vibrancy and status of itsnorthern neighbour.

1.1.4 The special interest of the conserva-tion area arises from its historic role as a keyapproach to the City centre. This is seenphysically in its linearity, and also in the inten-sity of its uses - with intensity increasing thecloser one progresses northwards. Its historicrole was as a linear route between the gatesof the walled City and the south - the mostintensive development was closest to the Citygates (The Citadel), with a further historicnucleus at the medieval St Nicholas hospitalsite to the south of the current designation.

1.1.5 The physical attributes of the


04

Conservation Area, which should be pre-served and enhanced, range from the higherstatus 19th and early 20thC buildings whichemulate and extend the urban character ofthe City centre; through the smaller retail offerof the central section (which now struggles tofind its economic function); and lastly theareas of residential and mixed use, markingthe transition to the more conventional sub-urbs and terraced streets which have gradual-ly encompassed Botchergate.

1.2 Assessment of Special Interest

1.2.1 Location and Setting

1.2.2 Historically a suburb outside of thegates of Carlisle, Botchergate has been swal-lowed by the southerly expansion of the city.Until the opening of the M6 motorway in the1970, it formed the main route betweenGlasgow and London and it maintains its his-toric function as the primary route into the cityfrom the south. It remains a key route into thecity and a gateway point at which residentialsuburbs can be said to give rise to the urbancore of Carlisle.

1.2.3 Originally a linear development on theapproach to the walled city, Botchergatebecame increasingly urban and commercialduring the nineteenth century. Firstly narrowlanes, and later, spur roads were developedalong its length serving new development,until it became fully enmeshed as the heart ofthe web of streets that survive today. TheConservation Area is urban in character, withfew trees and only a single piece of greenspace within its boundaries. Its topography islargely level and it occupies a plateau in con-trast to land to west, which falls away to whatwere once the floodplains of the River Caldewand its water meadows.


05

CChhaattsswwoorr tthh SSqquuaarree //PPoorr tt llaanndd SSqquuaarree

CCoonnsseerrvvaatt iioonn AArreeaa

CCii ttyy CCeenntt rreeCCoonnsseerrvvaatt iioonn AArreeaa BBoottcchheerrggaattee

CCoonnsseerrvvaatt iioonn AArreeaa

SSSSeeeettttttttlllleeee ttttoooo CCCCaaaarrrrlllliiiisssslllleeee

CCCCoooonnnnsssseeeerrrrvvvvaaaattttiiiioooonnnn AAAArrrreeeeaaaa

Fig 04. ‘Area 1’ - The northern extremity of Botchergate - thelarge white building marks the beginning of the adjacent ‘CityCentre Conservation Area’.

Fig 05. Tait Street, a heavily trafficked residential side-streetto Botchergate within ‘Area 2’.


06

1.3 Character Areas

1.3.1 For the purposes of this appraisalBotchergate can be said to comprise threecharacter areas (illustrated by figures 3, 6 and7 and named areas 'One', 'Two' and 'Three').

Area 1

1.3.2 Area One comprises the part closest tothe Citadel at Botchergate's northern tip. Thisarea is the most urban in character and scale,reflecting its proximity to the railways stationand the commercial heart of Carlisle. Fromthe Victorian period it has been characterisedby buildings of some scale and grandeur.Though less grand than the architecturewhich occupies the adjacent Crescent area(City Centre Conservation Area) it has never-theless aspired to a similar status. Area Onehas hosted Botchergate's more recent com-mercial redevelopments, largely focused onthe evening economy and entertainment, andwhile there has been significant clearanceand reconstruction, there has also beeninvestment in the maintenance of the buildingstock.

Area 2

1.3.3 Area Two runs from Tait Street toRydal Street. It has less grandeur than AreaOne and the parts fronting Botchergate arecommercial in character. This section has suf-fered significantly from a decline in localshopping and by changing retail patterns andthis is evidenced by the neglected state ofmany of the buildings. The housing that previ-ously abutted the western flank of this sectionwas cleared in the 1960's and this hasreduced the population necessary to supportbuoyant commerce. By contrast Tait Streethas survived as a well-preserved residentialstreet of polite terraced housing and is nowGrade II listed.

Fig 03. The northern portion of the Botchergate ConservationArea is identified as ‘Area 1’.

Listed Buildings

Local List Buildings

Potential new Local List Buildings

Townscape Improvement Areas

Focal Areas for frontage improvement

Neutral impact areas

Fig 09. The four storey rendered building marks the begin-ning of London Road and ‘Area 3’


07

Fig 06. Area 2 Fig 07. Area 3

Fig 08. The 1905 Stanley Hall - a prominent Edwardian build-ing in ‘Area 2’ (prior to refurbishment)

Area 3

1.3.3 Area Three runs from Rydal Streetsouthwards, and encompasses both part ofLondon Road and also St Nicholas Street/StNicholas Bridges. The area is fragmentary incharacter and while the Grade II listed work-ers housing at Woodrouffe Terrace and StNicholas Street provide a ballast of quality,much of the frontage commercial units are ina poor state.

1.3.4 This is exacerbated by sites such as12-18 St Nicholas Street whose contributionto the streetscape, vitality and attractivenessof the area is negative, but which lie outsidethe Conservation Area boundary.

Listed Buildings






Listed Buildings






Fig 10. Smith’s 1746 map showing Botchergate and the road ‘to London’ to the bottom right of the frame. Towill 1996 p26


08

1.4 Historic Development and Archaeology

1.4.1 Botchergate, previously ‘Botchard-gate’, was originally a township forming thesouthern approach to Carlisle, and ownedaround the time of Henry I by one 'Botchard',a native of Flanders (1). G Smith's 1746 mapof Carlisle shows Botchergate as the principalroute south and framed by linear development(Figure 10). The character of existing devel-opment to the northern part of Botchergatereflects and continues a historic quirk, ashostelries and victuallers sprang up outsidethe gates of the City, closed after dark by anordinance of Elizabeth 1st and barring entryto travellers. 400 years on, this function stillserves many buildings on the northern part ofBotchergate.

1.4.2 Early development appears to haveconcentrated at its northern end, closest tothe entrance to the walled city, and tailed offtowards the south. An early occupant of thesouthern extremity of Botchergate was themedieval St Nicholas leper hospital, indicatingthe peripheral nature of this area. The hospi-tal occupied the site (just south of SouthStreet) until its sacking during the Civil War.Carlisle's gradual expansion during the 18thand nineteenth centuries saw the linear stripof Botchergate develop adjoining streets ofworking class housing, interspersed with theindustrial enterprises these residents served.The mixed residential and commercial natureof the main street became increasingly com-mercial, with an eclectic range of public hous-es, hotels, manufacturing, entertainment andretailers present. The proximity to CarlisleCitadel Station will have stimulated thisgrowth, and in particular that of the grander

Fig 11. Extract from 1821 Woods Map of Carlisle clearly showing the linear development that was creeping along Botchergate,with additional development occurring at 90degrees to the main street. Towill 1996 p52.


09

hotels which developed at the northernextremity.

1.4.3 The 1821 Wood's map shows the lin-ear nature of Botchergate indicating frontagedevelopment with occasional backland build-ings (Figure 11) . At its northern end the mewsbuildings of what is now Collier Lane can beseen to have been developed, with spurs ofbuildings perpendicular to the main street inwhat is now the vicinity of Tait Street andPortland Place.

1.4.4 By the 1860's good quality terracedhousing had struck out along the newlyformed Tait Street. Union Street (now RydalStreet), had begun to be lined with terracesbut South Street, Charles Street and CloseStreet had just been laid out (Fig 12).

1.4.5 The 1900 map (overleaf) shows theFig 12. 1869 Map of Botchergate


10

development of Botchergate and its hinter-land perhaps at the height of its urbanisation,with each side of the street densely lined withterraces interspersed with business and man-ufacturers. The narrow 'burgage' plots whichcharacterised ownerships on the 1821 maphave influenced the development of laterstages. These patterns can be seen to havedictated the shapes of developments such asthe Rickerby's agricultural works at the rear ofPortland Place (now a surface car park), andalso the numerous narrow lanes and courtsthat stretched back from the frontage, linedwith dense housing and workshops of whichthere is now little trace.

1.4.6 As the twentieth century progressedthere has been a tendency for developmentswhich have consolidated and obliteratedthese traces of early land ownerships, withlarge swathes of backland now coalesced intoareas of car parking or large footprint build-ings. The frontages have proved more robust,and while a number of buildings which spannumerous original plot widths (e.g. StanleyHall and Palace Arcade) the ground floor sub-divisions broadly reflect the 4-5m footprints ofearlier plots. Towards the southern part of thestreet unconsolidated smaller frontages arevery much still in evidence.

1.4.6 The area is architecturally notablethanks to the legacy of Victorian/Edwardiancommercial confidence, evident in survivingbuildings such as the Stanley Hall and thePalace Arcade and in some of the ornamentand confidence that can be seen in neigh-bouring buildings. Two notable places of wor-ship arose in this same period of civic confi-dence - the 1830 Christ Church (Demolishedin 1952) and in Area 3, the imposing church ofSt John's on London Road. The Christ Churchsite is now occupied by the underutilisedChrist Church gardens, providing the sole

Fig 13 - Botchergate at the peak of its urbanisation in 1901.

Fig 14. Botchergate remained largely intact until the mid1970’s when the terraces of King Street, Princess St andLord St were cleared.

Fig 16. The former public house at the corner of WoodrouffeTerrace and St Nicholas Street.

Fig 17. The Grade II listed Woodrouffe Terrace.


11

area of green open space within theConservation Area.

1.4.7 The peak of development onBotchergate is illustrated by the 1901 map (fig13). By the 1970s large areas of terracedhousing were cleared under the auspices ofslum clearance. It is likely that this resulted ina gradual depopulation of the area which con-tributed to a decline in the fortunes ofBotchergate. This depopulation was coupledwith the changes in shopping patterns and thedecline of the traditional high street commonto the latter half of the 20th Century. Notablesurvivors of these residential clearancesinclude the Grade II listed WoodrouffeTerrace, St Nicholas Street and Tait Street.These are characterised by modest but well-built domestic architecture, and a rhythm andrepetition of building elements such as well-proportioned window openings, architraving,chimney stacks and doorways which theirListing serves to protect (Fig 16 and 17).

1.4.8 Archeological interest may be presentthroughout the area. Previous archeologicalwork provides no more than glimpses of thelikely archeological potential. The area wasutilised in the Roman period, including for bur-ial. The medieval leper hospital of St Nicholasis also a likely focus of potential interest.Before the approval of any planning consent itis likely that an archeological evaluationshould be undertaken (Cumbria countyCouncil 2006).

1.5 Economic Regeneration

1.5.1 Efforts to revive the area gainedmomentum in the 1990's culminating with thecreation in 2003 of the English Gate Plazascheme. This involved the demolition ofalmost 150m of existing frontage buildings

Fig 15. Showing the loss of housing to the southwest of theConservation Area boundary and replacement with industrialunits.

Fig 18. St John’s Church on London Road is one of the morenotable buildings at the southern end of the Conservationarea.

Fig 19. A prominent building at 1 London Road, which hasrecently has render applied over its original brickwork


12

and their replacement with a mixed use devel-opment comprising office, retail, residentialand entertainment space. Commerciallylargely successful, this scheme and associat-ed investment to the northern part of theConservation area have led to investment inthe fabric of those historic buildings whichremain. This built on earlier restoration worksstarted in 1994 under the Conservation AreaPartnership (CAP) Scheme and City Councilgrants. Between 1994 and 1997 some£900,000 was invested in the Botchergatearea by English Heritage, the City Council,Housing Associations and the private sector(CAP bid 1997). This included a 'GroupRepair Scheme' for the listed buildings on StNicholas Street.

1.5.2 While the achievements made bythese investments must be recognised, it isfair to say that a significant portion of the con-servation area is currently in a poor state ofrepair and is suffering the twin perils of neg-lect and unsympathetic 'improvement'. Theparlous state of many of the buildings withinthe Conservation Area, and their neglect orunsympathetic alteration, is worsened by thegeneral decline in the retail strength of the'traditional high street' in the face of CityCentre or supermarket competition, and bythe changed character of its hinterland - thedense population that once abutted westernBotchergate has been cleared to make wayfor low density light industry which contributeslittle to the economic vitality of the high street.Opportunities to reinvent Lancaster Streetand its environs as a residential-led mixeduse area may help to provide the residentpopulation and vibrancy that the ConservationArea needs if it is to regain some of its formervigour.

1.6 Spatial Analysis

1.6.1 There is an evident building hierarchyon approaching the conservation area fromthe south. Within Area Three, (with the excep-tion of St John's Church - fig 18), buildings arelargely two storey and domestic in scale. Few'statement buildings' are evident within thisarea, perhaps with the exception of the corner

Fig 22. The long vista northwards up Botchergate towardsthe Citadel.

Fig 20. Open space at Christ church Gardens.

Fig 21. The vehicle dominated junction of St Nicholas Streetand London Road.


13

building to South Street/London Road, recent-ly the subject of unsympathetic modifications(fig 19). Building heights and commercialstature rise a little as one enters Area Two,with notable substantial buildings being theStanley Hall and Palace Arcade. In Area Onesurviving Victorian buildings have aspired tosome architectural sophistication, and thegeneral impression is of a mature urbanstreet. The 4-6m plot dimensions that is typi-cal of the length of Botchergate is largelyrespected in Area One, despite the amalga-mation of plot boundaries - the echoes of ear-lier plot widths can be seen in the subdivi-sions at ground level despite coalescence ofownership. As building heights rise in AreaOne, this pleasant rhythm of narrow plots andvertically emphasised buildings lends a dis-tinctive quality to the street. The rise in build-ing heights relative to street width in Area Onegenerates a greater sense of enclosure that isabsent in Area Three and only emerging inArea Two.

1.6.2 Two areas of 'openness' are evident.These are Christ Church gardens in Area Twoand the nodal 'open space' generated by thejunction of St Nicholas Road and theBotchergate/London Road interface. Althoughtraffic dominated and austere, this junction isa potentially important space within the con-servation area and one whose potential is asyet untapped. Christ Church gardens occupythe former Christ Church site. This genuinelygreen open space is significantly undercapi-talised, with no buildings presenting activefrontage to it, no through routes and little ani-mation.

1.7 Key Views and Vistas

1.7.1 The linearity of the conservation areameans that while there are a series of longdistance views towards landmarks including

the tower of Carlisle Cathedral, the Citadeland some prominent corner buildings alongBotchergate, it is unlikely that developmentwill significantly impede these views. Thestreet itself creates a largely unbroken senseof enclosure and where streets open up offthe main thoroughfare, or in the occasionalbreak in the frontage, no critical landmarks orvistas are evident. It may be that the biggestopportunity sites to create new vistas are

Fig 23. New apartments seen through the arch of the PalaceArcade.

Fig 24. Area One


14

Christ Church gardens and the St Nicholas Stjunction referred to above. At present theseareas are underwhelming but an appropriatelandscape / architectural intervention couldcreate focal points and vistas of note.

1.7.2 A recent example of a missed opportu-nity to utilise a vista to the mutual benefit ofboth the streetscape and the development isthe interface between the recent 'picturehouse apartments' and the large carriage archset within the Palace Arcade. The new build-ing nudges apologetically into view throughthe arch when it could have been designed asa complimentary element (fig 23).

1.8 Character Analysis (by areas)

1.8.1 Area One (northern portion ofconservation area)

1.8.2 Area One contains the conservationarea’s greatest concentration of good qualitycommercial Victorian/Edwardian architecture.The entire frontage, except for the recentdevelopments at English Gate, and the unfor-tunate (c1962) 30-34 Botchergate (fig 26), arelocally listed, with Harry Redfern'sCumberland Inn Grade II listed. The 2000-2003 English Gate Plaza and Ibis hotel devel-opment attempt to replicate the scale andrhythm of their Victorian neighbours but aremarkedly more austere and lack visual rich-ness. They benefit the Conservation Areahowever in that they have helped to injectnew uses into what was a series of vacantand increasingly decaying buildings, spurringinvestment in their retained neighbours.Design failings within the scheme include theblank elevations that frame the new incidentalopen space of English Gate Plaza, and thebarren car parking behind the new scheme. Itis testament to the visual strength of the

remaining architecture that such a substantialmodern development can be accommodatedwithout significant detriment to the characterof the street.

1.8.3 The traditional architecture in the areais diverse and in many cases exuberant. It isevident that there was a degree of competi-tion between Botchergate's Victorian develop-

Fig 27. Area Two

Fig25. Neglect of basic maintenance in the formerBoustead’s building, latterly Mood’s Nightclub.

Fig 26. An unfortunate 1960s insertion into the otherwiseimpressive buildings of the northern part of Botchergate.


15

ers to outdo their neighbours. A commonthread however is a strong vertical emphasis,with windows, mullions, columns, pilastersand chimney stacks contributing to this effect.The vulnerability of these buildings is greatestat ground level, where unsympathetic retailsignage and frontages can mar elevations. Afurther source of more fundamental damageis through the neglect of maintenance of thewider building that can bring about structuraldamage. Fig 25 shows rampant vegetation inthe gutters of the Boustead's Building whichwill almost certainly result in water ingressand costly damage if left unchecked.Cosmetic changes at ground level can atleast be remedied - as evidenced by theachievements of the CAP scheme - whereasstructural damage arising through neglectmay have more insidious impacts.

1.8.4 The building line is almost withoutexception on Botchergate hard-up to the backof the pavement. This reflects the intensity ofthe commercial uses here that dictated thateach plot and building should work as hard aspossible to make its presence known. Thenarrow plot widths and frequency of doorwaysonto the street helps to generate vitality.

1.8.5 Area Two (central portion of con-servation area)

1.8.6 The central part of the ConservationArea is at present the most vulnerable andeconomically weak. This places its buildingsat risk, as lower quality interventions may beconsidered by owners to be acceptableoptions. A notable negative influence on theappearance of this area arises from the unim-plemented planning consents for comprehen-sive redevelopment applying to the buildingsbetween South Henry Street and Rydal Street(fig 29). Notwithstanding this permission thebuildings themselves are of some modest

Fig 29. An unimplemented permission exists for this blockbetween Rydal and South Henry Street.

Fig 31. The site of the firstmainland UK post box, installedin 1853 on Botchergate.

Fig 32. Great improvments to the appearance of Stanley Hallwere made by McKnight’s builders in 2011.

Fig 33. The Palace Arcade building - sadly missing a pedi-ment previously located over the central arch.


16

architectural interest, in particular the low twostorey building at 149/151 Botchergate, (fig26) - in part as a result of benign neglect itsshop front has been retained. This block couldbe revived sympathetically and allowed onceagain to contribute to the quality of the streetif the currently proposed demolition and com-prehensive redevelopment were not to beenacted.

1.8.7 Adjacent to this block is the muchgrander Stanley Hall (119-147 Botchergate).Subject to a 1990's 'Living Over the Shop' ini-tiative the building was originally built as retailwith offices above, fronting the livestock mar-ket. The incremental loss of building elementsto this grand (though unlisted) 1905 buildingcan be seen here in the truncated chimneystack to the northern gable. A marked improv-ment has however been achieved by recentrefurbishment work to the building, and to aunified approach to the colour and design ofthe ground floor.

1.8.8 Opposite this building is the PalaceArcade. The building shows a broadly suc-cessful approach to its shop frontage in thenorthern portion, (fig 33) where the 'GaryEtherbridge' unit spans three bays but in sub-tle and attractive manner. The southern'palace cycles' signage is much more domi-nant and unnecessarily large. Neither occupi-er benefits aesthetically from the securityshutters which could be located more sensi-tively behind the glazing. The Palace Arcadeshows examples of the incremental loss ofarchitectural detail - in this case the missingpediment from the central gable, which throwsthe composition of the facade out of balance.With funding this could be reinstated.

1.8.9 The northern portion of the Palacebuilding was improved under the BotchergateConservation Area Partnership scheme in1994/1997 but the building is again showing

Fig 30. Truncated chimneystack to the Stanley Hall.

Fig 35. Area Three


17

some signs of deterioration. It is unfortunatethat the 'Picture House' residential develop-ment to the rear did not make more use of thearcade entrance, and indeed the adjacentChrist Church park.

1.8.10 An exception to the relative decay evi-dent in the central portion of the ConservationArea is the residential umbilical of Tait Street(fig 34). These polite mid-Victorian dwellingsare Grade II listed and retain the repeatingelements of sash windows, panelled doors,and detailing which lends coherence to ter-races. As a main traffic artery (in particularwhen Botchergate is partially closed on Fridayand Saturday nights) the environmental qual-ity of the street is somewhat compromised.The quality of the street is added to by itsavenue tree planting, and where necessarythese trees should be sensitively managedand replaced as specimens are lost. Anyreduction, or sensitive calming, of trafficwould enhance the quality of the street.

1.8.11 Area Three

1.8.12 This area stretches from Rydal Streetand through to St Nicholas Bridge. It encom-passes the confluence of 'Botchergate' as itbecomes 'London Road', and ends at the twinlisted public houses of The Cranemakers andThe St Nicholas Arms. The area is varied inquality, though significantly bolstered by thelisted pubs and the Grade II listed terraces atSt Nicholas Street and Woodroufe Terrace.The quality of these buildings contrasts withthe unprepossessing retail fronting the rest ofthe area. These retail elements (figs 36 and38) are characterised by essentially solidVictorian commercial buildings marred bypoor late twentieth century shopfronts, andunsympathetic alterations. For example, thepreviously fine brick building at 1 LondonRoad has been unsympathetically altered,with its brickwork hidden by cement render,

Fig 34. The Grade II listed residential terraces of Tait Street,enhanced by legacy of Victorian tree planting.

Fig 36. More sympathetic signage and resinstatement ofappropriate window designs would lift this row considerably.

Fig 37. 12-16 St Nicholas Street although outside the conser-vation area has a negative visual impact on it.

Fig 38. ‘Street clutter’ at the junction of St Nicholas Streetand London Road, impeding pedestrian access and eroding‘sense of place’.


18

and delicate curved sash windows replacedby PVCu (fig 9).

1.8.13 Nonetheless, even within this areathere is potential to retrieve some lost quality.Shop front improvements as achieved by the1990's CAP scheme could significantlyenhance the area. Further substantial poten-tial to elevate the condition of this part of theconservation area comes from the possibilityof redevelopment of 12-16 St Nicholas Street(Fig 37) - the unsympathetic 1970's low riseshopping parade which although it lies out-side of the conservation area, exerts a strongnegative influence within it.

1.8.14 As touched on above, the confluenceof open space created at the junction of StNicholas Street and Botchergate/LondonRoad offers potential for significant improve-ment. Currently beset by an array of unsym-pathetic traffic management pedestriancages, chicanes and general highways clutter(fig 38) the space could be simplified andmade more usable by pedestrians seeking tocross the road. The apex of the St Nicholastriangle, currently occupied by WCs, anunsightly telephone kiosk and a blank gablecould be put to better use. The council'sUrban Design SPD suggests this as a site forartwork but a device as simple as a singlespecimen tree would be an equally suitablemeans to mark this nodal point.

1.8.15 Botchergate hosts two public housesdesigned by Harry Redfern under the CentralControl Board/State Management Scheme inthe 1920s and 1930s. The quality of suchpubs is generally high and, reflecting thesehigh standards of quality and design, seven ofthis group across Carlisle have listed status,including Botchergate's Grade II listedCumberland Arms. The unlisted former 'EarlGrey (opened in 1935) is now a martial artscentre (fig 39).

Fig 39. The former 'Earl Grey’, lattery ‘The Jester' publichouse, built by Harry Redfern,exhibits a strong art-deco char-acter and contributes positively to the streetscene.

Fig 40. Setts and sandstone kerbs and paving at MaryStreet.

Fig 41.Surviving setted surfaces on various side streets tothe area could be readily exposed revealing historic charac-ter.

Fig 42. Unsightly bollards and guardrailing close to StNicholas Street.

Fig 43. An impressive mature plane tree to the front of the StNicholas Arms, protected by a Tree Preservation Order.


19

1.9 Public Realm

1.9.1 The public realm in the conservationarea is of varied quality. It has few deliberate'open spaces' and with the exception of ChristChurch gardens and consequently the 'publicrealm' is largely made up of highway and foot-paths. In general the impression of the area isof a place dominated by vehicular movement.The northern portion of Botchergate was sub-ject to an improvement scheme arising fromthe development of English Gate plaza andas such has a relatively consistent palette ofpaving, lighting and street furniture. AreasTwo and Three are more varied and the mainthoroughfare is largely paved in poor qualitymaterials which do not contribute to the char-acter of the conservation area. The floorscapeis a mixture of clay paviours, concrete flagsand tarmac.

1.9.2 There is more interest however in sidestreets where there are a number of survivalsfrom the Victorian and early twentieth century.This is a result more of accidental survivalrather than a deliberate policy of conserva-tion. High quality basalt setts (fig 40) can beseen on several side streets, in particular onthe western side of the Conservation Areawhich has suffered most from a benign neg-lect. Princess Street and Albion Street haveretained their setted carriageways anddespite the loss of their original buildings, thisfloorscape offers an element of quality aroundwhich a new streetscape can begin to devel-op. In Area One, Collier Lane and Mary Streetare similarly paved, although Collier Lanerequires extensive restoration due to inappro-priate reinstatement following utility works. Itis likely that setts may exist under the tarmacon other streets within or adjacent to the con-servation area.

1.9.3 The greatest concentration of utilitari-an lighting and intrusive highways items is in

Fig 44. neglected maintenance of gutters leading to vegeta-tion growth and likely damage to building fabric.

Fig 45. A neglected gutter spilling water onto masonry andwindow below.

Fig 46. Buddleia growing in coping could eventually unseatthe masonry unless removed.


20

Area Three, in particular around the StNicholas junction. Impromptu bollards (Fig42) and extensive guardrailing create anatmosphere of lack of care and severelyweaken the integrity of the conservation area.It is likely that a great number of these itemscould be reduced or removed if the area werethoroughly audited and pedestrians given theprimacy which the movement hierarchyaffords them.

1.10 Green Infrastructure

1.10.1 With the exception of Christ Churchgardens, whose potential as a focal point fornew development has been identified above,there is no other public green space within theconservation area.

1.10.2 With the exception of the avenue treeplanting that survives and benefits Tait Street,there are only a handful of trees in the area.Two of these are located to the front of StJohn's Church and the third is within the frontyard of the St Nicholas Arms. Alongside thepotential to enhance the St Nicholas junctionwith structural planting there is the opportuni-ty to soften the rest of Botchergate throughappropriate planting of columnar street trees.This is identified as a goal in the UrbanDesign SPD for Carlisle and potential loca-tions for this are identified in the appendix.

1.11 Extent of Intrusion or Damage (negative factors)

1.11.1 The conservation area has sufferedsignificant damage and erosion to its charac-ter by incremental loss of historic features anddetailing. Loss of timber sash windows andreplacement with PVCu, removal or damageof architectural elements such as finials,chimney stacks and removal of historic shopfronts all lower the architectural integrity of thearea. Neglected maintenance is usually a

false economy and failure for example to fixleaking gutters or clear debris can lead toexpensive structural problems. Fig 45 showsa cracked gutter whose water has spilled onto windows and masonry below, hasteningdecay and causing potentially costly damage.Figure 46 shows vegetation whose continuedgrowth is likely to damage masonry and allowwater ingress into the building.

Fig 48. 98-106 Botchergate. These buildings are typical of those which currently border negative/neutral but which could beenhanced through a shopfront enhancement programme.


21

1.11.2 The loss of character through activitiessuch as rendering a building and the stoppingup of windows may fall within planning controland building owners should check with theplanning authority to verify if any permissionsare required before they carry out proposedwork.

1.11.3 The local authority has a number ofpowers to secure improvements where build-ings are suffering neglect and are harmingeither protected structures such as listedbuildings or the amenity of the area. Theseinclude Urgent Works Notices (as used in2012 on the nearby Central Plaza Hotel) ,Repairs Notices, and Amenity Notices'.

1.12 Neutral Areas

1.12.1 The tightly drawn boundary of theBotchergate Conservation Area has resulted

Fig 47 The English Gate Plaza development could be characterised as ‘neutral' in its impact on the conservation area.

in little that can be considered 'neutral' beingincluded. It could be said that the EnglishGate Plaza development fits into the neutralcharacter, neither enhancing nor detractingfrom the appearance of the conservationarea. A number of the less notable buildingswithin areas Two and Three could be consid-ered as neutral, bordering on negative, yetthe majority of these buildings are capable ofa positive contribution to the ConservationArea if their lost historic elements (appropriateshop fronts, timber windows and detailing)were restored.

1.12.2 The CAP scheme which mainly bene-fited Area One shows the ability for buildingssuch as the previously decaying County Hotel(City Centre Conservation Area) to leap a cat-egory and become a more positive element.

Fig 49. The impressive Crown Works building, Crown Streetwith Lancaster Street in the foreground.


22

2 PART 2 - Management Plan

2.1 Despite its issues, Botchergate is still adynamic place where people live, work andvisit. The conservation area designation is notdesigned to preserve what is there at presentin aspic, but is intended to guide change andto enable development which makes the bestuse of the area’s attributes for the benefit ofall. There are a number of measures whichcan be taken to actively preserve the qualitiesof the area and to promote improvement.

2.2 Conservation Area BoundaryReview

2.2.1 The Conservation Area boundary wasdrawn in 1994. Since that time there has beensubstantial redevelopment on the EnglishGate Plaza site and the emergence of devel-opment opportunities at other points in thearea. The current boundary in the vicinity ofEnglish Gate Plaza reflects former plotboundaries which are now obliterated. It isrecommended that this portion of boundaryshould be redrawn to reflect the building foot-prints of the new development. This is shownin figure 52. To the immediate east of thisboundary the Botchergate Conservation Areaabuts the Portland and Chatsworth SquareConservation Area.

2.2.2 It could be argued that there are sev-eral sites adjacent to the Conservation Areawhose development might adversely impactupon it and that the boundary should be mod-ified to include these. Such sites include thegarage complex at 27-29 London Road (Fig50), the 1960s development at 12-18 StNicholas Street and the area abutting ChristChurch Gardens.

2.2.3 The site at 27-29 London Road,though the subject of developer interest, is

mainly visually separated from theConservation Area by the terraced frontage toLondon Road. It is likely that development onthis site will not be visible from theConservation Area. For this reason it is notrecommended that the site is brought withinthe conservation area boundary.

2.2.4 The units at 12-16 St Nicholas Streethave a marked detrimental impact on theappearance and vitality of the conservationarea. It is likely that the buildings areapproaching the end of their design-life, and itis possible that they will be brought forwardfor redevelopment. It is therefore suggestedthat the conservation area is redrawn toinclude these buildings so as to ensure thattheir replacements contribute positively totheir context. This is especially importantgiven the need for future redevelopment torespond sensitively to the listed residential

Fig 50. Garage building at 27-29 London Road. A potentialdevelopment site but not readily visible from within the con-servation area.


23

properties directly opposite on St NicholasStreet.

2.2.5 The sole significant open space in thearea is Christ church gardens. While it hasbeen improved moderately by the construc-tion of new apartments immediately adjacent,these have failed to capitalise on their neigh-bour and there is no active connectionbetween the two. The remaining boundariesto the park are currently a small surface carpark and two warehouses. The redevelop-ment of any of these uses offers the opportu-nity to significantly enhance the park. The riskof development adversely affecting the park isalso high, and as such it is suggested thatportions of the adjacent building plots arebrought within the revised conservation areaboundary.

Fig 51. Current Conservation Area Boundary. Fig 52. Proposed extension and rationalisation of boundaryshown as broken line covering 3 modifications.

Fig 53. Proposed revised boundary rationalising line atEnglish Gate Plaza and extending at Christ Church gardensand 12-16 St Nicholas Street.

Fig 54. Christ Church gardens, separated from LancasterStreet by fencing and a surface car park.

Fig 55. Guardrailing at St Nicholas Street.

Fig 56. A cast iron street nameplate which could readily berestored, adding some quality to the streetscape.

Fig 57 Restoration of Setts on Collier Lane.


24

2.3 Public Realm

2.3.1 The primary challenges to the publicrealm in the conservation area are the need toimprove the animation of the handful of publicspaces that currently exist - Christ ChurchGardens and the St Nicholas/London Roadintersection. The former space requires activeuses to front onto it. This is expanded on indetail under 'development opportunities'below. The latter 'highways' space suffersfrom a high degree of 'street clutter' - opportu-nities should be taken to review and auditexisting provision and to identify opportunitiesfor simplification or removal.

2.3.2 Other elements of note exist in theretained historic surfaces to Collier Lane,Mary Street and other side streets whichretain their setted surfaces. These high quali-ty basalt setts are an integral part of the char-acter of the conservation area. Wherever pos-sible they should be retained and reinstatedwhere they have sustained damage (e.g. insections of Collier Lane damaged by utilitytrenching). The protection of these surfacesshould extend along the length of thosestreets which adjoin the Conservation areae.g. King Street and Princess Street - in thesecases they offer an element of public realmquality which can be used to enhance futurebuilt-development.

2.3.3 Historic street nameplates are presentthroughout the area and could be inexpen-sively refurbished or reinstated where lost (fig56).

2.4 Protection of Historic Fabric

2.4.1 The bulk of residential properties with-in the conservation area are Grade II listed(Appendix 1). This affords them significantlevels of protection against changes whichcould erode their group value or architectural

Fig 59. An unlisted building on Blake Street retaining its origi-nal windows and contributing strongly to the quality of thearea.

Fig 60. 107-109 Botchergate which although having lost theiroriginal shopfronts, retain original sash windows capable ofrefurbishment.


25

integrity. They are however vulnerable to theusual impacts of neglect as the unoccupiedunits to the eastern end of Woodruffe Terraceindicate (fig 58).

2.4.2 In non-residential areas of theConservation Area, many of the incrementalchanges that have been made required plan-ning permission. This includes the replace-ment of timber windows with PVCu windowsand the replacement of shop frontages.Where there has been a breach of planningcontrol consisting of the carrying out withoutplanning permission of relevant works, noenforcement action may be taken after theend of the period of four years beginning withthe date on which the operations were sub-stantially completed (T&CP Act 1990 - asamended). Those works that required permis-sion but where none was sought may there-fore be enforced against within this time peri-od.

2.4.3 Unfortunately, many of the losses tohistoric fabric in Botchergate have occurredoutside of this four year enforcement opportu-nity, or were indeed carried out prior to thedesignation of the Conservation Area in 1994.Remediation of lost elements can be encour-aged as building owners bring their propertiesforward for redevelopment, or via grant incen-tives such as the CAPS scheme should fund-ing become available.

2.5 Article 4 Directives

2.5.1 Article 4 directives offer the opportuni-ty to restrict 'permitted development rights'and retain historic elements (e.g. timber win-dows), which can be removed where Article 4directives do not exist. Such directives com-monly apply to dwelling houses, the mainbeneficiaries of permitted development rights.However, the bulk of residential propertieswithin the Botchergate Conservation Area are

already Grade II listed, which offers enhancedlevels of protection above and beyond that ofan Article 4. This applies to Tait Street,Woodruffe Terrace and St Nicholas Street.Remaining residential areas such as SouthView terrace have largely already lost the his-toric detailing which an Article 4 would protect.

2.5.2 The remaining areas within the con-

Fig 58. Unoccupied former surgery at Woodrouffe Terrace,suffering casual vandalism.

Fig 62. Christ Church gardens - currently an undercapitalised asset. To work effectively, green spaces must have routes pass-ing through or around them, and be well overlooked. The space currently has none of these attributes.

Fig 63. There is potential for new residential/mixed use development in the area which could be focused on the Gardens, witha new access broken through onto Lancaster Street (indicative illustration only).


26

servation area are largely retail or other useswhich do not enjoy permitted developmentrights. Much of the incremental loss of archi-tectural elements in these buildings willrequire planning permission. It is therefore notlikely that an Article 4 direction would be ofbenefit to the Botchergate Conservation Area,unless it is to address the handful of remain-ing residential properties which retain historicarchitectural detail such as the sash windowsat No 1 Blake Street (fig 59).

2.6 Development Opportunities

2.6.1 A development brief for Botchergatewas adopted in 1994. Arising from this cameproposals to develop the sites in Area Onenow occupied by English Gate Plaza and theIbis hotel development. The former Co-Opsite on the west side of the street was rede-veloped as the Warner (Now Vue) cinema,with the cinema disguising its large bulk very

effectively behind the retained facade of thefire-damaged building.

2.6.2 Remaining opportunities include theunimplemented permission for the blockbetween South Henry Street and RydalStreet, although as noted above these build-ings could be reinvigorated without demoli-tion.

Fig. 61 The large vacant ‘Mood’ building could be subdividedto provide smaller retail units with upper floors suitable forresidential or office space.

Fig 64. 12-18 St Nicholas Street - although outside the cur-rent conservation area is a site whose enhancement wouldbe of great benefit to the wider area.

Fig 65. The junction of St Nicholas Street, London Road and Botchergate. Pedestrian movement and the aesthetics of thearea are extremely compromised at present by the primacy given to road traffic.

Fig 66. A number of possibilities exist to improve the streetscape through expansion of the pavement, decluttering and appro-priate planting (Illustrative purposes only).


27

Christ Church Gardens

2.6.3 The area bounding Christ Church gar-dens is a further key site. It offers the oppor-tunity to frame the open space with develop-ment and active frontage. A residential ormixed use development wrapping around thisopen space would give new life and purposeto the gardens. While the open space is notwithin the actual ownership of the CityCouncil, negotiation of frontage access fromsurrounding plots would significantly raise theattractiveness of the space and make it asafer and more useful space.

2.6.4 An indication of the potential of the siteis illustrated below. An increase in residentialuses would be a significant boost to theremaining retailers on Botchergate, but wouldcall for the rationalisation or relocation of anumber of ‘bad neighbour’ industrial uses inthe Lancaster Street area.

12-18 St Nicholas Street

2.6.5 The 1960s block at 12-18 St Nicholasoffers a further opportunity site, which if com-bined with surface parking to the rear andadjacent sites, offers a significant develop-ment opportunity. Development here shouldhave regard to neighbouring residential prop-erties, but the width and depth of the siteallows for a substantial development footprintthat could revive the fortunes of this part of

Fig 67. Opportunities exist to improve pedestrian priority andstreetscape along the length of Botchergate.

Fig 68. English Gate Plaza is a potential site for a public realmscheme to return space to the pedestrian and soften the hardurban landscape through avenue tree planting.


28

the conservation area. A suitable anchordevelopment at this point could serve to draw-er users southwards and invigorate the cur-rently parlous states of areas two and three.

2.6.6 The area at the junction of St NicholasStreet and the junction of London Road/Botchergate has the potential for significantpublic realm improvements while retaining itsrole as a main traffic artery. Rationalisation ofstreet clutter, expression of pedestrian desirelines and possible pavement expansion andtree planting offer opportunities to improve thearea. A potentially inexpensive set of improve-ments are illustrated above.

2.6.7 Regarding the conservation areasimmediate hinterland, there is further opportu-nity throughout the Lancaster Street area andits connecting roads. The mixed commercialdesignation allocated to this area has tendedto result in a low intensity landuse dominatedby single storey workshops and a largeamount of surface parking. This low intensityis far below the critical mass of activity andfootfall which a viable Botchergate requires ofits hinterland.

2.6.8 Some buildings of note remain withinthis area including the reading room at thewestern end of Lord Street; the Pagoda build-ing, which is a distinctive post-war building,and indeed some surviving remnants of ter-raced housing at the western ends of KingStreet and Princess Street

Fig 70. The former Pagoda building, a 1970’s office for Olivettiby Ted Cullinan Architects, now Edenside Carpets, is of someinterest as a distinctive 20th Century building.

Fig 69. Former Working Men’s Reading Room, Lord Street,opened in 1851. A rare survival from 1970’s clearance of theLancaster Street area.

2.6.9 It is recommended that an increase inresidential-led mixed use development cancreate this. An Area Action Plan, DevelopmentBrief or similar should be drafted for this areain order to direct the changes that are neededto revive the economic strength ofBotchergate, and to generate a level of landuse intensity appropriate to an inner-urbansite.

Strengths

• Strong sense of legibility as one approach-es the City and the scale of developmentincreases.• A small number of listed buildings whichretain their character.• Some imposing and confident Victorian andEdwardian buildings (mainly in area 1).

Weaknesses

• Economic decline very evident as distancefrom top end of Botchergate increases.• Poor quality shop fronts and neglectedbuilding fabric.• Loss of original features such as joinery,chimney stacks and architectural detailing.• Poor public realm and high levels of streetclutter.• Vehicle dominated environment.• Limited public open space and few streettrees.


29

Opportunities

• Key development opportunity in landfronting onto former Christ church graveyard.• Redevelopment of site at 12-16 St NicholasStreet forming edge of the Conservation Area.• Restoration of appropriate retail frontagesand reinstatement of missing original fea-tures.• Redevelopment of adjacent area(Lancaster Street) to create economic buoy-ancy for the CA.• Public realm enhancement throughremoval of highways clutter and implementa-tion of public realm enhancements.

Threats

• Economic decline of area leading to deteri-oration and neglect of buildings.• Further incremental loss of those originalfeatures which remain.• Lack of leverage funding via public purse tostimulate private investment.

2.7 SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities andThreats)


30

Bibliography

Newman, Richard (County Archaeologist)(unpublished April 2006) - 'CarlisleRenaissance - Historical EnvironmentAppraisal of Proposed Regeneration Sites',Cumbria County Council.Summerson, H (1993). Medieval Carlisle: TheCity and the borders from the late eleventh tothe mid sixteenth century Vol I, TheCumberland and Westmorland AntiquarianSociety, Gloucester.Towill, S. (1991) A History of Carlisle,Phillimore, Sussex.Towill, S. (1996) Georgian and VictorianCarlisle - Life Society and Industry, Carnegie,Preston.Carlisle and District Civic Trust (1990).Botchergate - A Study Carlisle and DistrictCivic Trust, Carlisle.Web Resources - Steve Bullman(http://www.stevebulman.f9.co.uk/cumbria/stcuthbert_f.html)Botchergate Carlisle, Dennis PerriamBotchergate Development Brief ConsultationDraft Carlisle City Council, Sept 1999Botchergate Conservation Area PartnershipScheme funding bid Carlisle City Council July1997Cumberland News - 'Convenient place for acall of nature' Friday, 08 August 2008


31

Documents

Botchergate Conservation Area Management Plan & Conservation