LEAZES CONSERVATION AREA CHARACTER STATEMENT · The future of the character of Leazes Park Road and...

LE A Z E S CO N S E RVAT I O N AR E A CH A R AC T E R STAT E M E N T

Leazes Conservation Area Character Statement

1 Leazes Conservation Area Character Statement

CONTENTS Page Number

1 INTRODUCTION 2

1.1 Terms of reference: conservation area evaluation 2

1.2 Leazes - purpose of designation, boundaries 4

2 CONTEXT OF LEAZES PARK 15

2.1 Leazes Park - preamble 16

Sub-area 1: Leazes Park 16

Sub-area 2i: Leazes Terrace and Leazes Crescent 19

Sub-area 2ii: St Thomas Estate 23

Sub-area 2iii: St James Terrace and St James Street 25

Sub-area 2iv: Leazes Park Road (east side) 27

Sub-area 3: Leazes Square 31

Sub-area 4: Strawberry Place, Barker & Stonehouse, Benefit Agency Offices 32

Sub-area 5: Percy Street 34

3 APPENDICES 37

Acknowledgements 43

2Leazes Conservation Area Character Statement

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Terms of Reference

This character appraisal has been prepared in response toGovernment advice.

Conservation AreasConservation areas were first introduced by the Civic AmenitiesAct 1967, and defined as being “areas of special architecturalor historic interest the character or appearance of which it isdesirable to preserve or enhance”. They depend on much morethan the quality of individual buildings, and take into accountfeatures such as building layout, open spaces, boundaries,thoroughfares, the mix of uses, use of materials, and streetfurniture. It is common for a conservation area to include anumber of buildings, which are designated as “Listed Buildings”because of their individual architectural or historic value.

Conservation Area AppraisalsThe approach to conservation area designation has altereddramatically in recent years. It is now recognised thatdevelopment plan policy, development control decisions,proposals for preservation or enhancement and the“management” of conservation areas can be best achievedwhen there is a clear and sound understanding of the specialinterest of the conservation area. PPG15 - “Planning and theHistoric Environment” urges Local Authorities to preparedetailed assessments of their conservation areas and states“the more clearly the special architectural or historic interestthat justifies designation is defined and recorded, the sounderthe basis for local plan policies and development controldecisions, as well as for the preservation and enhancement ofthe character and appearance of an area”.

Value of the AppraisalThe value of the appraisal is two-fold. First, its publication willimprove the understanding of the value of the built heritage. Itwill provide property owners within the conservation area, andpotential developers with clearer guidance on planning mattersand the types of development, which are likely to beencouraged. Secondly, it will enable Newcastle City Council toimprove its strategies, policies and attitude towards theconservation and development opportunities and prioritieswithin the conservation area. The appraisal will form a soundbasis for establishing effective conservation area policies;support the effective determination of planning and listedbuilding applications; and form relevant evidence in planningappeals with specific emphasis on those relating to thedemolition of unlisted buildings.

■ Bandstand - This is a replica which was introduced as partof the restoration of the park 2002/3.


Evaluation criteria

Buildings and Development sites

• Existence/proximity to listed buildings, schedulemonuments, protected trees, features of interest

• Grouping cohesiveness, linkage/relationships to otherbuildings

• Period, style, materials, colour, detail, proportions, status

• Uniqueness, distinctiveness, consistency, inventiveness

• Local, regional or national importance

• Completeness. Condition, construction

• Cultural, historical or “folk/popular” associations

• Archaeological and industrial archaeological value

• Orientation, access, form, height, plot shape

• Relationship to topography and urban grain

• Density/proximity to other buildings

• Historical or planning precedents

• Opportunity for creative contemporary solutions

• Threat from unsympathetic development

Streetscape

• Historical pattern

• Effect of proportion, alignment and topography onenclosure

• Street furniture, signs and features

• Landscaping and surfacing

• Shopfronts and commercial treatment

• Period, style, materials, colour, detail, proportion, status

• Relationship to urban grain

• Relationship and hierarchy with connecting spaces

• Cohesiveness and relationship with adjacent buildings

• Local, regional or national importance

• Completeness, condition, construction

• Cultural, historical or “folk/popular” associations

• Archaeological or industrial archaeological value

• Uniqueness, distinctiveness, consistency, inventiveness

• Visual and physical activity

• Traffic and access

• Effects of differing lighting conditions


1.2 LEAZES

Purpose of Designation

The Conservation Area lies to the north west of the City Centre,linking the main retailing core with more residential inner areas.The south eastern edge of the Conservation Area is formed byPercy Street, one of the main historical thoroughfares leadingfrom the old medieval city, shown on Speed’s maps of 1610 asa straggle of houses outside the city walls. The remainder of thesouth-eastern half of the Conservation Area was occupied bygardens until development commenced in the early 19TH.

century. The north-western half of the Conservation Area,Leazes Park was formed from part of the Castle Leazes, anarea of common grazing land said to have been granted tocertain burgesses by King John as compensation for theenlargement of the castle moat.

The overall character of the area has been shaped by 19thcentury development, and although some medieval propertiessurvived in Percy Street to the 1960’s nothing now survives ofearlier than the late 18th century.

Newcastle was late to develop significant residential areasoutside of its town walls, but from the 1790’s the Leazes Areawas attractive to developers and affluent residents alike with itssetting among gardens adjacent to the walks of Castle Leazes.The model of housing adopted was the Georgian terrace asdeveloped in London but initially in a rather plain and provincialstyle. There is a sharp contrast between these formal terracesin Georgian rectangular plots and the burgage plot layout ofPercy Street.

The eminent developments in brick were in Albion Street andAlbion Place (now called Leazes Park Road) followed by St.James Street all prior to 1829-1835. The Leazes Terracedevelopment by Grainger and Oliver of 1835 marked a shift to alevel of grandeur of national significance. This large stone-faced, palace-fronted block, projecting into the Castle Leazes,contrasts with the small-scale stucco housing of LeazesCrescent which was built during the same period. Althoughechoing developments in Bath and London in the 18TH. centuryLeazes Terrace is of a larger scale and is more confidentlyimplemented than elsewhere. The St. Thomas developmentwhich followed reverted to the simpler Georgian style of theearlier St. James Street, with brick facades and rubble stonerears.

During the 20TH. century there was a shift, focusing morecommercial activity on several residential streets, and the rundown of others, before Leazes Terrace was restored in 1959 asstudent housing under the direction of Professor Napper. Thesuccess of institutional and individual restorations, coupled withsome infill developments since then has resulted in the areabecoming a popular inner city residential and commerciallocation adjacent to the hospital, university and City Centre.

Leazes Conservation Area was designated in 1974, and LeazesPark which occupies more than half of this Conservation Areawas added to English Heritage’s Register of Parks andGardens of Special Historic Interest in 1992.


Leazes Conservation AreaSub-areas


For the purposes of this study the Leazes Conservation Areacan be divided into broadly five distinctive sub-areas;

1) Leazes Park

2) Four late Georgian/early Victorian terraced residentialdevelopments,

i) Leazes Terrace and Leazes Crescentii) St. Thomas Estate,iii) St. James Terrace and St. James Streetiv) Leazes Park Road (East Side)

3) The 1980’s Leazes Square residential development

4) Strawberry Place, the Barker and Stonehouse building,and the Benefit Agency offices

5) Percy Street

Whilst the development of the St Thomas Estate remainsintact, Leazes Terrace, Leazes Crescent, St James Street andLeazes Park Road have suffered from piecemeal erosion ofboth their historic fabric and integrity. Although the residentialdevelopments have quite separate identities the integrity of thegroup identity is retained because of the similar use ofarchitectural vocabulary, materials, and scale. For both theStrawberry Place and Percy Street Sub-Areas there are onlyremnants remaining of the late Georgian and early Victorianperiod that have any special characteristics to justify theinclusion within this Conservation Area.

The three principal, detrimental factors to the character of theLeazes Conservation Area are traffic, commercial pressure inthe area between Leazes Park Road and Percy Street,and StJames Park, home of Newcastle United Football Club(NUFC).The present City Centre traffic circulation pattern not onlyprovides abrupt edges to the Conservation Area alongStrawberry Place, Percy Street, St. Thomas Street and St.Thomas Terrace but Leazes Park Road additionally divides thesub-areas into two as this is currently part of the inner ring road.The character of the area has become threatened and erodedbecause the volume of traffic is not only intrusive on residentsamenity but adversely affects the land use within the area asopportunity for on-street parking is limited. By contrast theclosure of St. Thomas Crescent as a through route andassociated parking restrictions has effectively transformed thissub-area, creating a sense of urban tranquillity. Following thisexample, other measures are currently under consideration todiscourage non-essential traffic.

■ Tennis courts, RVI and Newcastle University in background.


Despite the City Centre location and excellent public transportnetwork the increase in car ownership has created a need forparking spaces for both commercial and residential occupiers.This has adversely affected the immediate setting of the periodterraced developments through heavy on road parking andthrough the loss of individual gardens, converted tohardstanding for off road parking.

The majority of derelict sites have been cleared for municipalcar parking and these are very evident and detract from thequality of the Conservation Area. The numerous car parksvisible from Strawberry Place and Leazes Park Road areparticularly damaging and should be designated asredevelopment opportunities to enhance the character andappearance of the Conservation Area. Those to the rear ofPercy Street are effectively screened by surroundingdevelopment but they do create a wide corridor of under usewithin the Conservation Area. This area has been designatedfor a proposed link road between Strawberry Place and StThomas Street and consideration has to be given to thesuccessful integration of this area, and Percy Street, with therest of the Conservation Area and not further eroding thehistoric characer of Percy Street.

Policies to minimise the harmful effects of development in thecommercial parts of the Conservation Area need to beconsidered. Not only do they pose the threat of demolition ofunlisted buildings within the Conservation Area but also adversealterations to listed buildings. Whilst the latter can becontrolled, threat of the former could be reduced with clearpolicies on acceptable use, as generally the most appropriateuse for a historic building is the one for which it was originallydesigned.

The future of the character of Leazes Park Road andStrawberry Place will be affected by the new office quarter atGallowgate which will be developed right up to the edge of theConservation Area and which incorporates an element ofresidential development adjacent to the Conservation Area.This will have positive benefits in removing blight from an areaof under use. The impact of this proposal on current trafficlevels will need to be handled sensitively to avoid the furtherdamage to the nature of this Conservation Area.

The continued popularity of Newcastle United Football Clubhas an obvious impact on the Conservation Area. The effect istwo fold. First, there is the short-term intermittent effect ofpedestrian and traffic generation traditionally associated withhome games and secondly, the permanent substantial visiblechanges of the built form of the stadium. Although not withinthe Conservation Area the stadium directly abuts it and theoverall footprint and massing is larger than any of the individualbuilt sub-areas.

■ View of lake with Leazes Terrace and St James Parkin the background.


Location ofLeazes

ConservationArea

Speed’s map of 1610


Hutton’s map of 1770

Approximate line of theLeazes Conservation Area


Oliver’s map of 1830


1st Edition O.S. map c1840

Approximate line of theLeazes Conservation Area


2nd Edition O.S. map c1898


3rd Edition O.S. map c1919


BoundariesThe boundary is largely established by the historicaldevelopment of the Park and surrounding housing. On thenorthern edge it clearly follows the edge of the St Thomasdevelopment, separating it from the University of Newcastle onthe northern side of St Thomas Street, which is of an entirelydifferent character. The boundary then follows the edge ofLeazes Park, separating it from Castle Leazes (part of the TownMoor) and the allotments, and returns onto Barrack Road. Itthen follows an arbitrary line along the rear of the car parkbehind St James Park but which is clearly defined by the natureof the landscapes which lie to either side. The boundary thenturns southwards and follows the line of Leazes Terrace,continuing along the back alley behind St James Street, downto Strawberry Place. This clearly defines the development ofLeazes Terrace and the Georgian terraces of St James Streetfrom the large-scale development of the stadium at St JamesPark.

At this point the boundary follows the line of the road alongStrawberry Place to the junction with Leazes Park Road whereit heads south onto Percy Street. The line of the boundaryexcludes the western side of Leazes Park Road which retains anumber of traditional townhouses but which has suffered fromunsympathetic redevelopment and site clearance. Whilst theremaining townhouses on the western side of Leazes ParkRoad are of the same period they are not considered to be ofsufficient merit to warrant their inclusion within the conservationarea. The boundary then returns eastwards along Percy Streetwhere it meets St Thomas Street. This particular section of theboundary has become somewhat of an anomaly due to thedevelopment of Eldon Gardens in the 1980’s, which bears littlerelation to the surrounding residential developments. It is

considered that the Eldon Garden development neither detractsfrom nor enhances the character or appearance of theconservation area, but is in fact a neutral element. As such it isnot proposed to amend the eastern boundary to remove thisdevelopment from the conservation area.

■ View of St Thomas Street looking towards Percy Street.

■ View of park looking towards RVI.


2 CONTEXT OF LEAZES PARK

2.1 Preamble

Urban parks developed as a reaction to the explosion in urbangrowth and the subsequent overcrowding of the populationthroughout the country around the beginning of the 19thcentury. The first major public park was set out in Birkenheadin 1843. Urban living conditions in the north-east werenotoriously bad and in a bid to improve them the Council waspersuaded by Sir Charles Hamond to commission Leazes Parkin 1863. A number of extravagant schemes were rejected andeventually, in 1871, the Council accepted a relatively modestplan to construct a lake, carry out tree planting and build somelodges. The Park was opened in 1873 and was the firstpurpose built public park in Newcastle. Over the next ten yearsthe main path network was laid out. The terrace from which thepark could be viewed was built and other features such as thebandstand, further pavilions and shelters and a fountain wereinstalled. The Park proved very popular and was enlarged andimproved throughout the next fifty to sixty years.

The early plans had been heavily influenced by eighteenthcentury landscape park design, however, these were modifiedby the changing demands for recreational facilities and indeed,this factor continued to modify the character of the Park up tothe Second World War. The variety of species of trees wasseverely limited from the outset by the severe atmosphericpollution and soot which resulted from the burning of coal.

The importance of Leazes Park was given statutory recognitionin 1992 by its inclusion in English Heritage’s First Register ofParks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest.

■ General view of restored terrace and bandstand.

■ Restored lake and new public art(part of the 2002/3 refurbishment).


Sub-area 1: Leazes ParkIt is unique in its proximity to the town centre. It retains manyoriginal historic features and so complements the adjacentGeorgian and Victorian residential developments that it wasincluded in the Leazes Conservation Area when it wasdesignated in 1974. It is surrounded almost entirely bybuildings and provides a stop end, i.e. tree belts etc. are denseenough to separate the internal area of the park from theexternal environment. As a result, surrounding urbanenvironment is largely obscured from within the Park, even inwinter. There is constant bird song, open space and lots oftrees. The Park, as originally designed consisted of the lake,the northern end and the surrounding parkland described hereas the Old Park. Within the present park curtilage there areessentially has four areas of different character, the old Park asinitially designed, Hoyle’s Intake, the lake and northern end, theTerrace and the adjacent Barrack Road extension.

The old Park area has a network of sinuous paths roughlybased on the original layout. These wind about and betweenthe lake, the terrace and other features which have nowdisappeared. The tree belts are mature and large, approachingold age with a considerable feeling of openness. There is afairly limited use of species chosen to suit the atmosphericpollution of that period. There are a dozen or so speciesrepresented, mostly native and therefore good for wildlife andvery effective en masse. Generally there is very little shrub orunder-planting within this original area apart from decayedshrub planting which is overgrown and dead in places.

■ Terrace - fully restored in 2002/3.

■ Tennis Courts.


Hoyle’s Intake off Leazes Crescent has the most ‘urban’ feel toit with several reasonably dilapidated games courts and athinner tree belt screening Leazes Crescent and Terrace. It isovershadowed by the dam around the lake which is clearlyvisible through the trees; although in certain seasons this is anattractive flower strewn bank.

The lake, with an island, is irregular in shape and edged intraditional granite setts with patches of inappropriate concreteand tarmac. It supports a varied bird population and is ofendless fascination to small children and anglers. At thenorthern end of the Park there is a diminishing collection ofmaintenance buildings, a bowling club, derelict paved area,some shrub planting which is good for wildlife and a play andpicnic area. Glimpses of the more rustic environment of CastleLeazes Moor can be seen through the edge screen of trees.

The extension of the Park beyond the terrace and down theridge towards Barrack Road is very different in character. It ismuch more open with wide grassy spaces divided by belts ofyoung as well as older tree planting, and by swathes of shrubplanting. The noise of traffic is particularly intrusive here. TheTerrace, which formed part of the more formal area of the Park,is now fairly dilapidated. It was originally constructed inconcrete as a substitute for stone and has subsequently beeninappropriately patched up in brick. There is some small scaleformal bedding above and below the terrace.

Generally the buildings throughout the Park are in reasonablerepair. There are a number of lodges and pavilions which havebeen built throughout the life of the Park and contribute to itsappearance.

the boundaries of the Park are fairly unkempt at localised levelbut fortunately this is less evident from afar. They include lowstone walls, poor despoiled gateways, rusting or absent railingsand a horizontally railed, timber fence along the Castle Leazesboundary. However, this is only the bottom metre or so of theboundary and generally the trees form a solid wall of plantingwithin the boundary. The worst of the boundaries is the tall wiremesh which separates the Park from the large tarmaced NUFCcar park. This provides a very dismal and abrupt junction whenviewed from outside.

Views within the Park are largely contained by the boundaryplanting. There are exceptions where buildings tower above,the most obvious being the N.U.F.C. stadium. Open views arefrom the top of the ridge across the planting boundary towardsGallowgate, and the brewery. The outline mass of the Park canbe viewed from several traffic routes and the buildings on allsides. From Castle Leazes the boundary tree planting providesa view of parkland but obscures the layout in detail. LeazesTerrace, Leazes Crescent and the hospital buildings facingRichardson Road enjoy a direct view into the Park as a result oftheir close proximity, but the overall panorama is obscured byprominent lake dam and tree planting.


Sub-area 1 summary: Leazes Park

Special CharacteristicsFour areas of different character:

1. Old Park (original)

2. Hoyles Intake

3. The Lake and Northern End

4. Terrace and Barrack Road

Against the Grain• Contain areas affected by traffic noise

• Treatment of the dam on the southern side of the lake(Thedam itself is of historic interest as a feature of the Park)

• Fence against Castle Leazes

• Southern Leazes car park and wire mesh fence

• Existing lavatory block

Key Issues• Management of tree population approaching old age

• Appropriate planting of shrub/undergrowth layers

• Address perceived personal security problems

Enhancement Potential• Refurbishment of historical elements

• Sensitive improvements to increase recreational use

• Encourage fuller casual use.

• Infrastructure repairs

■ View showing relationship between Leazes Parkand St James Park.

■ Play area.


Sub-area 2i: Leazes Terrace and Leazes Crescent

Many properties in Leazes Terrace and Leazes Crescent nowenjoy a wonderful Arcadian relationship with Leazes Park. Fromthe park terrace these residences contain the view as an endstop, with only modern tower blocks seen beyond. These nearcontemporaneous, residential schemes were both designed byThomas Oliver for Richard Grainger, but there all similaritiesend other than that they were both designed in the classicalstyle.

Leazes Terrace is the most imposing Georgian development inthe City because of the monumentality of its grand sandstoneashlar facade, three storey set on a basement plinth. Asoriginally designed this elongated square of terraced houses,aligned almost north-south, was almost completely surroundedby Castle Leazes moorland giving the impression of a palatialfacade. The restrained design of the elevations is enlivened bythe rusticated ground floors of the end and centre pavilionswhich support giant Corinthian pilasters. The dentilled cornice iscontinuous around the terrace, and the frieze is decorated inpart. At first floor level, the recessed bays show continuousanthemion patterned cast iron balconies and some pavilionbays have decorative balconies.

The change of ownership for much of this terrace to theuniversity for offices and halls of residences, is reflected incontemporary alterations. The remaining properties to thenorth-east are subdivided into flats but have retained the smallfront gardens. Plain black cast iron railings enclose lawns witha single width stone flag leading directly from the gate to theraised front door. These gardens are simple to the point ofausterity. For the remaining terrace all that remains of theoriginal garden setting is the stone plinth separating the frontlawn from the pavement level. The lawns have become semi- ■ Relationship between Leazes Terrace and St James Park.

■ Grade 1 Listed Leazes Terrace - typical detailing.


public places and prone to litter, which detracts from thegrandeur of the terrace. Additionally, on the south-westelevation the original number of building entrances has beenreduced to suit the present use. This however has beenthoughtfully handled in the spirit of the original design.

The entrance to the internal court is via the two elliptical arched,carriage entrances on the north-east elevation. At present it ismostly hard-surfaced for car-parking, which is radically differentfrom the original individual rear yards, but has the advantage ofreducing the impact of on street resident car parking.

The increased public interest in professional football as aspectator leisure activity as opposed to tennis, bowling andboating, has led to the dramatic contrast in setting between thenorth-east and south-west elevations - the open aspect of theArcadian view across Leazes Park and the abrupt enclosure ofthe fortress-like elevations of the N.U.F.C. stadium and thedismal view of the large tarmaced car park enclosed by tall wiremesh fencing. The resulting contrast in scale and design isdisturbing. Leazes Terrace as a Landmark building hasoutstanding views from the park, and the adjacent streetsnotably Leazes Crescent, Terrace Place and St. James Street.

The remaining three short stepped, stucco terraces of LeazesCrescent inclusive of Terrace Place, are a unique example ofRegency style residences in Newcastle, and in comparison withLeazes Terrace are much smaller in scale. An enchanting viewfrom St. Thomas Terrace captures essential designcharacteristics of the distinctive repetition of the curvedsegment motif. This device is used both in the plan form ofcurved-end bays and the ground floor segmental head door andwindow recesses to the front elevations. The elevational

■ View of Leazes Crescent fronting Leazes Park showing thestepped nature of the crescent and its relationship with thepark and Newcastle United Football Club.

■ Entrance to internal court, Leazes Terrace.


treatment otherwise is quite plain, the human scaleemphasised by the continuous projecting first floor and cornicebands. There is also a decorative frieze to the parapet of thewest front.

Some of the houses and their garden settings of the Crescenthave a sense of neglect which detracts from the appearance ofthe terrace. As a result of the lack of residents parking, almosthalf of the gardens have unfortunately been hard surfaced tocreate forecourts for car parking. All the original iron railings seton stone plinths have been removed and have been replacedby hedging, low brick walls and picket fencing. None of thesetreatments are continuous or necessarily appropriate.

The concept of uniformity of the terraces has been diminishedby the variation in the colour of the stucco, predominately palebeige but at the northern end a darker shade and in somecases white. The loss of the original development to the rear ofLeazes Crescent comprising Crescent Place and Terrace place,which completed the block, now reveals a variety of laterextensions. The lack of original external detailing, the mixeduse of facing materials to the rear and limited example of poorrepair to the stucco, all detract from the quality of the originaldesign.The cohesion and residential amenity of Leazes Crescent isseverely affected by the present traffic circulation. The presentrouting of the inner ring road bisects the Crescent, Nos. 17-24having become a traffic gyratory. system. The rear of LeazesCrescent as seen from Leazes Park Road is set in a sea ofundefined tarmac used for municipal car parking.

Sub-area 2i summary: Leazes Terrace

Special Characteristics• Monumentality of elongated square of terraced ashlar

houses

• Surrounded on 2½ sides by Leazes Park

Against the Grain• Loss of private front gardens to semi-public spaces for

areas owned by the University

• Loss of park land setting together with the stark anddisturbing contrast of scale and design of the N.U.F.C.stadium and associated car park

Key Issues• To protect the remaining residential use

• Impact of the St James Park stadium both in terms ofvisual presence particularly the east stand andmanagement of spectators when in use

Enhancement Potential• Continued appropriate maintenance and repair of Grade 1

building

• Curtilage landscape setting, return to formal gardens ofLeazes Terrace

• Softening and screening of the N.U.F.C. car park andenhancement of the street elevation of the present eaststand


Sub-area 2i summary: Leazes Crescent

Special Characteristics• Unique example of Regency stucco residences in

Newcastle Circa 1829

• Curved end bays and ground floor segmental head doorand window recesses

• Landscape front garden setting

Against the Grain• Inner ring road traffic system

• Loss of original front iron railings and the soft landscapingof the gardens replaced by hard standing for cars

• Loss of uniform colour to the stucco of the houses

• Very prominent rear elevations not designed to beexposed

• Contemporary municipal car park to rear of terrace

Key Issues• Traffic management

• Control of intrusive parking within property curtilages

• Use class order limited to residential only

Enhancement Potential• Conservation Area enhancement proposals for; a single

colour finish(BS 08B17) for the stucco dwelling,appropriate design standards for all rear extensions, asingle design of railings and landscape treatment to thefront gardens

• Secure appropriate development on the car park sites toscreen exposed rears

• Removal of through traffic and heavy traffic

• Reinstatement of gardens

■ Rear of Leazes Crescent.


Sub-area 2ii: St. Thomas Estate

The Georgian/Early Victorian style town house terraces of theSt. Thomas Estate are the epitome of timeless elegant cityliving. The formality and the uniformity of the materials anddetailing create a harmonious appearance to the front facades.They are two-storey, three bay plain brick faced with ashlardressings for the wedge stone lintels, sills, continuous sill bandsand gutter cornice. The sash windows with glazing bars,andpanelled front doors are set in deep reveals, some withpedimented doorcases and full-height brick pilasters whichcreate additional interest to the formal front elevations. Thescheme was designed in harmony with the topography, theregular steps in the terrace development reflecting the landgradient. On entering St. Thomas Crescent a wonderful senseof enclosure is created by both the curve and the slope of thestreet. The view along St. Thomas Square is also an important,formal view within the conservation area.

The St. Thomas Estate has clearly benefited from the majorrefurbishment which began in the late 1970’s and is a ‘model’conservation project. Nothing detracts from the quality andorder of the original design, as it is not marred by any visiblelater alterations. The terrace is described as being the epitomeof timeless, elegant city living where ‘domestic scale’ buildingsare given a sense of elevated status with the uniform blackpainted front door set above the ashlar semi-basement,reached directly by a short flight of stone steps. The separationof the house from the street is continuous and uniform, withsmall front gardens bounded by black ‘spear headed’ metalrailings. The rear elevations are concealed from view exceptfor the East side of St. Thomas Crescent. The elevationaltreatment is less formal and largely of rubble sandstone withsome brick.

■ General view of St Thomas Crescent.

■ House showing typicaldetailing of theSt Thomas development.

■ Archway leading toSt Thomas StreetBusiness Centre.


The role of Home Housing Association as owner and manageris clearly evident providing a uniform approach to therefurbishment and subsequent retention of this work. Thecurrent ‘right to buy’ policy is a clear threat to the presentcomprehensive approach though their listed status shouldmitigate any immediate danger to their character throughprivate sale. No 9 St. Thomas Street which was not acquiredby Home Housing Association is an example of the possibleconsequence of the break-up of the ownership pattern. It is theonly property to be roofed with brown tiles as opposed to theuniform grey slates elsewhere.

There is a real sense of residential tranquillity here. Thesuccessful converted St. Thomas stables development is theonly business use in the area. It is concealed and access isfrom the lower archway on St. Thomas Street. The area is adelight to walk through, as, in addition to the townscape qualityof the development there are no through roads due to trafficmanagement with parking and vehicular access limited toresidents only.

The largely Edwardian frontages of the university precinct fromSt. Thomas Street to Barras Bridge, although not within aconservation area does possess ‘special quality’ appropriate forconservation area status and which do not detract from thelocation of the St. Thomas Estate.

Sub-area 2ii summary: St. Thomas Estate

Special Characteristics• Continuous terraces of near identical, Georgian/ Early

Victorian town houses

• Formality and uniformity of materials and detailing

• Stepped massing in harmony with topography

• Continuous formal front garden setting bounded byblack iron railings

• Tranquillity due to traffic management

• Success and quality of St Thomas Stables development

Against the Grain• No. 9 St. Thomas Street

• Traffic on St. Thomas Street and Queen Victoria Road

Key Issues• Maintain present traffic and parking control

• Continue the current standard of the building maintenanceand immediate setting

Enhancement Potential• No action required at present


Sub-area 2iii: St. James Terrace and St. James Street

The three-storey, two bay terrace of St. James Street (westside) and the return to St. James Terrace was completed in1830 and was constructed of plain brick with ashlar dressing forthe wedge stone lintels, door architraves, sills and continuoussill bands. The Georgian sash windows and panelled frontdoors with ashlar dressings are typical of this period inNewcastle. On St. James Street regular steps in the terracedevelopment reflect the land gradient.

St. James Street (West side) is easily identified as a sub-areain need of attention. The architectural quality clearly degradesfrom Nos 13 - 17 down to Nos 2 - 3 St. James Street. The latterproperties are an example of ‘what not to do’ to unlistedbuildings within conservation areas. The frontage has beenpebble dashed, door cases removed and windows replacedwith horizontal casement windows. Similar to the St. ThomasEstate, the lawned front gardens to Nos 13 - 17 St. JamesStreet are enclosed by black cast-iron railings. For theremaining frontage the landscape setting has given way tocurtilage parking. The surface treatment is mixed and thevestiges of property enclosure defined inappropriately by dwarfbrick walls, or bollards linked by a single metal chain.

This terrace as originally designed, backed on to the openmoorland of Castle Leazes; now it is dwarfed by the N.U.F.C.stadium (St James Park). The poor quality of rear extensionsto the terrace is further emphasised by their visibility from thestadium. The rear lane retains the original cobbled surface butit is in poor condition. It has intermittent peak pedestrian flowassociated with sports fixtures at the stadium. The loss of No 1St. James Street for municipal parking creates a weak cornerjunction off Strawberry Place, further emphasising thedominance of the stadium.

■ General views of St James Street (west side)showing transition from formal gardens to off street parking.


Special Characteristics• Two continuous terraces of late Georgian town houses

• Formality and uniformity of materials and detailing

• Landscaped garden setting to St. James Street

Against the Grain• The loss of most front gardens for car hard standing and

poor quality boundary treatment

• Visible inappropriate rear elevations inclusive of yard walls

• Nos 2 & 3 St. James Street inappropriate pebble-dashfrontage with casement windows

• End car park beside Strawberry Place

• Condition and repair of the surface treatment to the rear lane

Key Issues• Control of the intrusion of the through traffic


Enhancement Potential• Conservation Area enhancement proposals for; removal/

control of curtilage parking, appropriate landscapetreatment for the former front gardens, improvements ofthe quality of rear elevations inclusive of the yard walls

• Repair to surface treatment and lighting

• Secure an appropriate development to the car park site ofNo 1 St. James Street

• Permit street parking to negate the need for curtilageparking

■ Back lane separating St James Parkand St James Street - good retentionof original floorscape.

Sub-area 2iii summary: St. James Terrace and St. James Street


Sub-area 2iv: Leazes Park Road (East Side)

This is an almost continuous terrace of largely three storey, lateGeorgian and early Victorian town houses. They are all incommercial use at present, but still retain a strong groupidentify because of similarities in height, frontage width andelevational design.

Leazes Arcade, the recently restored former synagoguedesigned by John Johnstone in 1880, is the most dominantsingle building in this one-sided street scene. The elaboratetwo-storey sandstone frontage was designed in the North Italianstyle. The adjacent and near derelict property of No 16 LeazesPark road contains the survival of an C18th Garden House.

The Arcade and street junction with Strawberry Place signify thedivide in the environmental quality of the street. This isevocative of the area’s historic development. Leazes ParkRoad was formerly known as Albion Street between PercyStreet and Strawberry Place and as Albion Place above thestreet junction.

Leazes Park Road, formerly Albion Street, is a quieter, whilstbeing commercially, a relatively successful ‘backwater’. FromPercy Street it is a narrow street with a steep gradient. Thestreet scene is contained with building frontages at the back ofpavement line.

Nos 4a to No 10 Leazes Park Road, though unlisted, make apositive contribution to the conservation area. The largeEdwardian, projecting upper floor, bay windows are of especialinterest to Nos 4a, 4 and 6. There are five similar Victorianstyle shopfronts which are of an appropriate quality. At presentthere is evidence of upper floor vacancy.

■ General view of Leazes Park Road.

■ Refurbished Leazes Arcade - converted to flats.


The conservation area definition is one-sided. The stark,monolithic Labour Club and multi-storey Percy House are rightlynot included in the conservation area. However, the Georgiantown houses at Nos 21 and 23 Leazes Park Road, all thatremain of an entire terrace dating prior to 1830, make avaluable contribution to the street scene.

The architectural treatment of Nos 18 - 52 Leazes Park Road issimilar to that of the contemporary period development of St.James Terrace if a little formal. The majority of the originalresidential frontages remain though somewhat altered. Thedevelopment with the exception of the two-storey pairedfrontage at Nos 28 - 30 Leazes is three-storey, two-bay,originally brick faced with ashlar wedge window lintels, sills andcontinuous first floor sill band. The door cases are mainlypaired with a timber pilaster and entablature door surround withan adjacent single offset ground floor window. It is a delightthat to date, commercial pressure has had limited adverseeffect on altering the original ground floor opening. Althoughthis format would originally have been commonplace for the citycentre, this street now contains a limited vestige of this design,and it is indeed a rare survival. 52 Leazes Park Road has beensuccessfully extended with a sympathetic traditional design, adominant curved centre bay recessed between wide piers andrelieved with niches.

■ 21-23 Leazes Park Road - outside theConservation Area boundary.

■ 18-58 Leazes Park Road.


The individuality within the overall group is expressed by thestepped terrace frontages and the present differences in facingmaterials either cleaned brickwork, pebbledash or stuccopainted in various pastel shades. These differences aresubservient to the overall unity of the terrace. The loss of thefront gardens to provide for car parking detracts considerablyfrom the quality of the setting. Generally all evidence ofindividual enclosure is lost, the surface materials are poorquality and the cars are densely crammed into the forecourts.

Former Albion Street, where through traffic is limited, has apeaceful pedestrian quality in contrast with the road aboveStrawberry Place, where it becomes a heavily used as part ofthe Inner Ring Road. Here the street scene is no longercontained, as development on both sides of the road is set backand the building frontages are dominated by car parking. No 16Leazes Park Road is of historic importance as a survival of an18TH. century garden house. It is very prominent at the junctionof Strawberry Place and its vacancy is very evident. Since theearly 19TH. century development a narrow pedestrian laneopposite the junction with Strawberry Place and besides No 16Leazes Park Road has been the only break in the building line.The rear elevations of 4a to 52 Leazes Park Road show avariety of later extensions which are in sharp contrast withthe Leazes Square development. The mixed surface treatmentof Leazes Lane contributes to the evidence of neglect.

■ No. 58 Leazes Park Road is an extension to No. 52,carried out in a traditional manner.

■ 52 - 58 Leazes Park Road.


Special Characteristics• Almost continuous stepped terrace of late Georgian and

Victorian town houses

• Leazes Arcade

• Nos 18 - 52 Leazes Park Road - retention of the majorityof the original residential frontages

• Survival of C18th Garden house at No 16 Leazes ParkRoad

Against the Grain• Modern development on the west side of Leazes Park

Road

• Traffic as part of Inner Ring Road - control zone 2

• The loss of front gardens for car hard standing and non-existent or poor quality boundary treatment

• Poorly maintained rear elevations

• Poor quality surface treatment to Leazes Lane

• The later extensions and near derelict condition of No 16Leazes Park Road

Key Issues• Nos 18-52 Leazes Park Road - retention of ground floor

residential frontages

• Control of traffic intrusion


• Upper floor vacancy

• Quality of development on the west side of Leazes ParkRoad

Enhancement Potential• Conservation Area enhancement proposals for removal

/control of curtilage parking, painting of external facades

• Shopfronts (where they exist) and signs to match - best

practice suitable for the architecture

• Upgrade poorly maintained rear elevation

• Surface and lighting treatment to Leazes Lane

Sub-area 2iv summary: Leazes Park Road - East Side


Sub-area 3: Leazes Square

This is a good example of a contemporary infill within thisconservation area. This largely inward-looking scheme hasvery much its own identity as the other five period residentialareas do.

This is a confident and attractive, contemporary scheme,designed as an entity with a strong architectural character in itsown right, pinky-brown brickwork, wide beige window frames,art-stone lintels, cream panelled projecting bay windows withdormer lights. Whilst some of the elevational elements areirregular, there is an overall effect of unity. Although thedetailing and material colours are quite distinct from any otherperiod developments within the conservation area it is verymuch in the spirit of the areas character namely, a variety ofsingle period residential developments.

Sub-area 3 summary: Leazes Square

Special Characteristics• Largely inward looking contemporary residential scheme

• Design as an entity

Against the Grain• Nothing at present

Key Issues• Future maintenance regime

Enhancement Potential• Consideration give to removal of selective permitted

development rights and related Article 4 Direction■ View of internal, private courtyard.

■ Street frontage of Leazes Square to Leazes Lane- what is essentially a back lane.


Sub-area 4: Strawberry Place, Barker and Stonehouse & Benefit Agency Offices

The most apparent feature of this sub-area is that it is difficultto detect any qualities that would make it worthy ofConservation Area status. The present lack of coherentenvironmental pattern and identity reflects the historicdevelopment of this location. Unlike the other five set pieces oflate Georgian and Victorian single design residentialdevelopment, the development of this site was piecemeal.

All that remains of the Georgian period is the pink renderedthree storey house off Strawberry Place and now used asoffices by Barker and Stonehouse. The confident two-storeycurved glazed retail pavilion for Barker and Stonehouse standsproud at the junction with Strawberry Place, and is a goodexample of contemporary development in the ConservationArea. The associated North-lit industrial units, refacaded withbrick and punctuated with glazed openings and with projectingglazed canopy, have enhanced a previous intrusive element.Improved hard landscaped car parking spaces occupy thefrontage up to the building face. The articulated red brick andstone frontage of the Companions Club on Leazes Park Roadand adjacent shops are the only remaining evidence ofVictorian development. They provide a strong frontage followingthe curve of the road. The Edwardian warehouse on St. JamesStreet which is now used for student accommodation, althoughunlisted, is a building of notable architectural quality.

The monolithic Benefit Agency office block on St James Streetis a mediocre example of contemporary development. Forpresent day office requirements the floor levels remain thesame throughout, despite the evident slope in the street level.The eaves line therefore remains the same level so it is viewedas one continuous block as opposed to the subtle regularstepped Georgian development across the other side of the

road on St. James Street. The two storey clerestory windowsadd interest but overall, the scheme lacks refinement inelevational treatment.

■ View of Strawberry Place.

■ Barker and Stonehouse - modern extension in acontemporary design to corner of Leazes Park Road.


Sub-area 4 summary: Strawberry Place,Barker and Stonehouse and Benefits AgencyOffices

Special Characteristics• No coherent environmental pattern and identity

• Three storey Georgian terrace house adjacent toStrawberry Place

• St. James Street Edwardian warehouse

Against the Grain• Electricity Sub-Station and the conjunction St. James

Street and Strawberry Place

• Terrace Place Municipal car parks

• Monolithic Benefit Agency office

Key Issues• Control of intrusive parking within property curtilages

• Appropriate use of class order for the location

Enhancement Potential• Relocation of Electricity Sub-Station from Strawberry

Place

• Secure appropriate development to the Terrace PlaceMunicipal car parks

■ East side - St James Street, dominance of the BenefitAgency in the streetscene.

■ Rear of Benefit Agency Building - infill site used for parking.


Sub-area 5: Percy Street

This commercial street has the greatest development contrast,two thirds of the properties are recent developments. Thestreet is a major distributor creating a divide from the CityCentre. The street is not one to linger in, filled with the noiseand fumes of speeding traffic.

There are three short rows of earlier residential and purposedesigned commercial units stated below. All these propertiesdisplay neglect and under-use of the upper floors. Poor qualityshopfronts further detract from their quality. Nos 78-95 and Nos19-21 Percy Street are late Georgian terrace town houses, nowaltered at ground floor level for commercial use. They are ofinterest as a decreasing stock of such properties. The rear ofNos 87-95 Percy Street are in a poor state of repair.

There are limited examples of historical buildings with individualcharacter and flamboyantly designed. No 11 Percy Street is ared brick and stone, double fronted late Victorian premisesformally used by the Carriage Proprietors, ‘T Howe and Co.’.No 31 Percy Street is a neglected delight, almost embeddedinto the side of Eldon Gardens. The robust shopfront surroundis a unique period piece. The Hanseatic gable-fronted elevationof No 79 is in keeping with Edwardian university frontage furtherup the street. The Edwardian Percy Arms breaks the skylinewith two distinctive roof dormers.

■ 11-21 Percy Street.

■ Recent (2004) extension to Eldon Gardens, Percy Street.


Eldon Gardens was contructed after the Conservation Area wasdesignated and is the most dominant building in the streetscene. The five storey fortres- like monolith successfullyconceals a major multi-storey car park. The scale and designwith blind upper floor elevations relates to the Eldon Squareshopping development and not the historic residential Victoriansuburbs. The glazed link across Percy Street is opaque andheavyweight rather than transparent and blocks the street vista.

There are two weak corner junctions adjacent to the LeazesLane and St. Thomas Street junctions. Large Victoriandevelopments have previously been demolished and the sitesare now occupied by poor-quality single-storey prefabricatedunits.

Behind the Percy Street frontage from Eldon Gardens to St.Thomas Street the land has been extensively cleared. Since1988 this area has been designated for the link road fromStrawberry Place to St. Thomas Street. This creates a corridorof under-use and separation from the rest of the ConservationArea and at present is used for temporary car parking and theCity Council cleansing depot. A sensitive approach for thislocation is required to ensure that it relates and is integratedinto the core of the Conservation Area, safeguarding the historicbuildings on Percy Street.

■ Rear of Eldon Garden Shopping Centre.

■ Eldon Gardens, Percy Street - extension to Eldon Square.


Sub-area 5 summary: Percy Street

Special Characteristics• 11-21/31 and 78-95 Percy Street - late Georgian and

purpose built Victorian commercial units

• Major traffic distributor

Against the Grain• Strongly separated from the remainder of the

Conservation Area by a corridor of vacant land and underused buildings

• Vacant upper floors

• Poor quality shopfronts, lighting and signage

• Eldon Gardens link

• 23-28 and 97-99a Percy Street, single storey prefabricatedunits

• City Council Cleansing Depot (rear)

Key Issues• Conflict between pedestrian environment and major traffic

distributor

• Securing strong and viable commercial frontage

• Quality of redevelopment to the rear of the streetfrontages

• Safeguarding historic buildings on Percy Street

■ Rear of Percy Street - ad hoc spaces used toprovide parking.

Enhancement Potential• Pedestrian environment

• Shop front guidance inclusive of lighting and signage

• Improve setting and appearance of Cleansing Depot

• Secure appropriate re-development for 23-28 and 97-99aPercy Street and for the vacant rear sites


3 APPENDICES

Bibliography

Ayris, I. (1997) A City of Palaces Richard Grainger and theMaking of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle Libraries andInformation Service.

Barke, M. and Buswell, R.J. (1992) Newcastle’s Changing Map,Newcastle upon Tyne City Libraries and Arts.

Charleton, R.J. (1885) A History of Newcastle-on-Tyne, W.H.Robinson, Newcastle.

Curry, 1. (1974) Leazes Terrace redevelopment’, NorthernArchitect, 1 (new series), July, 18-19.

Girouard, M. (1990) The English Town, Yale University Press,New Haven.

Middlebrook, S. (1950) Newcastle upon Tyne: Its Growth andAchievement, Newcastle Chronicle and Journal, Newcastle.

Muthesins, S. (1982) The English Terraced House, YaleUniversity Press, New Haven.

Pevsner, N and Richmond, I.A. (1995) The Buildings ofEngland: Northumberland, Penguin, Harmondsworth.

Tyne and wear County Council Museums (1980) The TynesideClassical Tradition: Classical Architecture in the North East1700-1850, TWCC Museums, Newcastle.

Watkin, D. (1982) The Buildings of Britain: Regency, Barrie andJenkins, London.

Wilkes, L. and Dodds, G. (1964) Tyneside Classical, JohnHarvey, London.

Additional general reading

Publications, references and Associated readingLegislation, Circulars and Guidance Notes.Planning(Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas ) Act 1990

Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979(asamended by the National Heritage Act 1984)

DoE Planning Policy Guidance: “General Policy and Principles”PPG1, Revised February 1997

DoE and DNH Planning Policy Guidance: “Planning and theHistoric Environment” PPG 15, September 1994

English Heitage “Conservation Areas Practice. English Heritageguidance on the management of Conservation Areas” 1993

English Heritage “Street Improvements in Historic Areas”Guidance Notes. 1993

“The Statutory List” for the protection of Buildings andMonuments

Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)Order 1995Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure)Order 1995

DoE Research Report, The use of Article 4 Directions, 1994

Planning Policy for the City of Newcastle upon Tyne

City Centre Local Plan 1985 (to be superceded by NewcastleUnitary Develpoment Plan (adopted January 1998)

Newcastle Unitary Development Plan, adopted January 1998


Land Use


Traffic andPedestrian Access


Listed Buildings


ArchaeologicalPotential


Associated references and reading

Newcastle City Plans (1:1250) locating all listed propertieswithin the City. Relevant plans for Central Conservation Areaare Nos. 19 to 24.

Pevsner, N. The Buildings of England - Northumberland 1992

Barke, M. and Buswell RJ Editors, Newcastle’s ChangingMap,1992

Graham, F. Maps of Newcastle 1984

Tyne and Wear Museums. The Tyneside Classical Tradition

Allsopp and Clark, Historic Architecture of Northumberland andNewcastle upon Tyne

The Grainger Town Study, Newcastle upon Tyne Stage, 1Report March 1992

The Grainger Town Study, Newcastle upon Tyne Stage, 2Report July 1992

English Heritage Conservation Area Character AppraisalsGuidance Notes, February 1996

Historic maps

Bourne’s Map of 1736, based upon James Corbridge map of1723

Charles Hussey’s Map of 1771

T. Oliver’s Map of 1830

Richardson’s Map of 1830

T. Oliver’s Map 0f 1851

Ordnance Survey Maps of Newcastle 1858/59 and of 1919(surveyed 1914)


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Ordnance Survey map data used in this publication isprovided by Newcastle City Council under licence from theOrdnance Survey in order to fulfil its public function as aplanning authority.

Persons viewing this mapping wishing to use Ordnance Surveydata should contact Ordnance Survey Copyright.

Photographs used in this document are copyright of NewcastleCity Council unless stated otherwise.

Aerial photographs are copyright of:

i) Cities Revealed® aerial photography

©The Geoinformation Group.

ii) Air Images, Nunsborough House, Hexham.

iii) AirFotos, Belsay Gardens, Newcastle upon Tyne

Leazes Conservation Area Character Statement

For further information contact:Historic Environment SectionUrban Design & Conservation GroupPlanning and Transportation DivisionRegeneration DirectorateTel. No. 0191 211 5625Fax. No. 0191 211 4998

This document was approved asSupplementary Planning Guidance on23 June 2000Printed April 2005www.newcastle .gov.uk

LEAZES CONSERVATION AREA CHARACTER STATEMENT · The future of the character of Leazes Park Road and...

Documents

Transcript of LEAZES CONSERVATION AREA CHARACTER STATEMENT · The future of the character of Leazes Park Road and...