temple church cmp
Post on 02-Jun-2018
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
1/45
ALAN BAXTER AND ASSOCIATES
ENGLISH HERITAGE
S UT W ^REGION
FE RU RY 3
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
2/45
CONTENTS
1 Introduction 2
2 Identifying the
Asset:
history of theTemple
Church
4
Location and early history
The
Knights Templar and the
Templar
Fee
The Hospitallers and the Company of
Weavers
The Reformation to the early th century
194 and later
3 Defining significance 18
Introduction
As
a nationally important monument
Importance to Bristol
Importance to the area
4 Defining the issues 24
Introduction
Conservation priorities
w
uses
New building
Linking theTemple Church back into
its
surroundings
Improving
understanding of the asset
5 Policies 33
Introduction
General policies
Control of change
Provision of
services and
retention
of character
Care of the fabric
Setting
Management
6 Conclusion 38
ppendices
1
Scheduled monument
and
statutory list descriptions
2 List
of sources
L N XTER SSOCI TES
TEMPLE
CHURCH BRISTOL CONSERVATION PLAN
FE RU RY
3
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
3/45
1.2 TheTemple Church is both
aScheduled
Ancient Monument and
a
grade II listed
building.
It is therefore a
building
of outstanding national
architectural and historic
importance. It also
has
considerable local significance as a landmark.
13
The first
church
on the
site
was built by the Knights Templar in
the
12,h century
and, with the particular
support
of the
Weavers
Company,
developed
into Bristol s
second
largest parish
church
until
it
was
bombed
in
1940.
It has
remained a
roofless
ruined ever since,
closed to
public access and gradually decaying. It
was
taken into Guardianship in 1958 and
has,
since 1984, been in the care
of
English
Heritage. In recent years,
there has
been increasing
concern
at the
decay of
the
historic fabric,
and at the cost
of
maintaining
a
monument without
any
proper
function. This conservation
plan
was
commissioned to consider these and other
issues
facing the church
and those responsible for
its
upkeep.
INTRO U TION
1.1 In May
2002, Alan
Baxter Associates was
commissioned
by English Heritage to
prepare a Conservation Plan for the Temple Church in Bristol.
ethodology and sources
1.4
The
Conservation
Plan follows the
methodology
set out
by James Semple
Kerr
in
onservation lans
5th
edition,
National Trust of
Australia,
2000). It begins by
describing the historical development
of
theTemple
Church Section 2: Identifying
the Asset) before
assessing
the
relative
significance
of
its
various components
in
section 3.
This is followed
by a discussion of the conservation
issues which
are
raised,
particularly
by
the church s
currently ruined
state
and
lack
of
function
Section4: identifying the issues). The
final section
sets outpolicies for thechurch
to guide its
future
care and development.
1.5 Much of the historical and architectural information in this Plan is indebted to
research
by Keystone Historic Buildings Consultants, itself building on earlier
work
by Richard
Gem. We
have
also
been given
valuable help by Rob
Harding,
Arnold Root and Francis Kelly ofEnglish Heritage South-West Region. A list of
sources,
published
and
unpublished,
is given asAppendix 2.
ALAN BAXTER
ASSOCIATES
TEMPLE
CHURCH BRISTOL
CONSERVATION PLAN
OCTOBER
2002
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
4/45
Consultations
1.6
n October
2002 a
consultation
draft of this Conservation
Plan
was issued for 7
comment to the following organisations and individuals:
Bristol
CityCouncil: _
Paul Barnett,
Head
of Cultural
Services
^
Stephen Price,
Head
ofMuseum
Services
Bob Jones, City
Archaeologist
Sarah Jones, Redcliffe Futures Team
Chris Heath, City
Centre and Urban Design Team
Ian
White,
Team Manager, Central
Area Planning
Peter
Wilkinson, Head of Parks Development
Diocese of Bristol:
Lesley Farrall
BristolTourism
and
Conference Bureau: John Hallet
Bristol
Civic
Society
and
Redcliffe Futures
Group:
David
Farnsworth,
Mr
G
Tucker, Mr M Lee
Bristol
Blue
Glass: Sandra Duck
Bristol and
Gloucestershire
Archaeological
Society: Mr
D Large
Bristol Society ofArchitects: Mr R Pedlar
Bristol
Visual and Environment Group:
Mrs
ED Brown
Council
for
the
Preservation of Ancient Bristol: Mr R Emanuel
Association for Industrial Archaeology: Mike Bore
Avon GardensTrust: Laurie
Bingle
CSJ Planning:
Julie
Lamming
Temple
Local
History Group: Julian
Lea
Jones
St
Mary
Redcliffe: Rev.
Tony
Whatmough
St Mary
Redcliffe and Redcliffe
Futures
Group: Margaret Cartledge
Society
for the
Protection
of
Ancient
Buildings: Matthew
Slocombe
nationally , John Winstone locally
Redcliffe
Parade
Environmental
Association
Mr Rod Dowling
1.7 Comments
received
by 6January
2003 have been
taken
into account n producing
this Conservation Plan
WwW12 7m
Garway, Herefordshire
Templars
Hereford, St Giles
Hospital chapel
Little
Maplestead,
Essex,
St John the
C 1 3 3 5
Parish
Church
10 8m
Baptist
London, St
John s Clerkenwell
C 1 1 4 4
Hospitallers
16m
London,TempleChurch
C 1 1 6 1 - 8 5
Templars
18m
Ludlowcastle chapel
Pr ivate
9 84
m
Northampton, StSepulchre
d
108 1113
Parish church
21 1m
Temple Bruer, Lincolnshire
C 1 1 5 0
Templars
18 2
m
West
Thurrock Essex, St
Clements
12* century?
Parish Church
Round
churches
in England: a
comparison
of
foundation dates,
founders and size afterSaunders, unpublished
ALAN BAXTER
ASSOCIATES
TEMPLE CHURCH BRISTOL
CONSERVAT ION PLAN
OCTOBER 2 2
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
22/45
Fig 32: Saunders sketch section of trench B, with
phasing
Similar
sections survive
for trenches A. E, ,
^
Natural Clay
emplar Church Walls
emplar
Church Make up Layer
emplar Church Floor
4th Century NaveWalls
4th Century
Robbing
Trenches
Floor
take-up
>ost Medieval
Layers
A L A N B A X T E R A S S O C I A T E S
E
C H U R C H
BRISTOL
C O N S E R V A T I O N PL N
FEBRU RY 2 3
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
23/45
3 5 Medieval church: By far the most architecturally important part of the Medieval
church is the tower, which is
highly significant
The remainder of the church,
despite bomb damage (and 1871 and 1909 restorations) is still
significant
Although itwas not architecturally innovatoryor outstanding, in the way that St
Mary Redcliffe is, it was Bristol s second largest parish church and it reflects the
wealth and aspirations of a major medieval city. The
link
with the Hospitallers
is
also significant So too
is
the
Martyr s
Door, as a witness the religious turmoil of
the 1th century and the high price paid bymany
normal people for their beliefs.
3.6
18th ntury church:
This was clearly an
important phase in the history of the church,
linked to Edward Colston. Today, following the
1871
and 1909 restorations, it is represented in
the churchonlybythe porch
fig.
18), which
itself
had a narrow escape in 1909 and is therefore
significant This phase is also represented by the
ironwork
screens relocated in Mayor s Chapel and
StMary Redcliffe fig. 33).
3.7 19th 20th century restoration and new vestry:
Ponton and Gough were a Bristol practice that
produced some good architecture in the city,
notable the granaryon
Welsh
Back
of 1869
fig.
34).
Their
restorationof theTemple Church does
not appear to have been archaeologically based
and was not, overall, a creative piece of work.
t gives the impression of having been driven
more by dogma (witness Gough s dismissal of
the 1701 porch as an anachronism from our
architectural point of
view )
than by
an y
understanding of, or sympathy for, the church.
Th e individual
elements,
such as the
1871
reredos, which might have been intrinsically of
interest as examples of Gothic
Revival
design
and craftsmanship figs. 21 35), were all
destroyed by the bomb. The 1909
vestry is
undistinguished.
The
significance of this phase
is
therefore
neutral Only the screen
in
the passage
leading to the west porch has any
architectural merit; it
is
listed grade
and is
significant fig.
22).
Fig.
33: The ironwork screen now
in the Mayor s Chapel
ll> -Granary 1869. Portion and Goughl. V.chh Bach
fimio?
Fig. 34: Ponton and Gough s
Granary on Welsh Back, Bristol
1 8 6 9 )
v.
Fig. 35: the chancel after the 1909 restoration
ALAN BAXTER
ASSOC IATES TEMPLE C H U R C H ,
BRIS T OL
CONSERVATION P L A N
OCTOBER
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
24/45
3.8 The post-war works of stabilisation were necessary
to the building s survival, but are notofsignificance.
The infilling of the chancel and side chapel arcade
detracts
from
the appreciation ofthe church sspatial
qualities
fig. 36). They are intrusive
Importance to ristol
3.9
As
a landmark in the city, the tower with its
characteristic lean is
highly significant
Glimpsed
above the concrete post-war architecture of its
immediate surroundings, it
is
a striking, eccentric
and somewhat incongruous sight
fig. 37 .
3.10 The tower was built on the prosperity of the
merchants of Bristol, principally the Weavers,
whose
bequests to
the
church enabled its
construction from 1441-60. A local explanation
of its lean
was
that it was buil t on wool sacks (rather
than the profits
from
them). TheWeavers Chapel,
possibly founded by royal gift in 1299, is an
important witness to the formal link between the
church and the Weavers Company. The late 14lh
century nave was largely funded by the bequests
ofparishioners, as theTemplegradually passed
from
being a possession of the Hospitallers to one of the
city s most important parish churches. The history
ofchurch mirrors the development of
Bristol
asone
of Britain s most important and populous ports; it
is also closely linked to the
Bristol
philanthropist,
Edward Colston For this reason, the whole church
(not justthe tower)makes a significant contribution
to understanding of the medieval and post-medieval
development of Bristol.
Fig.
36: Looking west. Note
how the support for the chancel
arch
blocks
views down th e
church
The line of th e
chancel
roof
can be
traced
above the
arch
Fig. 37: View from the north
3.11
As
discussed above, the Temple Church is not, despite popular belief, a formal
memorial to the bombing of
Bristol.
Despite
this,
its burnt out shell
is
a reminder
of the damage which Bristol suffered during the Second WorldWar and this is of
some significance
ALAN
BAXTER
ASSOC IATES
TEMPLE CHURCH
BRISTOL
CONSERVAT ION PLAN 2
OCTOBER
2 2
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
25/45
mport nce to the re
3.12 The Temple Church, with the 1
9,h
century stone screen and
the small
group of grade
listed 1
7th-1 9,h
century buildings to its west are a
fragmentary and highly signific nt
survival
of the historic buildings and
street pattern figs. 30-1 . A rather
different relationship, butalsoa highly
signific nt one, is with the former
churchyard. The two together
continue, as theyalways
have,
to give
an area of open
space
in what is
otherwise a densely built up urban
area fig. 38 . The importance of this
function was recognised by
the
City in 1958
when
t took over the churchyard as
a
public
open space. These
surviving historic
relationships, as well as the tower s
uneasy juxtaposition with
its
newer surroundings, arc epitomised by a series of
key views, which have been plotted on
fig.
40.
Fig. 39: TempleChurch: significance of
surviving material
Fig. 38 Church and churchyard from the south
e a s t
K Y
Highly significant
|
Significant
Neutral
In trus ive
A L A N B A X T E R A S S O C I A T E S
T E MP L E C H U R C H B R IS T O L
C O N S E R V A T I O N
PL N 2 2
O C T O B F R 2 2
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
26/45
KEY
Grade Listed
Buildings
Fig
40: The envelope of significant townscape survival and key external views of the
Temple Church
3.13 TheTemple Churchwas,
until
its
destruction, the spiritual focus of the area.
But
it
also had a wider role
in
defining the identity of this area of
Bristol
The special
privileges
given
totheTemplars and Hospitallers, which endured until 1534,enabled
theTemple Fee to function outside thecontrol ofthe city dispensing its own justice
and holding
its
own markets. Its particularrelationship withthe
Weavers
Company,
first attested in 1299, also gave ita rolegreater than simply as a parish church. The
Temple Church s position as the historic
focus
ofthe area
thus highly signific nt
Today that significance has gone; the bombed out church is a vacuum at the heart
ofthe area. However with the regeneration of the area nowgatheringmomentum,
t
has the potential to
regain
something of
its
historic role at the centre of
its
area.
3.14 Figures 39 and 40 show how these levels of significance can be applied to the
fabric of the church and to its surroundings.
L N B A X T E R
A S S O C I A T E S
TEMPLE C H U R C H RISTOL C O N S E R V A T I O N P L A N
2 3
O C T O B E R
2 2
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
27/45
e
FINING TH ISSU S
Introduction
4.1 For
62
years,
the
Temple
Church
has
been
a
bombed
out shell
with no
public
access
cut
off both from
its
churchyard
and
the district
literally its
parish
around
it.
It is
a
vacuum at the historic heart of theTemple area; at the same time,
the decay
of
its fabric continues, gradually
eroding
the asset which makes it
special
and
acting
as a
constant
drain on the resources of
those charged with
its
maintenance.
4.2 The
prime issue is
therefore, whether its current
state is
the
most
appropriate
way
to preserve what is significant
about
the
Scheduled
Ancient Monument and Grade
II
listed
building
that is the Temple Church.
In
considering
this, it
is
right
to
consider
also the
other
possible options
for
its
future.
These
include:
- Ac
demolition
of
all
orpart of the building.
The
most obvious candidate
for
retention is
the
tower
as
a Bristol
landmark;
C
retaining the building
as
it is, but making it publicly accessible probably
as
^
an
extension
to the public park;
making
the
existing
building
weathertight
in practice by putting
a new roof
on and reglazing
the
windows.
construction ofa
new
building within the ruins. This could be self-sufficient
or serve as
an
ancillary
facility,
such
as
a cafe or exhibition space
for
the
public park
4.3 Of these, the
first should be
dismissed
at once,
as it
was by Donald
Insall
in 1954.
As demonstrated
above
the
building s significance
lies in all
the
surviving
fabric,
with the
possible
exception of
the 1909
vestry.
Any demolition
of significant
fabric would be clearly
contrary
to current
policy
on the conservation of the historic
environment. In considering the remaining options a number of
issues
arise
and
must
be
balanced against each other to choose the most suitable.
Conservation priorities
4.4
The
significance
of the
different
components of the
Temple
Church was
identified
above
Fig 39 . The
remains of the original round church and the 15 h century
tower are highly significant; the
remainder of the
Medieval church and
the surviving
18,h century alterations are significant. The
priority
should be their preservation
but, at
the
moment, this historic fabric is very vulnerable
to
gradual
decay
through
the effects of the
weather,
particularly
on
the interiors and wall tops. Even the
most
conservation
sensitive
repairs such as those carried out in 1999-2000 can
do no
more than slow this
process.
ALAN BAXTER ASSOCIATES TEMPLE CHURCH BRISTOL CONSERVATION
PLAN
24
OCTOBER
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
28/45
4.5 Although not as historically significant as the Medieval and 18 1 Century fabric,
the church s overall function as reminder of the bombing of
Bristol
has some
significance, which should be retained. This does not need to be achieved by
keeping the church as a complete
ruin;
the
fire
damaged window tracery
is
a
poignant reminderof the heat ofthe blaze thatdestroyedsomuchofthe city. Any
solution
which preserved
themedieval fabric a new
roof
and glazing
is
the
most
obvious way
of
achieving
this
should
not be at the expense ofthewar damage.
New uses
4.6
All
the practical options outlined inpara 4.2 above would allowa new use for the
building,
varying
from
a
public
open space to something
which
occupies an
entirely reroofed and reglazed church.
4.7
In
considering what type and scale of use would be appropriate, the main
prerequisite should be that it does not compromise the
building s
archaeological,
architectural and historic significance. This means that:
in preparing the building for a new use and in its
clay
to day operation, there
should be no unnecessary damage to significant historic fabric;
the new
use
should not
have
such
specific
accommodation requirements as
to compromise the ability of the church to take other uses in the future;
Any
new use preserves the open nature of the church s spaces as much as
possible and make use of its historic entrances.
4.8
It
would be wrong, however, to focus simply on
the constraints. Anew use could havea significant
positive impact if, inter li it generated income
to cover the costsofmaintainingthe historic fabric
to the highest standards. There is a balance to be
struck and it might be that a compromise of the
open nature of the spaces could be accepted
if
it
maximised the efficient use ofwhat is a very large
open
space
4.9 In addition to these practical considerations, there
is
the more general question of what uses would
be appropriate given that there isno demand for a
return to church
use. Any
other use must be Fig. 41:
The
fire damaged
walls
compatible with the
building s
previous use
as
a ancl tracery
church ancl place of burial, it should also be
compatible
with
public access so that the significance of the building can be
appreciated ancl its history presented. A use which allowed the building to
regain a
link
with
its
churchyard as well as some of
its
historic role as the heart of
its
community would be particularly appropriate. Such a use, however, should
not beachieved at the expense of long-term sustainability and incomegeneration.
ALAN
BAXTER AS SOC IATE S TEMPLE CHURCH BRISTOL
CONSERVATION
PLAN
OCTOBER
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
29/45
4.1
0
Finally,
a new use should not generate too much vehicular traffic, whether visitors
or service, as there
is
limited existing or potential parking
space.
The existing
character of the area immediately around the church is very much a pedestrian
and
traffic-free
environment.
New Building
4.11 The majority of options for the future of the church include some form of new
building.
The importance ofthe church s external envelope,
particularly
ofviews
from the south means that any new building should be restricted to inside the
existing fabric. Given the
lack
of
detailed
knowledge of the work that was
destroyed
in the
War, it would
not be
possible to rebuild in replica though, if the option of
complete reroofing ancl reglazing were selected the general profile and volumes
of
the
previous church could
be
reconstructed
figs. 42
43).
Any
new
building,
on
whatever scale
will
need
to
address various
issues:
imp ct on historic f bric
nd
rch eology
This needs to be
minimizedin linewithgovernment
guidance in PPC15 and 16. In
practice
there is considerable
scope,
for example, tomake fixings
in
areas of wall rebuilt during the
Victor ian ancl Edward ian
restorations ancl to run sub-surface
services
along
the lines of the
Victorian heating conduits ancl
Saunders
excavation
t renches.
flexi ility
of design nd
construction
To a large degree the
type and scale of new construction
will be determined by the intended
use. Nevertheless any newbuilding
should not be tied too closely to that
use;
rather it needs to be designed
to allow a maximum of flexibility
for future adaptation ancl use. This
cou ld mean that structural
additions
are designed to be fully reversible.
Fig. 42:A1 h century photograph of the
Temple Church showing the roof profile and
vestry chimney removed by the 1909
r es to ra t ion
Fig. 43: An interiorviewof the
church.
the
ALAN BAXTER ASSOC IATES
TEMPLE CHURCH BRISTOl
CONSERVAT ION PLAN
6
OCTOBER
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
30/45
1
access:Theprincipal historic access to the church was via the west door,
which
is now closed but could be reinstated.
All options
would need to
address the issue
of
level
access.
This
is
particularly problematic
via
the
south
door, which is both narrow and significantly below the level of the
churchyard outside.
Q
treatment of historic
sp ces
the
spatial
quality ofthe medieval church was
given added
importance
by
the
relative
austerity of
its
architectural
r\
ornamentation. Like all churches, the spatial distinction between the
different parts of the
Temple
Church nave/chancelAA/eavers
chapel/St
H
Katherine s
chapel) emphasised their
separate liturgical functions and gave X
the
church its
character. With the removal ofthe
roofs,
partof
this
character ^
has
gone,
though
it
could
be
recreated
with roofs
which
reproduced
the
historic
profile,
and if the 20th
century
chancel arcade
supports
could be
removed
or
made
more permeable.
At
the same
time,
the
resulting
spaces -
most particularly the nave - are very
large
and may
conflict
with the
need
to C
maximise
use
of the
space
and
to
achieve the necessary sustainability. A
balance
needs to be
struck
and
flexibility of design will
be important; any
scheme
which
permanently
subdivides an important space, such as the
nave
would need particularly careful justification.
visu l imp ct on
extern l
views any new w ork , of whatever scale, will need
to be considered in
relation
not justto its effect on the
historic interiors,
but
also on exterior
views most
particularly
from
the south. Thechurch has
been most
frequently
drawn
and
photographed from
the churchyard, while
the higher ground level and large windows enable views intothe nave.
For
this
reason, new works
to
the interior such asmezzanine
floors
in the nave)
will inevitably
be
visible from
the
outside. Their
impact on
exterior
views
will need to be balanced against their role in the
new
use
of
the building
and the flexibility of their design.
Similar considerations will need
to be
applied to new signage
which
is likely
to be necessary.
Indeed
there is a potential conflict between the
requirements
of
a
user
particularly
a
commercial
user
for
signage and the
preservation
ofthe
historic
setting ofthe
building.
A
church,
of
course,
requires no signs to draw attention to its existence.
ALAN BAXTER ASSOCIATES
TEMPLE CHURCH, BRISTOL
CONSERVATION
PLAN
27
O TO ER
i f
IS
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
31/45
rel tionship etween new nd ol the precise relationship between a new
building
within
the
envelope
of theTemple
Church
ancl
the existing remains
will depend on the relative scale of the new work. A small structure
freestanding
within
the
existing
fabric,
for
example,
would
require
very
different solution to the complete reroofing ancl weatherproofing of the
church. n general terms, however,
new work
should
seek to emphasise
rather than
compete
with
the
historic fabric
of
the
Temple
Church. This
s
not just a question of ensuring that key spaces or external views are not
unnecessarily compromised but of a positive use of
design
ancl materials to
draw attention to what s significant whetherMedieval fabric or wartime
damage.
Any reglazing of the
war-damaged
tracery will
require
the most
careful treatment
Among
the
most
significant
elements ofthe
church
-
certainly
n
national
terms - are the archaeological
remains
of the original Templar
round
church.
While
there may be
scope for
revealing
ancl displaying these see below , t
would be
most
appropriate to incorporate some element ofthe plan and
form
of the round church in the design of the
interior,
so as to
recall its
importance.
Linking the Temple Church back into its surroundings
4.12 The preservation of the Temple
Church is important not just in its
own
right,
as a nationally important
Scheduled Ancient Monument and
listed building but also for its more
local role
in
Bristol
ancl its
immediate area. t is currently cut
off both from its churchyard
ancl
from the townscape of its former
parish.
Fig. 44: Interior viewof the south aisle wal
Note the relationship between the south door
and t he w indows
ALAN
B A X T E R
A S S O C I A T E S
TEMPLE C H U R C H BRISTOL
C O N S E R V A T I O N
P L A N
O C T O B E R 2 2
.
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
32/45
4.1 3 The desirability of re-establishing a link with the former churchyard was stressed
in para
4.9 above. The medieval
south
aisle door provides the principal
physical
link between the church ancl the churchyard, though it is narrow ancl at a lower
level
than the
churchyard
figs.
44
46 .
A
new
use
for
the
church,
in
any event,
is
bound to increase the number of people ancl vehicles visiting the building.
Potential parking albeit of
limited
capacity) for the latter exists in the area of
tarmac adjacent
to
the tower, in the ownership
of
the
city.
Although the churchyard
in
general
is currently very
well
maintained, this
area
is
not
fig. 47 . The
9lh
century
railings
are
missing, replaced
by
crude
wire mesh, the
surfacing is
poor
and the area is used for the storage of
rubbish
bins.
4.14 If the potential of
this area, both
as a
setting for
church and as service access/
parking, is
to
be improved, co-operation
with
the
City
Council
will
be necessary.
Ideally,
the
whole site, church
ancl
churchyard, would
be
under single
management, toachieve a good relationship between the church
ancl park.
On a
more
practical
level, it
would ensure
that the planting of the gardens does not
spoil views of
the church,
as
is currently the case
with a fast
growing conifer
which
is rapidly obscuring
views
ofthe south side fig. 48 .
Fig. 45: An Ith century view of the south side. Note the
vestry at the east end of the south chapel.
Fig.
47: The entrance to the public park.
ALAN BAXTER
ASSOCIATES
Fig. 46: The exterior of the south
aisle, showing the relationship
between
th e
small
south
door
and
the ground level outside.
TEMPLE
CHURCH BRISTOL CONSERVAT ION P L N
9
OCTOBER
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
33/45
4. 15 A l s o
r e l e v a n t
is t h e
c h u r c h s
relationship to the small core of
surviving historic buildings ancl
street pattern to the west. This issue
will
become more significant if the
church s historic access through the
westporch were to be reopened fig.
50 .
These areas Iie outside
the site s
boundaries, but there is no
doubt
tha t the i mm e di at e e n vi ro n m en t
could be very considerably
improved by relatively modest street
improvements.
4.16 The building s relationship with the wider
Temple
area is equally important, but more problematic,
as it
is
the
result
not just of the bombing but of a
much longer historical process of decay and
fragmentation. Havingbeen one of the richer areas
of the medieval
city,
the Temple area declined in
wealth and importance
from
1
lh
century onwards
fig. 1
7 . The
19th century saw increasing incursion
of industry and the disruption of the street pattern
by the cutting ofVictoria Street, linking the centre
toTemple Meads Station.
Post-war
redevelopment
and further road schemes (Temple Way) both
demolished most of the surviving buildings and
largely
destroyed the historic street pattern. The Fig 49:
New
building and
destruction of
the Temple Church was just
one of Qwc^T^ne^^6611
many episodes which deprived the community of
its historic character ancl
focus.
4.17 Considerable redevelopment is now
taking
place
around the church fig. 49) which, as a result, has a
potentially important roleto
play,
the precisenature
of which
will
be dictated by its new use. It
is
important that the relationship of the church to
its
regenerating surroundings is a consideration in the
selection of an appropriate future use.
Fig.
48: This most significant view of the church
is spoiled by a poorly placed conifer.
Fig. 50: The route to the west
porch fromVictoria Street
A L A N B A X T E R A S S O C I A T E S
T E M P L E
C H U R C H
I R I S T OL
C O N S E R V A T I O N P L AN 3
O C T O B E R
2 2
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
34/45
Improving understanding of the asset
TheTemplar Church:
4.18
It is
important that the significance
of
the historic building,
and
its
archaeology,
is
presented
as an integral part
of
the building s new use. Although any
new
building
should
seek to
minimise
impact
on historic fabric, there is an opportunity
to improve
understanding, particularly ofthe
Templar Church. If
Saunders trenches
were as
suggested above)
to
be used
for
running services,
their archaeological
re-excavation
would go some
way to
supplement the
meagre excavation
records and
would
improve understanding of the original church and of its relationship
to
the
later
building.
4.19 In a national context, better understanding oftheTemplar Church would
make
a
significant
contribution
to
knowledge
of this rare
form
of
medieval building.
The l ter building
4.20 Over the years, a number of studies of the church s history and archaeology have
been carried out and
specific
aspects
have
been examined
in detail. The information,
however,
remains unpublished and
uncoordinated. There is
a
need
for it and the
various
finds made over the years)
tobe
gathered together
in a
proper archive, and
a definitive account produced.
Developing the church s educational role
4.21
The
church s potential
as
a
teaching
tool
for,
nt r li
the
development
of
Bristol,
the Knights Templar,
Medieval
architecture and the Second
World War is
considerable
but
with
the
exception of
an English Heritage leaflet) entirely unrealised.
The
improved understandingofthe asset
see above)
combined
with
a usewhichallows
public access and presents the site gives an
ideal
opportunity to unlock its
educational
potential.
anaging
the
Temple hurch
4.22
Church
is owned by the
Bristol
Diocesan Board of Finance, but managed by English
Heritage under the
1958
Guardianship
agreement. Guardianship
is
intended to
allow
the
maintenance
of
and
public access to ancient monuments . If
theTemple
church
is
to
remain
in
low-key use
(for
example
as
a
publicly
accessible
open
space) then
guardianship by English
Heritage would probably continue
as an
appropriate form of management. However,
if
any more active and intensive use
were tobe pursued, alternative arrangements might be considered.
The
aim
would
be a proactive approach to the
historic
fabric and to
the
church s historic role in
Bristol
and theTemple area, mixing commercial
and public
interests to
ensure
public accessibility
and
presentation ofthe church s history.
ALAN XTER SSOCI TES TEMPLE CHURCH, BRISTOL CONSERVATION PLAN 31
OCTOBER
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
35/45
4 23
TheTemple Church is both a
Scheduled
Ancient
Monument
anda listed
building
Scheduling
is
designed to protect archaeological
sites and
ruins;
indeed
dwellings
cannot
be scheduled
takes priority over
listing and
it
requires applications
for l
consent for all works to the monument Listing by contrast is designed for
^
buildings in
use
and
the
need
to obtain
consent is
limited to
works which
affect
the
character of the
building
Continuation of the
existing
dual coverage
may
well
conflict
with thesmooth operation ofa new use in thechurch Onepossibility ?
which
would ensure adequate protection of both subsurface archaeology and the
standing
building
would
be to define
the limits of
the
scheduled ancient
monument
and the listed building so that they do not overlap. ^
4 24 We
understand from
the
Diocesan
Board of
Finance that
the
church
may still be
consecrated. Any RedundancySchemewould need to considerwhether to remove
the
effects
of consecration.
t
m
L N
XTER
&
SSOCI TES
TEMPLE CHURCH BRISTOL *
CONSERVATION
PLAN 32
OC TO ER
V * t
V
c /
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
36/45
o POLI I S
ntroduction
Having
discussed
the
main conservation issues facing
the
buildings,
this section
outlines the
policies
that are
required
if
those
issues
are to be adequately addressed.
It is essential
to the
future
conservation of theTemple
Church
that these
policies,
regularly
reviewed and amended as necessary, are agreed and adopted
by all
those
involved
in its future
The policies are numbered and appear
in bold
below. Each one
is
followed by a
brief explanation of its purpose.
General policies
1 Any
proposals
for
the
conservation
and
future
development of the
Temple
Church
should
accord
with
national
overnment uidance
on
the
historic environment
and archaeology, andwith
Local
Authority Guidance
for
the
area.
2 The conservation
priority
for those
responsible for
theTemple
Church should
be
the safeguarding of
those
parts which contribute to the building s national
archaeological historical
and
archaeological importance.
Reason
Scheduled
ancient
monuments and
grade
II* listed buildings, like the Temple
Church, are a crucial partofthe nation s heritage.
As
3.6 of
PPG15
states, Grade
I and
II*
identify the outstanding
architectural
and
historic
interest of a
small
proportion about 6 of all listed buildings .
The
owners and managers of the
church have an obligation to
ensure
that
its outstanding
interest
is maintained
and,
ideally,
enhanced. The relative significance of
the
constituent
parts
of the
Temple Church isshown in Fig. 39.
3 English Heritage should review the full range ofoptions for the
future use
ofthe
Temple
Church
and seek to implement
that
which
ensures
that policy 2 is
met.
Reason
It
is
now
more than 60
years
since theTemple
Church
was
destroyed
by
bombing
and the
time
is
ripe to
consider whether
its
current state is in
its best
conservation
interest. Awide variety of future options exist,
from
maintenance of the ruin as
part
of the adjacent
public
park,
through
to
a fully
reroofed and
reglazed building
in
commercial use. The
choice
of option must, however, depend primarily
on the
needs of the historic asset.
ALAN
BAXTER
ASSOCIATES TEMPLE CHURCH, BRISTOL
CONSERVATION
PLAN 33
OCTOBER
2002
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
37/45
Any new use for the Temple Church should seek to:
minimise damage to significant historic fabric
be flexible in its use of space
preserve asmuch as possible the fundamental division of spaces the open
nature of the building and the historic entrances
be
financially
sustainable and able to contribute significantly
towards
the
maintenance of the building to the standards set in policies 2, 9 and 15
allow public accessand interpretation of the site s history
be appropriate for the building s history asa
place
of worship, assembly
nd buri l
provide a link with the churchyard
make a positive contribution to the Temple
area
not generate more vehicular visitor or service traffic than the area can
reasonably handle
e son
It is
essential that the use can be fitted
into
the requirements of the
building
not
vice vers The principal purpose ofa new use isto assist in the preservation and
appreciation ofthe historic asset and this
may
require balancingthe preservation
of the historic character of the building particularly
its
spaces
with
the need to
generate sufficient income to maintain the fabric
As the historic core of
its
neighbourhood the Temple
Church
has an important
potential contribution to make to its area At the same time viable use of the
church should not be achieved at the expense of the local historic environment
and the tranquillity of the churchyard
This
Conservation Plan
should be formally adopted by English Heritage and
those responsible for the management of the church.
e son
The
Conservation Plan intended
asan
effective long term management
tool to
guide the future use and development of the
Temple Church.
L N B XTER SSOCI TES TEMPLE CHURCH BRISTOL
CONSERVATION
PLAN 34
O TO ER
I )
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
38/45
Control of change
6
Any
new buildings or
structures within
the
envelope
of the
church
should
seek
to
avoid
unnecessary adverse impact
on
significant historic fabric and
spaces
and
views
from
the outside
be
the minimum compatible with aviable new
use for the
building
not be so
rigid as
to hinder
possible future
uses
respect and make use of the
basic subdivisions
of space and the historic
accesses
to
the church
make
reference
to the
underlying round
church of the
Templars
be able to be dismantled and removed
from
the building without further
damage to the historic fabric
enhance
through
its
design
materials
and
detailing
the
appreciation
of
the
historic fabric
Reason
Flexibility is the
key
to the successful
long-term
reuse of the Temple Church and
it is essential that it is built into both the planning and construction of any new
internal
structures.
Since
the
original round Temple church is
a
highly significant,
but invisible, part
of
the site s
history,
it is important that its memory is preserved
in the structure.
The
impact
of new structures on both the internal spaces
and
particularly or mezzanines) views of
the exterior
is an
important
design
consideration
Evidence
of wartime bomb damage should
remain
visible
e son
Although not
an
official
War
Memorial, it is
right
that the church should
continue
to act
as
a reminder of
the damage
suffered by the city
during
the last war.
Provision of services and the retention of character
8
New services should
be
designed to minimise their
physical
and visual
impact
onthe
historic building
by
making
use of
areas
ofdisturbance and newstructures
to
disguise runs
Reason
Churches
are normally
relatively
free
of intrusive
services.
With careful
design it
should be possible
to
maintain this appearance in any new
structure.
Damage to
significant archaeology and standing
fabric can be
minimised
y
the
careful
use
of areas already disturbed
by
19th and 20th century works and excavations.
L N
B XTER
SSOCI TES TEMPLE CHURCH BRISTOL CONSERVATION PL N 35
OCTOBER
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
39/45
are
the fabric
Setting
There shouldbe anagreed programme of maintenanceanda provision for
regular
inspection
of
the condition
of
the fabric.
Reason
As
para 7 1 of
PPG15
states Regular maintenance and repair are the key to the
preservation of
historic buildings Modest
expenditure on repairs
keeps
a building
weathertight and routine maintenance [...] can prevent much more expensive
work becoming necessary at a later date. [...]
Regular
inspection is invaluable.
10 The historic envelope of the Temple Church should be retained intact and no
new extens ions should be allowed
Reason
Views ofthe
Temple Church
particularly
from
the former
churchyard
are
highly
significant. Any new extension would adversely affect these.
11 Those responsible for theTemple Church shouldseek to co operatewith
Bristol
City Council to ensure that the management of the churchyard enhances the
setting
of
the church.
Reason
Renewing the
link between the church and
its former
churchyard would
be
a
considerable
benefit
not
least
because of the
potential
parking
and
service
area
at the foot of the tower Co-ordinated management will help to ensure that the
planting ofthe park enhances the setting of the building rather than blocking
t
as
s
currently the case
anagement
12 The management structure for the church should seek to:
ensure the proper curation and long term protection of the historic asset
in line with policy 2
9
allow
public access and the
interpretation and
presentation of the history
of the Temple Church
manage
and control
the
building s
use to
ensure
that it complies with
policy 4
encourage
the
involvement of theCity
and
local
interests
in the long-term
future of the building.
ALAN BAXTER ASSOCIATES TEMPLE CHURCH
BRISTOL
CONSERVATION
PLAN 36
OCTOBER
^
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
40/45
e son
An appropriate management structure
is
key
to ensuring the long-term future of the
Temple Church.
The
precise structure
will
depend
on part on
the
outcome
of
any
review
of
options
for
future use
of the
church as
described in policy 3.
may
be
that
Guardianship
is not an appropriate mechanism to manage a
more
intensive
use
of
the church. The
involvement of
representatives
of wider
interests
will
allow the
development
of the church to
be
seen
in its
necessary wider context.
13
External
signage
should be the minimum necessary toadvertise the function ofthe
church
t
should
not be directly
attached to
the
historic building
and it
should
avoid adverse impact on
the
setting of
the Scheduled
ncient
Monument
and
listed building
and the
character
of
the
churchyard
Reason
The immediate setting
of
the
listed
building particularly
when
viewed from the
churchyard is precious and could easily be spoiled by
intrusive
signage.
At
the same
time the requirement of the new user of the
church
to advertise their presence
must
be recognised.
14
This Conservation
Plan
should be reviewed at
5 yearly intervals
Reason
The
Conservation Plan is intended
as
an effective long term management tool.
needs
regular
review to
ensure
that
it
continues
to
reflect
the
conservation
priorities
of the
building
particularly if its use is to
be intensified.
15 All
works to the
building whether new development
or
routine maintenance should
be
based
on a thorough understanding of the building should seek to
minimise
adverse
impact on the
significant historic
fabric
of
the building and its
archaeology
and
should
be
carried
out to best
practice
conservation
standards
A
full
record
should be kept of
all
changes
e son
As
the government s adviser
on
the
historic
environment
English
Heritage
has
a
duty
to set the highest standards as an example for
others
to
follow.
16
English
Heritage should implement
a
programme
of
research
to
improve
understanding of theTemple Church and to make publicly
accessible
the results
e son
The
considerable amount
of
existing knowledge
ofthe
history
ofthechurch
particularly
of the round Templar church is
currently scattered incomplete
and
unpublished.
Better understanding would contribute to academic understanding of a highly
significant building
type
aidthe planningof
future works
and
help
in
thepresentation
of the site to the public.
It
could be achieved by the selective re-excavation of
Saunders trenches, by the creation of a co-ordinated archive of information on
and
finds from
the church and by the publication of an account of its
history.
L N XTER
SSOCI TES
TEMPLE
C HUR C H
BRISTOL CONSERV TION
PL N 37
* OCTOBER
U ^
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
41/45
6 C O N C L U S I O N
6.1 In many respects, theTemple Church is a typical English urban parish church. It
was a
medieval
foundation, gradually enlarged, rebuilt and refurnished by the
generosity of
its
parishioners,
restored
by
the
Victorians, and damaged by wartime
bombing.
Several
features, however,
set
theTemple
Church
apart.
Its
original
foundation
as
a round church
by
the
Knights Templar
is
very
unusual. Its
exceptional
size,
its role in medieval Bristol, its particular
association with
the
Weavers Company
and its leaning
tower
give it a local importance matched
only
by
St Mary Redcliffe.
.
6.2 Of particular relevance to the
Conservation
Plan, how ever, w as an additional
Q
factor. U nlike virtually
all
other
churches damaged
by bombing,
the
Temple 5
Church remains unrepaired, inaccessible
and without
a function. The building
which
was once
at
the
heart
of
its
community
is
now an expensive
vacuum at its
core.
As
English
Heritage has
recognised,
such
a
situation
should
not be
allowed
to
cont inue
6.3
The principal issue for the Conservation Plan
has
thus been
to
identify what
s
most
significant about theTemple
Church and to
establish the
overall
priorities
for
its
conservation. These
can
then act as a yardstick,
against
which the various
options
of the
future
of
the church from incorporating
its ruin into
the public
park to full
reroofing and reglazing)
can be measured
and
the most appropriate
selected.
It is
not
for
this Plan to select
the
most appropriate
option, but it does
describe
the
various issues - of
suitable
uses, public access and interpretation,
and
the
nature
of
any
new
building
-
which
must
be
taken into
account.
The
conservation of the Temple
Church,
moreover,
should not be seen simply
as
an
end in
itself. Its significance, both for Bristol and
its
immediate area,
must play a
role in deciding
its
future and this in turn raises fresh
issues,
of access, of
uses
which allow
it
to
link
back into its
historic surroundings particularly
the
churchyard) and of co-ordinated management.
6.4 Conservation Plans are usually
described
as
being
about managing
change . o
some extent this is true of this plan. At the same time however, it is also about
defining a future for theTemple Church
which
both preserves its
historic
interest
and
allows
itoncemore to play a full and positive role
in
this part of
Bristol.
L N XTER
SSOCI TES
TEMPLE
CHURCH BRISTOL CONSERVATION PLAN 3 8
O C T O B E R 2 2
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
42/45
PPENDIX
S HEDULED
MONUMENT ND
ST TUTORY LIST DES RIPTIONS
ST597
901-1/42/337
08/01/59
GV
BRISTOL
VICTORIA STREET
East side
Temple Church, remains
II
Formerly known as: Temple Church. Church of che Holy Cross
VICTORIA
STREET,
Also known ao: Holy Cross Church VICTORIA STREET.
Church. cl400 upper stage of tower 1460 gutted cl940. Bath
stone
ashlar
and Pennant rubble with ashlar dressings to an
open shell without roof or glass.
PLAN: aisled
unclereotoreyed
nave chancel
wich
chapels
and
SW
tower.
Perpendicular Gothic
style
with a Somerset type
tower
EXTERIOR: 2 centred arched E window of 5 lights with trefoil
heads
betweenshore clasping buttresses. A low vestry
attached to the NE of 3 bays with 3 light mullion windows and
a parapet and a N door with a mullioned overlight. 3 bay
chancel
has 3 light
windows with
trefoil heads and label
moulds
and buttresses at the
ends.
5 boy nave with 5 light
windows drip mould and crenellated parapet; in second bay
from W is a doorwaywith chamfered reveals the arch breaking
the line of the sill above. Similar S aisle. The W end of the
N aisle has an octagonal stair turret between the N aisle and
the nave and mid Georgian porch to the nave with Corinthian
pilasters to a segmental pediment with a cartouche inside and
an urn on the top; inside is a round arched doorway with an
acanthus
key.
5 stage tower to end of S aisle divided by deep
drips
with
an
internal
stair
turret
in the SE corner: a low plinth with
three W niches with crockened pinnacled hoods beneath a
4 light window
the
hoodmoulds running
into the drip
course;
2 light windows to the second and third
stages
all
blind;
niches with foliate bases flank the third stage N window
triangular buttresses either side ending in attached
pinnacles
at the base of the
belfry
is a band of
triangular
traceried panels; above are paired lights with mullions and
transoms and ornate fretwork separated by slender buttresses
with blind panels
above
the corner buttresses endingin
attached pinnacles; drip with gargoyles and a blocking course;
the
octagonal
stair turret is
slightly expressed
in the
belfry
with blind panelling.
INTERIOR: column bases to a 5 bay
nave
with round responds at
each end; the base of the tower has a vaulted roof entered
through an arch with soffit quatrefoil headed panels.
Memorials: a finely carved memorial on the N wall of the tower
forming an aedicule with a skull at the
base.
HISTORICAL NOTE: The
church suffered bomb
damage in the
Second
World War and is preserved as a gutted shell; it originally
had a fine unclerestoreyed nave. The lower stages of the tower
leant to the W soon after completion and the belfry slightly
corrected the angle; the pinnacles were never built.
Gomme A Jenner M and Little B: Bristol, An
Architectural
History: Bristol: 1979 : 59; The Buildings of England: Pevsner
N: North Somerset and Bristol:
London:
1958 . 409 .
A L AN BAXTER
AS SOC IATES
TEMPLE C HUR C H BRISTOL CONSERVAT ION PL N
OCTOBER
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
43/45
ST 97
901 1/42/336
08/12/72
BRISTOL
VICTORIA
STREET
North
East
side
Archway and gates to Temple Church
Formerly Listed
as:
VICTORIA
STREET
{North East side
Piers and gates of the Temple Church
GV
Archway Mid C19. Portland stone and wrought iron Gothic
Revival style Screen
with 3
pointed archways separated
by
buttresses with crenellated
turrets
a small gable with a
heraldic shield over the taller middle
arch
stepped
gablets
inscribed THE TEMPLE and HOLY CROSS over the outer
ones;
2 leaf gates with fleur de lys finials.
L N
XTER
SSOCI TES
TEMPLE CHURCH
BRISTOL
CONSERVATION
PL N
OCTOBER
4
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
44/45
vSchcduled Monumen t
JftC'iuwnn r\ yny hi rrscrvvil
I'm iilcmilicalHin| un tc only
SiU-Name: Tismplo amrol i
mijr: l i . i .n.r.1
llislrii l:
Il i :.t o|
l :irisli:
Hr i r to
Ki-y: M ui ii iM if ii l N I.i>i.i ioiiA-\Ii.'iii si-
O
So l e :
1 : 1 0 0 0 0 Derived
ft inn: I : 10000
Yiilrnl
mi M:|{; .;Tj0 3?1?71
Kxlrat i
rrum OS slu-cl: nV/N -.
A LA N B A XT E R
&
A S S O C I A T E S
link: - 0.2.9V I .MuiiiiiiiciilNV
English Heritage
.;:.:/=
b)nlaWr(IAW
TiUtsVp-. 071971
I m
T, (:/ .
TEMPLE CHURCH
BRISTOL
CONSERV TION PLAN
OCTOBER
X
-
8/10/2019 Temple Church CMP
45/45
FILE REFERENCE:
AA
70912/1
INSPECTOR S
R PORT
MONUMENT:
Temple Church
PARISH: BRISTOL
DISTRICT:
RISTOL
COUNTY: RISTOL
NATIONAL MONUMENT NO: 28841
NATIONAL GRID REFERENCE S): ST59327273
DESCRIPTION OF THE MONUMENT
The monument includes the buried remains of a 12th century oval church over
which is built the 14th century church remains which ate visible today.
The church lie3 in Bristol city centre in a churchyard which is now a
public amenity space.
The earlier church built by the Knights Templar was circular in form
typical
of
churches
of this
order
and based on the
form
of the Dome of the
Rock and the Church of the
Holy Sepulchre
in
Jerusalem. Nothing shows
at
ground level of the original circular church but it3 form influenced
the
development
of the
later church.
Its
foundations were excavated, and
its
plan is now marked out inside the later church. The 14th century church
includes n 18th century porch a nave with a 5-bay hall an aisled chancel of
three
bays a
sanctuary
and a tower. The tower
adjacent
to the
porch
at the
west end of the church was finished in 1460. It is
34.75m
high and
leans
a lm os t 1 .5 m o ut o f t ru e.
The Templars church was built on land outside the city of Bristol
granted
to
the
order
by Robert, EarL of Gloucester,
between 1120 and
1147. It
appears
that the
Bristol Temple
became the
administrative centre
for the
order
in
south west England. Archaeological evidence suggests that the church wa3
altered in the early 13th century. In c.1 3 the chancel was rebuilt and
extended and given a square end. A chapel was built on its north side and
dedicated to St Katherine; this is known as the Weavers Chapel
because
in
1299 it was granted to the Company of weavers in Bristol just before the
suppression of the TempLar3 in 1312. In 1313 the church known as Holy Cross
was transferred to the Knight3 Hospitallers. In the early 14th century more
chapels were built and documents indicate that by 1392 there was a separate
Lady chapel apparently built onto the south side of the nave
projecting
into
the cemetery. From 1396
wills
refer to the
chapel
of St.
Nicholas
which is
recognised as the main chapel south of the chancel balancing St Katherlne s
on the north. The present nave dates from the last quarter of the 14th
century,
and it must
have been
at
this tim e th at t he c ir cul ar nav e
was
demolished The rebuilding of the nave appears to have been complete by the
end of the 14th century and the tower was begun in 1441. In 1540 the
Hospitallers were suppressed by Henry
VIn,
and Holy Cross survived as a
parish church. Four years later it was purchased from the Crown by the City.
The Lady chapel was demolished in the 16th century. The church was refitted in
the 18th century and restorations took place in 1872 1907 and 1911. In
1940 the church was badly damaged by bombing and in 1958 the ruins were taken
i nt o s ta te c ar e.
Excluded from the scheduling are notice boards wooden door3 modern
protective structures and modern brickwork.
on t inued
top related