SNN106606 - Survey of former turnstile building at the British Timken site, Duston, Northampton

NIAG was contacted by Jenny Ballinger, Conservation Officer with Northampton Borough Council, who had in turn been approached by the developers of the former British Timken site at Duston. They had ‘found’ the former turnstile building for the Timken athletics track along the south-western boundary of the site, complete with turnstile. It was in a poor state of repair and due for demolition unless anyone was willing to take responsibility for it. It was understood that no one had come forward and thus NIAG agreed to record the building prior to demolition. The British Timken Works was built to produce roller bearings on a Greenfield site immediately to the north of Duston village commencing in 1941. At its peak over 4000 people were employed in the factory. Production ceased in 2002 and the works were demolished over the next 4 years. A survey of the works was undertaken prior to demolition but it appears that the turnstile building was excluded. It is not known precisely when the turnstile building was constructed but it is thought likely to date from the 1950s. The turnstile building was located at grid reference SP 72384 61138 (10 figure co-ordinates), alongside what is assumed to have been the former entrance to the Timken sports ground accessed from a lane leading off Main Road, Duston; see fig 1. The building sat adjacent to the boundary of the former Timken site. Butted against the south-west wall was a stone built pillar that was once part of a double gateway, the metal track and accessories associated with the gates remaining in the concrete road surface. At the time of the survey, apart from the Timken gates on Main Road in Duston, the turnstile building and the gate pillar were the only remaining structures relating to British Timken on the site. Access to the south-west and south-east external walls (including the gate pillar) was severely restricted due to the combination of a steel fence along the boundary coupled with extensive growth of ivy on these facades. Likewise there was a large growth of ivy on part of the north-east wall and much of the roof. All of this inhibited recording some aspects of the building. Figs 2 – 5 show external view of the building. Figs 6 – 9 show scale drawings of the plan, section and two facades.