Specification for Archaeological Monitoring and Strip, Map and Sample Excavations (V2)

Transcription

Specification for Archaeological Monitoring and Strip, Map and Sample Excavations (V2)
Specification for Archaeological
Monitoring and Strip, Map and
Sample Excavations (V2)
Site Name: Postwick Distribution and
Overflow Mains
Site Code: tbc
County (Grid Ref): Norfolk (starting at TG 2963
0844)
Project No: CNF44209
Planning App. No.
Client: Anglian Water
Date: revised 29/5/14
Author: Dr P Spoerry
30 May 2014
20140920
1
Specification for Archaeological Excavation
Oxford Archaeology Ltd is an Institute of Field Archaeologists Registered Organisation and
follows IFA By-Laws, Standards and Policy.
Site Name:
Site Code:
County (Grid Ref):
Postwick Pipelines
tbc
Norfolk (from TG 2963 0844)
Project No.:
Project Type:
CNF 44209
Excavation
Event No.:
CNF 44209; and others as required by NCC
Planning App. No.:
Client:
Date:
Author:
tbc
Anglian Water
Revised 29/5/14
Dr P Spoerry
1
General Background
1.1
Circumstances of the Project
This specification (Written Scheme of Investigation) has been
prepared on behalf of Anglian Water in response to an Archaeological
Brief issued by Norfolk HES. This specification conforms to the
principles identified in English Heritage's guidance documents for the
Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment,
specifically the Morphe Project Manager's Guide (2006) and PPN3
(Project Planning Note 3): Archaeological Excavation.
1.2
The Geology of the Site
The site lies between approximately 10m OAD and 30m OAD on
Norwich Crag sand and gravels (BGS, Geology of Britain Viewer;
http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html). Borehole logs
from the A47 scheme in the central part of the site mostly identify
approximately 0.4m-0.5m of topsoil over 1.1m to1.6m of silty sands or
silty clays.
Tender Ref. No. 16335
22
1.3
The Proposed Development
Pipelines are to be laid supplying the new WTW works at Postwick.
Norfolk HES have provided requirements for areas of pipeline to be
monitored and for other areas to be subjected to strip, map and
sample excavation.
Distribution Main; Monitoring
ch. c.40 – 1850 (TG 2963 0844 – TG 2966 1003)
ch. 2750 – 3550 (TG 2971 1088 – TG 2952 1164)
Distribution Main; Strip, map and sample excavation
ch. 1850 – 2750 (TG 2966 1003 – TG 2971 1088)
ch. 3550 – 3853 (TG 2952 1164 – TG 2933 1189)
Overflow Main; Monitoring
ch. -100 – 0 (TG 2955 0832 - TG 2965 0830) (Borehole Site)
ch. 0 – 1220 (TG 2965 0830 – TG 3031 0748)
Overflow Main; Strip, map and sample excavation
ch. 1220 – 1512 (TG 3031 0748 – TG 3041 0727)
2
Archaeological Background
2.1
Background Study
In line with Norfolk HES's recommendations, which preclude the use
of data from the Norfolk Heritage Explorer online resource for
commercial work, a formal search of the NHER was commissioned by
OA East, with data supplied on 9/12/13.
This data confirms that the site lies within what was a densely utilized
environment throughout most periods.
2.2
Undated
The cropmarks of a group of undated ditches are visible on aerial
photographs to the south west of the Postwick Transmitter Station,
and to the west of a comparable cropmark site (NHER 49558) – just
east of this easement. It seems likely that these cropmarks represent
several phases of activity, and may date to the Late Prehistoric to
Tender Ref. No. 16335
3
Roman period or medieval to post medieval period. They probably
represent part of a wider grouping and as such remain undated
(although see 2.2 below), and these alignments may extend into the
easement.
2.3
Prehistoric
Records of casual finds and non-metallic finds recovered during
detecting within close proximity of the eaeement indicate the presence
of flint tools and prehistoric pottery (e.g. NHER 29867) indicating
activity areas and possibly occupation close by. Neolithic tools have
been found in several fields close to the northern easement in
Plumstead (e.g. NHER8169, 2420).
It is possible that the parallel ditch features recorded to the west of
the central part of the easement (e.g.NHER 52004) represent the
fragmentary remains of of a prehistoric trackway.
A ring ditch, which probably dates to the Bronze Age or Iron Age (or
just possibly the Roman, or medieval to post medieval period) is
located at the WTW site in the centre of the eaeement. The ring ditch
is quite small for a Bronze Age round barrow and may instead be the
remains of eavesdrip gully from a roundhouse. This site is located
within a wider area of undated cropmarks relating to field boundaries
and enclosures, which may be late prehistoric to Roman, or medieval
to post medieval in date (NHER 52004).
A magnetometer survey conducted in late 2013 identified weak
anomalies probably associated with the ring ditch and also located a
small number of linear features within the WTW area.
A cropmark of a possible Bronze Age ring ditch or hengiform
monument located 200m to the west of the central part of the
easement was visible on aerial photographs, and was excavated as
part of the NDR evaluation (NHER 49758). It is possible that this
feature represents a C-shaped hengiform monument, such as that at
Roughton (NHER 38501), and is not, in fact, a round barrow.
Several cropmark records from areas only a few hundred metres to
the north and west of the easement include pit alignments
characteristic of neolithic or later prehistoric activity.
In conclusion there is evidence for a variety of kinds of activity and
types of remains across the period from the neolithic to the Iron Age
Tender Ref. No. 16335
44
within the general vicinity of the easement, and therefore potential for
similar discoveries here.
2.4
Romano-British
As indicated above it is possible that the ring ditch recorded within the
WTW site is the remains of an eavesdrip gully from an iron Age or
Romano-British building.
Additionally the multi-period enclosure
systems see across many fields to the east and north of the easement
include alignments that are characteristic of Roman-British agriculture.
Roman coins and other finds were found during metal detecting in the
field through which the southern easement traverses (NNHER 23777).
It is also believed that multi-phase cropmarks in this area (e.g. NHER
49560) include some of Roman date.
In conclusion the site may include Roman-British settlement and/or
enclosure systems.
2.5
Saxon to medieval and post-medieval
An early Saxon brooch was recovered 300m to the east of the scentral
part of the easement (NNHER 50468).
Cropmark features identified to the west of the easement (NNHER
52045, 52046) may be evidence for Saxon SFBs, although they could
equally have an origin as quarries or field ponds.
Very substantial numbers of metal finds have been recovered from
fields through which the southern part of the easement traverses(e.g.
NNHER 16847, 30475, 31762) and additionally small numbers of
similar objects have been found slightly to the north and adjacent to
the easement (e.g. NNHER 24062, 240630. These finds date
primarily to the medieval and post-medieval periods.
The southern easement site lies just beyond the historic village
envelope of Postwick, and HER records from the settlement itself lying
just to the southwest attest to the unsurprising discovery of medieval
pottery and coins. St Ethelred's chapel possibly lay in the WTW field,
but magnetometer survey has not indicated its presence.
The central northern easement traverses an area on the western
periphery of the historic settlement of Great Plumstead. It passes
through several fields which contain HER references to medieval and
Tender Ref. No. 16335
5
post-medieval enclosure systems. Remains of these may be present
within the easement, and possibly of associated settlement.
The range of evidence for the Saxon to medieval period, as described
in this section, all point to the site being previously within the area of
medieval to post-medieval infield activity and the settlement periphery.
Settlement shift from the early Saxon period onwards may have at
times included this location.
3
Aims and Objectives
The main aim of the project will be to preserve the archaeological
evidence contained within the excavation area by record and to
attempt a reconstruction of the history and use of the site. Additionally
the following site-specific research objectives will be taken into
account and guide the project programme.
Beyond the site-specific objectives outline below, assessment of the
significance and potential of archaeological remains will be considered
in context with relevant regional research objectives as outlined in
Medlycott, M. (ed.) 2011, Research and Archaeology Revisited: a
revised framework for the East of England. E. Anglian Arch. Occ.
Pap.24
3.1
Prehistoric
3.1.1 Can casual finds evidence be associated with any earlier prehistoric
activity? If the ring ditch recorded as a cropmark on the WTW site can
be dated, can this be associated with other remains along the route?b
3.2
Iron Age and Roman
3.2.1
Can the ring ditch in the WTW site be confirmed as a Iron Age to
Roman eavesdrip gully, and therefore the presence of occupation be
confirmed?
3.3.2
Do enclosure systems in adjacent fields on both sides of the southern
part of the easement and a possible East-west trackway in the
Tender Ref. No. 16335
66
southern route area, represent a field system, part of which, can be
confirmed by excavation?
3.3.3
Can groups of Iron Age and Roman detector finds recorded adjacent
to the southern easement prove indicative of occupation or other
activity?
3.3
Anglo-Saxon
3.3.1 Does the recovery of a brooch to within fields adjacent to the southern
easement indicate the possibility of a cemetery nearby?
3.3.2 Can Saxon settlement and enclosure systems, pre-dating the village
cores of Plumstead and Postwick be identified?
3.4
Medieval to Post-Medieval
3.4.1 Can the vast number of medieval to post-medieval metal finds
recovered from fields to the south be contextualized on the basis of
objects, or settlement features, found through controlled investigation?
3.4.2 Can the date and extent of medieval to post-medieval enclosure
systems seen adjacent to the northern easement be confirmed?
4
Timetable
4.1
It is estimated that the fieldwork will take approximately eight working
weeks to complete. This does not allow for delays caused by bad
weather or any additional works beyond the current agreed limits of
the excavation area. In addition to excavation areas (SMS) provision
is made for an experienced archaeologist to observe other parts of the
easement, with teams brought in to record features where identified.
4.2
Post-excavation tasks and report writing will take a approximately 12
months following the end of fieldwork, unless there are exceptional
discoveries requiring more lengthy analysis. A summary statement of
results, however, can be produced more quickly if required.
Tender Ref. No. 16335
7
5
Staffing and Support
5.1
The following named staff will form the project team:
1 x Project Manager (supervisory only, not based on site) (Paul
Spoerry)
2 x Project Officer/Supervisor (full time)
5 x Site Assistant (part time, as required)
1 x Finds Assistant (part time, as required)
1 x Illustrator for post-excavation work (part time)
5.2
The Project Manager and Project Officer/Supervisor will be core staff
of OA East. Names, qualifications and experience of key project
personnel will be communicated to the relevant County Archaeological
Planning Advice team before the commencement of fieldwork. All Site
Assistants will be drawn from a pool of qualified and experienced staff.
The Contractor will not employ volunteer amateur or student staff,
whether paid or unpaid, to fulfil any of the above tasks except as an
addition to the stated team
5.3
Specialists will be employed for consultation and analysis as
necessary. The following individuals will be consulted based on the
evaluation results. Pottery will be examined by Sarah Percival, Alice
Lyons and Paul Spoerry. Faunal remains will be examined by Chris
Faine. Small Finds will be examined by Nina Crummy. Environmental
analysis will be carried out by OA staff, where necessary in
consultation with Val Fryer and the results will be conveyed to the
English Heritage Regional Scientific Advisor. Conservation will be
undertaken by Colchester Museums. Should unexpected remains be
encountered, a list of other specialists who may be consulted is given
in Appendix 1.
6
Methods
6.1
SMS areas will be opened using one 360° excavator with a toothless
ditching bucket to reveal as much easement width as is safely
possible. All mechanical excavation will take place under supervision
of a suitably qualified and experienced archaeologist. Spoil will be
moved away from machined area by side-casting.
Tender Ref. No. 16335
88
6.2
All excavation areas will be cleaned as necessary to facilitate the
identification of archaeological features and buried soils. All features
will be mapped onto a base plan either by hand (1:50 or 1:100) or
using a Total Station Theodolite, as appropriate. The survey data will
be made available in digital format for transfer to the Heritage
Environment Record (HER) GIS system. A plan showing all significant
features will be located on the Ordnance Survey National Grid.
6.3
Established excavation and recording methodology will be used as
has been generally employed on rural sites in Eastern England, a
system closely based upon the DUA manuals of London Museum, and
utilising single-context recording where appropriate.
A Project
Manager will monitor the work of the site director (Project
Officer/Supervisor). A Supervisor and experienced excavators will be
used to ensure accuracy of excavation and recording. Regular
communication between PM/PO will ensure that the work programme
and research direction is kept to, and that the recording strategy
develops in the light of excavation results and input from finds,
environmental and other specialists. On-site records checking and
matrix creation will be kept up to date and will be carried out by key
site personnel. Photographic records and hand-drawn sections will be
completed to recognised standards.
6.4
A minimum 50% of each discrete feature will be excavated unless it is
unsafe to do so. Where linear features are not directly related to
settlement they will be excavated sufficient to provide evidence for an
informed interpretation of their date and function. Where linear
features are directly related to settlement, a minimum of 25% of each
feature will be excavated.
6.5
Each feature will be individually documented on context sheets and
hand drawn in section and plan at an appropriate scale (1:10 or 1:20).
6.6
Spoil will be scanned visually and with a metal detector to aid recovery
of artefacts.
6.7
Monochrome and colour photographs supplemented by colour slides
will form the photographic archive.
6.8
Bulk samples will be taken by the excavator and in consultation with
the English Heritage Regional Scientific Advisor and the project
environmental specialists where practicable, to test for the presence
and potential of micro- and macro-botanical environmental indicators.
If buried soils are encountered a soil micromorphology specialist will
be consulted. The results of any analysis will be included in the
excavation report.
Tender Ref. No. 16335
9
6.9
If Human remains are encountered, the relevant County
Archaeological Advice Team, the Coroner and the client will be
informed. Removal of these remains will be carried out in accordance
with all appropriate Environmental Health regulations and will only
occur after a Ministry of Justice licence has been obtained.
610
Public Presentation: The subject site may not be suitable for direct
presentation through the provision of a public open day. The results
of this work will be disseminated during lectures and presentations to
the public and archaeological societies upon request, as part of the
growing body of work being conducted within the local area by OA
East.
6.11
All work will be conducted to professional standards, and will be
executed in line with the appropriate sections of Gurney, D., 2003,
‘Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England’, as adopted
by the Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers for
the East of England Region and published as East Anglian
Archaeology Occasional Paper 14.
7
Post-excavation, Publication and Archive
7.1
If required a post-excavation assessment report and updated
research design will be completed within 4 months of the completion
of fieldwork Post-excavation and reporting will follow guidance in
English Heritage's Management of Research Projects in the Historic
Environment (2009).
7.2
Following on from the updated project design a full archive report will
be produced within 8 months of the completion of fieldwork. The
archive report will incorporate the results of the archaeological
evaluation.
7.3
An Oasis report will be initiated at the start of the project and
completed/submitted on completion of the report.
7.4
A hard copy of the approved report will be produced for the HER and
the County Archaeological Advisor. In addition a digital copy of the
report will also be made available.
7.5
If appropriate a report will be published in an appropriate journal as
approved by the County Archaeological Advisor.
Tender Ref. No. 16335
1010
7.6
A security copy of the archive will be made.
7.7
All artefactual material recovered will be held in storage by OA East
and ownership of all such archaeological finds will be given over to
the relevant authority to facilitate future study and ensure proper
preservation of all artefacts. In the unlikely event that artefacts of
significant monetary value are discovered, and if they are not subject
to Treasure Act legislation separate ownership arrangements may be
negotiated.
7.8
It is Oxford Archaeology Ltd's policy, in line with accepted practice, to
keep site archives (paper and artefactual) together wherever
possible.
All archives will comply in format with PPN3
recommendations.
7.9
The project archive will follow the guidelines contained in Guidelines
for the Preparation of Excavation Archives for Long Term Storage
(United Kingdom Institute for Conservation, 1990), Standards in the
Museum care of Archaeological Collections (Museums and Galleries
Commission 1992), and Archaeological Archives: A guide to best
practice in creation, compilation, transfer and curation (Brown 2007).
The archive will be deposited within an approved county store. Costs
associated with the deposition of the archive will be met by the client.
8
8.1
Further Considerations
Backfilling/Reinstatement
Backfilling/reinstatement
undertaken by OA East.
8.2
of
the
excavation
areas
will
not
be
Monitoring
The relevant County Archaeological advice team will be informed
appropriately of dates and arrangements to allow for adequate
monitoring of the works.
8.3
Health and Safety
8.3.1 A risk assessment covering all activities carried out during the lifetime
of the project will be prepared prior to project commencement and
updated throughout the life of the project. This draws on OA East’s
Tender Ref. No. 16335
11
activity-specific risk assessment literature and conforms with CDM
requirements.
8.3.2 All aspects of the project, both in the field and in the office will be
conducted according to OA East’s Health and Safety Policy, Oxford
Archaeology Ltd’s Health and Safety Policy, and Health and Safety in
Field Archaeology (J.L. Allen and A. St John-Holt, 1997). A copy of OA
East’s Health and Safety Policy can be supplied on request.
8.4
Insurance
OA East is covered by Public and Employer’s Liability Insurance. The
underwriting company is Allianz Cornhill Insurance plc, policy number
SZ/14939479/06. Details of the policy can be seen at the OA East
office.
8.5
Services, Public Rights of Way, Tree Preservation Orders etc.
The client will inform the project manager of any live or disused
cables, gas pipes, water pipes or other services that may be affected
by the proposed excavations before the commencement of fieldwork.
Hidden cables/services should be clearly identified and marked where
necessary. The client will likewise inform the project manager of any
public rights of way or permissive paths on or near the land which
might affect or be affected by the work. The client will also inform the
project manager of any trees subject to Tree Preservation Orders
within the subject site or on its boundaries
8.6
Site Security
Unless previously agreed with the Project Manager in writing, this
specification and any associated statement of costs is based on the
assumption that the site will be sufficiently secure for archaeological
work to commence. All security requirements, including fencing,
padlocks for gates etc. are the responsibility of the client.
8.7
Access
The client will secure access to the site for archaeological personnel
and plant, and obtain the necessary permissions from owners and
Tender Ref. No. 16335
1212
tenants to place a mobile office and portable toilet on or near to the
site. Any costs incurred to secure access, or incurred as a result of
withholding of access will not be OA East's responsibility. The costs
of any delays as a result of withheld access will be passed on to the
client in addition to the project costs already specified.
8.8
Site Preparation
The client is responsible for clearing the site and preparing it so as to
allow archaeological work to take place without further preparatory
works, and any cost statement accompanying or associated with this
specification is offered on this basis. Unless previously agreed in
writing, the costs of any preparatory work required, including tree
felling and removal, scrub or undergrowth clearance, removal of
concrete or hard standing, demolition of buildings or sheds, or removal
of excessive overburden, refuse or dumped material, will be charged
to the client, in addition to any costs for archaeological evaluation
already agreed.
8.9
Invoicing
8.9.1 Unless otherwise agreed in writing, an invoice for 50% of the agreed
costs of the project will be presented on the project’s initiation. This
will normally be payable before further works take place. The
remaining balance of the fees for the project will be invoiced to the
client on completion of the project and presentation of the final report.
8.9.2 It is expected that payment will be received within 30 days of invoicing.
If payment is not made within this time interest will be charged at base
rate. After a period of three months Oxford Archaeology Ltd employs
a debt collection company to recover unpaid invoices and any costs
incurred during this process will be passed on to the client.
Tender Ref. No. 16335
13
Tender Ref. No. 16335
APPENDIX 1: CONSULTANT SPECIALISTS
NAME
Allen, Leigh
Allen, Martin
Anderson, Sue
Bamforth, Mike
Bates, Andy
Bayliss, Alex
Biddulph, Edward
Bishop, Barry
Blinkhorn, Paul
Jameson, Vicky
Jones, Jenny
SPECIALISM
Worked bone, CBM, medieval metalwork
Medieval coins
HSR, pottery and CBM
Wood
Animal bone
C14
Roman pottery
Lithics
Iron Age, Anglo-Saxon and medieval
pottery
Plant macrofossils, charcoal
plant macrofossils; pollen preparations
Roman pottery and coins
Pollen and soils/ geology
Prehistoric pottery
illustration & reconstruction artist
Snails, geoarchaeology
Medieval/post-Medieval finds, pottery,
CBM
Small Find Assemblages
Slag/metalworking residues
Wood technology
Worked Flint
Flint
Slags, metallurgy
Pollen, charred plants, charcoal/wood
identification, sediment coring and
interpretation
CBM (specialised)
Roman pottery
Animal bone
Medieval pot, glass, small finds
Charred plant remains
Molluscs/environmental
Charcoal ID
Osteologist
Herpetologist
Post-Roman pottery, building materials,
painted wall plaster
Fish and small animal bones
Conservation
Small finds, Mesolithic flint, RB coarse
pottery, leather, wooden objects
and wood technology;
Plant macrofossils, pollen
Archaeobotany (charred, waterlogged
and mineralised plant remains)
Human bone
Conservation
King, David
Locker, Alison
Loe, Louise
Lyons, Alice
Macaulay, Stephen
Masters, Pete
Window glass & lead
Fishbone
Osteologist
Late Iron Age/Roman pottery
Roman pottery
geophysics
Boardman, Sheila
Bonsall, Sandra
Booth, Paul
Boreham, Steve
Brown, Lisa
Cane, Jon
Champness, Carl
Cotter, John
Crummy, Nina
Cowgill, Jane
Darrah, Richard
Dickson, Anthony
Donelly, Mike
Doonan, Roger
Druce, Denise
Drury, Paul
Evans, Jerry
Faine, Chris
Fletcher, Carole
Fosberry, Rachel
Fryer, Val
Gale, Rowena
Gibson, Mark
Gleed-Owen, Chris
Goffin, Richenda
Hamilton-Dyer, Sheila
Hogarth, Emma
Howard-Davis, Chris
Huckerby, Elizabeth
Hunter, Kath
ORGANISATION
Oxford Archaeology
Fitzwilliam Museum
Freelance
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
English Heritage
Oxford Archaeology
Freelance
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Cambridge University
Oxford Archaeology
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Freelance
Freelance
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Freelance
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Freelance
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
Suffolk CC
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
ASUD, Durham
University
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Cranfield University
Middleton, Paul
Phosphates/garden history
Mould, Quita
Nicholson, Rebecca
Ironwork, leather
Fish and small mammal and bird bones,
shell
Aerial photographs
Prehistoric pottery, quern stones
Multi-period finds, CBM, fired clay
Roman coins
Faunal and plant remains, can arrange
pollen analysis
Anglo-Saxon bone objects & related
artefact types
Insects
Faunal and human bone
Pollen, non-pollen palynomorphs,
dinoflagellate cysts, diatoms
Architectural stonework
Pollen
Roman, Medieval, post-medieval finds,
metalwork, glass
Iron Age pottery
Worked stone, cbm
Medieval pottery
Snails
Animal bone
Dendrochronology
Human bone
Samian, Roman glass
Medieval Pottery in the Essex area
Medieval landscape and garden history
Osteologist
Iron Age pottery
Medieval Pottery in the Lincolnshire area
Coins
Palmer, Rog
Percival, Sarah
Poole, Cynthia
Popescu, Adrian
Rackham, James
Riddler, Ian
Robinson, Mark
Rowland, Steve
Rutherford, Mairead
Samuels, Mark
Scaife, Rob
Scott, Ian
Sealey, Paul
Shafrey, Ruth
Spoerry, Paul
Stafford, Liz
Strid, Lena
Tyers, Ian
Ui Choileain, Zoe
Wadeson, Stephen
Walker, Helen
Way, Twigs
Webb, Helen
Willis, Steve
Young, Jane
Zant, John
Peterborough
Regional College
Oxford Archaeology
Air Photo Services
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
Fitzwilliam Museum
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Freelance
Oxford Archaeology
Oxford Archaeology
Radiocarbon dating is normally undertaken for Oxford Archaeology East by Waikate
University, New Zealand and by the Oxford University Accelerator Laboratory.
Geophysical prospection is normally undertaken by Cranfield University, Geoquest,
and Geophysical Surveys, Bradford.