Archaeology in the planning process

Steve BakerDevelopment Control Archaeologist, Derbyshire County Council

Minster Lovell Hall, Oxon

What is archaeology?

“The systematic study of past human life and culture by the recovery and examination of remaining material evidence” (Free Online Dictionary)

• Below-ground remains• Earthworks

• Built heritage

• Material culture

• Palaeo-environment•Known and unknown

Legislation and planning policy

• Scheduled Monuments (Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act

1979); 4% of Derbyshire assets are scheduled

• PPG16 (1990)“Polluter pays” principle: archaeology as a finite non-renewable

resourceUse of planning conditions/Section 106 agreements: developer

fundingPreservation in situ or preservation by record

• PPS5 (2010)“Heritage value” approach – understanding significanceIncreased focus on plan-making and pre-applicationAll “heritage assets” are a material considerationPrinciple of proportionalityWeighing loss of significance against public benefit

• NPPF (2012?)

What does archaeology look like in the planning process?

• Staged approach – proportionality

• Identifying potential – do we need to do anything at all?

• Desk-based assessment Buildings appraisal

• Evaluation – non-intrusive GeophysicsFieldwalkingLiDAREarthwork survey

• Evaluation – trial trenching• What next?

Preservation in situExcavationControlled strip or watching

briefNothing!

Image courtesy of ArcHeritage

Key considerations

• Local planning authorities need specialist advice and HER• Identifying archaeological potential – known and unknown

Historic Environment RecordHistoric maps, geology, landforms, past settlement patterns,

field patterns, Regional Research Agenda, Historic Landscape Character

• How much is required pre-application? Need to understand significance and impact; Presumption that hitherto unknown archaeology is identified

pre-appNeed for proportionalityQuestion of balance – smart evaluation

• Appropriate recording methodologiesUsing information from desk-based studies and evaluation to

recommend the most appropriate and proportionate scheme

Case study 1: Foston, South Derbyshire

Anne Bronte’s grave, Scarborough

Images courtesy of University of Leicester Archaeological Services

Major 21ha pig farm and biogas application (not yet determined)

Ploughed site in Trent Valley – sands and gravels

Archaeological interest – HER site for cropmarks; likely prehistoric date

Desk-based assessment – refined cropmark plots and discounted others

Pre-app evaluation necessary to characterise archaeology – phased process

•Geophysics

•Limited trial trenching to validate

Case study 1: Foston, South Derbyshire

Results of DBA and evaluation process:

• Middle Bronze Age and probable Romano-British landscape

• Funerary monuments with cremations

• Field system• Monuments focused on low ridge• Some cropmarks not

archaeological• Archaeological features truncated

by ploughing

Recommendation for conditioned approach to remainder of archaeology

• Open area excavation over ring ditches

• Strip-and-record during groundworks

Lydiard Church, Swindon

‘Smart’ phased DBA and evaluation work reduced pre-app burden for applicant – early engagement critical

Case study 2: Waterswallows, Buxton

Scarborough

21ha application for new bottling plant

‘Improved’ limestone moorland

No HER records – archaeological potential identified through consultation on planning application

• Proximity of ‘Bullring’ henge

• Proximity of Roman roads

•Topography/geological position

Desk-based assessment highlighted likely impact of recent quarrying

Recommendation to defer further archaeological response as conditioned scheme

Case study 2: Waterswallows, Buxton

Trial trenching evaluation (28 trenches)

Large numbers of archaeological features and finds – high significance

Archaeology caused disruption to site programme

Combination of preservation in situ and area excavation

Late Mesolithic-early Neolithic activity (c5500-3000BC). Rare structural evidence – early Neolithic longhouse

Earlier engagement would have enabled better planning of archaeological programmeImages courtesy of ArcHeritage

Case study 3 – ‘The Old Barn’, Dronfield

Monkwearmouth Church

Application to convert Grade II* building for community use

18th century stone barn with timber frame dating around 1450 – possibly site of medieval manor house

Proposals include sub-floor excavations for underfloor heating

Small-scale pre-app evaluation – test pits

Evidence for post-medieval floors and wall footings

Original medieval beaten-earth floor?Images courtesy of Archaeological Research Services Ltd

Case study 3 – ‘The Old Barn’, Dronfield

Dale St, Liverpool

Conditioned archaeological work:

Full building survey

Archaeological work in area of medieval remains

Opportunities for community involvement

Conclusions

•Phased process – identification, evaluation, recording/preservation

•Identification of potential sites draws on a wealth of background evidence

•Massive range of potential tools and techniques available

•Essential that LPAs have expert advice and access to HER

•Ideally the identification and evaluation stages should happen pre-application

•Early engagement is crucial