Bath and North East Somerset – The place to live, work and visit Member training and development 23 September 2015 Archaeology and Planning

The Archaeology of Bath & North East Somerset

Rescue

Discovery of the Rose Theatre, London (1989) Dustin Hoffman and Dame Peggy Ashcroft share their enjoyment of the discovery and offer their support

PPG16: Planning and Archaeology

6. Archaeological remains should be seen as a finite and non-renewable resource, in many cases highly fragile and vulnerable to damage and destruction. Appropriate management is therefore essential to ensure that they survive in good condition. In particular, care must be taken to ensure that archaeological remains are not needlessly or thoughtlessly destroyed. 8. Where nationally important archaeological remains, whether scheduled or not, and their settings, are affected by proposed development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation.

PPS5: Planning for the Historic Environment (March 2010) Brought together PPG16 with PPG15 which covered Listed buildings and Conservations Areas.

Released March 2012

The NPPF ensures that:NPPF The applicant (developer) must provide sufficient information in order to assess the historic environment impacts of their proposed development. 128 The Local Planning Authority should maintain or make available an Historic Environment Record (HER) to provide relevant information to an applicant, who should then make any evidence from their assessments available to the HER The significance of a heritage asset and its conservation should be weighed against the wider benefits of the proposed development. The more important the heritage asset the more weight will be given to its conservation and enhancement Substantial or total loss of a designated heritage asset (e.g. Scheduled Ancient Monuments) should be wholly exceptional unless it can be demonstrated the scheme has overwhelming public benefits that outweigh the loss or harm to the heritage asset Non-designated heritage assets of equal significance to Scheduled Ancient Monuments will be subject to the same policy considerations as designated heritage assets. 139 The degree of harm to the significance of a non-designated heritage asset will be balanced against the merits of the proposed development and the degree to which the harm or loss can be mitigated. 135

BANES Historic Environment Record

HER Contents Archaeological Events and Monuments Bath Urban Archaeological Database Extensive Urban Surveys (historic towns in BANES) Historic Landscape Characterisation (Avon 1996) Scheduled Ancient Monuments Listed Buildings Conservation Areas Registered Parks and Gardens Registered Battlefields (Lansdown) World Heritage Site (City of Bath) Ancient Woodland

Internal Consultations

External Consultations Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (Mendip and Cotswold) Cotswold Way Footpath Scheduled Ancient Monuments Bath & Wells Diocesan Advisory Committee HER Information Requests Higher Level Stewardship – Farm Environment Plans Forestry Commission – Woodland Grant Schemes Energy Crop Schemes (Miscanthus) Hedgerow Regulations 1997 Wessex Water and Bristol Water Wales & West (Gas) Highways (internal and external)

Peasedown Henge 1: Planning Application 2008 In August 2008 the Council received a planning application from David Wilson Homes for the erection of 95 dwellings with associated public space on two pieces of land between Wellow Lane and the Peasedown St John bypass. The submitted layout for the western development area (before archaeological investigation)

Peasedown Henge 2: Historic Environment Record Advice to Planning Officer: The proposed development lies in close proximity to a number of records on the HER, revealing significant Bronze Age, Iron Age and Roman occupation in the vicinity. I would therefore recommend that a pre- determination field evaluation of the site is carried out. I can provide guidance for this work outlining the general requirements Richard Sermon Archaeological Officer All planning applications received by the planning department are routinely examined by the Council’s Archaeological Officer, who assesses their likely impact against a database of known sites and monuments (above left: Historic Environment Record) and then advises the planning officers on the appropriate course of action required (above right: initial advice provided for this application). This map is reproduced from the Ordnance Survey © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved ( ) 2012

Peasedown Henge 3: Geophysical Survey Results The first phase of the archaeological evaluation was a geophysical survey carried out by Archaeological Surveys on behalf of behalf of David Wilson Homes and overseen by the Council’s Archaeological Officer. The technique employed (above left: magnetometry survey) measures changes in the strength of the earth’s magnetic field as a way of remotely sensing below ground deposits and features. The results for the majority of the site were fairly unexciting, apart from a very interesting ‘horsehoe-shaped’ feature in the western development area (above right: shown in red). AC Archaeology (again overseen by the Council’s Archaeological Officer) were then commissioned to carry the seconds phase of work by trial trenching the anomalies identified in the geophysical survey.

Peasedown Henge 5: Archaeological Evaluation Results A trial trench was excavated diagonally across the geophysical anomaly revealing that it was a Late Neolithic to Early Bronze Age ( BC) ring ditch or ‘henge’ type monument (F311), with a central pit (F305) containing fragile fragments of early Bronze Age pottery.

Peasedown Henge 6: Archaeological Evaluation Results The word ‘henge’ refers to a type of earthwork monument largely dating to the Neolithic period ( BC), which usually consists of a circular bank with an internal ditch surrounding a flat central area. There is typically little evidence of occupation in a henge, although they may contain ritual structures such as stone or timber circles. The Peasedown monument would be a relatively small henge (17m ditch diameter) but given the presence of small bone fragments could also have served as a Bronze Age burial monument. Excavated sections through the ring ditch (Left: South-West Section, Right: North-East Section) Central pit with Bronze Age pottery

Peasedown Henge 8: Revised Development Layout The submitted layout for the western development area (following archaeological investigation) Given the importance of this prehistoric monument a revised layout was agreed with David Wilson Homes in order to preserve the archaeological remains below an area of public open space.

Peasedown Henge 9: Protection of the Monument Proposed layout of the public open space and henge information panel The monument will protected (but not visible) within an enclosed area of public open space, with an information panel explaining its discovery and significance. Copies of the site reports are held by the Council’s Archaeological Officer in the Historic Environment Record, whilst the finds and site archive will be deposited at the Roman Baths Museum.

Bath and North East Somerset – The place to live, work and visit Member training and development 23 September 2015 Any questions?