S E R V I C E S. Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Romford, London Borough of Havering. Archaeological Evaluation Phase 2. by Susan Porter.

Transcription

1 T H A M E S V A L L E Y ARCHAEOLOGICAL S E R V I C E S Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Romford, London Borough of Havering Archaeological Evaluation Phase 2 by Susan Porter Site Code: WLB09 (TQ )

2 Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Romford, London Borough of Havering An Archaeological Evaluation Phase 2 for Cranfield Golf Academy by Susan Porter Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd Site Code WBL09 May 2013

3 Summary Site name: Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Romford, London Borough of Havering Grid reference: TQ Site activity: Archaeological Evaluation, phase 2 Date and duration of project: 23rd 24th August 2010; 4th 6th March 2013 Project manager: Steve Ford Site supervisor: Danielle Milbank, Susan Porter Site code: WBL09 Site area: c. 50 ha Summary of results: The remaining trenches to complete the fieldwork were excavated during this phase of works, which took place in two parts. Only three linear features of possible archaeological interest were noted two of which were certainly or probably of late post-medieval date. The other linear feature was undated. No artefacts of archaeological interest were recovered from the features or spoilheaps. On the basis of these results, this phase of evaluation indicates that this area of the site has no archaeological potential. Location and reference of archive: The archive is presently held at Thames Valley Archaeological Services, Reading and will be deposited with the Museum of London in due course. This report may be copied for bona fide research or planning purposes without the explicit permission of the copyright holder Report edited/checked by: Steve Ford Steve Preston i Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd, De Beauvoir Road, Reading RG1 5NR Tel. (0118) ; Fax (0118) ; tvas@tvas.co.uk; website:

4 Chadwell Heath Golf Course, Romford, London Borough of Havering An Archaeological Evaluation by Susan Porter Report 07/155c Introduction This report documents the results of an archaeological field evaluation carried out at Chadwell Heath Golf Course, Romford, London Borough of Havering TQ (Fig. 1). The work was commissioned by Mr Bruce Weller of Weller Design Limited, Bishopmead House, West Street Farnham, Surrey GU9 on behalf of Cranfield Golf Academy, 142 Station Road, North Chingford, London, E4 6AN. Planning permission (app no P ) has been gained from the London Borough of Havering to develop the site as a golf course, which involves the removal of extensive areas of topsoil and the construction of lakes. An archaeological evaluation has been requested in order to provide information on the archaeological potential of the site so as to mitigate the effects of the proposed construction on any potential archaeological deposits that may be present. This is in accordance with the Department of the Environment s Planning Policy Guidance, Archaeology and Planning (PPG ), and the Borough Council s policies on archaeology. (It is acknowledged that National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2012), has since superseded PPG16). The field investigation was carried out to a specification approved by Mr David Divers formerly of Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service (English Heritage). The fieldwork was undertaken by Danielle Milbank and Natasha Bennett on 23rd 24th August 2010 and by Susan Porter and Aiden Colyer on 4th 5th March The site code is WBL09. The archive is presently held at Thames Valley Archaeological Services, Reading and will be deposited with the Museum of London in due course. Location, topography and geology The site is located primarily within the London Borough of Havering but part of the site lies within the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (Fig. 1). The total application area of the site is c. 54ha and the land was previously used as open farmland and allotment gardens, it is currently occupied by a golf driving range and areas of rough pasture. The total site lies on a gentle south-east facing slope and falls from 30m above Ordnance Datum in the north-west corner to below 20m in the south-east. The site is bounded to the north by the A12, to the east by farmland and farm buildings, to the south by the London Road (A118) and to the west by housing, a 1

5 school and Whalebone Lane (A1112). It is the western part of the overall area that this report is concerned with (Fig. 2). The site lies across three geological units with Boyn Hill gravel in the west, London Clay across the centre and brickearth to the south-east (BGS 1976). Within the trenches a small amount of gravel and gravel with clay was observed however the majority of trenches showed brickearth as the underlying geology. London Clay was not observed in any trench. Archaeological background The archaeological potential of the site has been highlighted in a desk-based assessment (Preston 2007). In summary the site lies in an area of considerable archaeological interest with a wide range of sites and finds in the vicinity including on the site itself. Numerous Palaeolithic stone tools were recorded during 19th-century gravel extraction. Cropmarks seen on aerial photographs of a large enclosure and small circular enclosure to the north of the site at Warren Farm were shown on excavation to be an Iron Age Enclosed settlement with Roman ditches thought to be field boundaries. The small enclosure was a Medieval windmill site. Further crop marks are present at Crown Farm to the east of the site and on the site itself. To the south-west of the site stands the Havering Stone, a boundary marker for the forest of Essex. Within the site there appears to be a circular cropmark which may be a windmill or Bronze Age barrow, together with a rectangular cropmark of a possible enclosure of unknown date and a trackway of post-medieval date or earlier. Geophysical Survey A geophysical survey carried out in November 2008 (Austrums and Cook 2008) comprised the use of a magnetometer and consisted of two components. A large percentage of the site (over 40ha) was initially scanned. Provision was then made for a detailed survey of 20% of the total site area (10.8ha), in transects spaced at 1m intervals. The results suggest the presence of a number of linear anomalies within the detailed survey area. Previous evaluation The results of the geophysical survey were used to determine the location of a number of machine trenches, to target the linear anomalies. An initial phase of evaluation carried out in 2009 revealed mostly 19th-century and later ditches with the exception of a single pit containing Late Bronze Age/ Early Iron Age pottery and a possible 17th-century ditch (Weale 2009). A small amount of Roman and medieval pottery was recovered but no features for these periods were noted. 2

6 Objectives and methodology The purpose of the evaluation was to complete the work set out in the written scheme of investigation for the site, and to determine the date, nature, extent, and state of preservation of any archaeological deposits. This field work is to be employed to provide the detailed information necessary to mitigate the effects of development. The specific research aims of the project were: to determine if archaeologically relevant levels had survived on this site; to determine if archaeological deposits of any period were present; to determine if archaeological deposits of medieval or early post-medieval date were present representing elements of a deserted medieval settlement at Crown Farm; to determine the extent and nature of the circular and rectilinear cropmarks; and to provide information to assist in the formulation of a mitigation strategy. Provision was made to trench the whole site at a sample fraction of 2% of the proposed development area. This was to test the efficacy of the geophysical results and examine and geophysical anomalies as well as the specific locations noted above in the research aims. The trenches for this phase of work were located in an area not covered by the geophysical survey. It was proposed to excavate 195 trenches in all, of which 42 were positioned in areas highlighted by the geophysical survey. Of these, the first phase of work opened 175 trenches but part of the site was inaccessible due to the presence of protected slow worms. Twenty trenches therefore form the subject of the present phase of work. The trenches were to be 25m long and 1.8m wide. Topsoil and overburden were removed by a 360º tracked machine under archaeological supervision. A toothless ditching bucket was used to expose archaeologically sensitive levels. All features were cleaned using appropriate hand tools and planned. Spoil heaps were monitored for the retrieval of artefacts. Results Of the proposed trenches, 20 were dug as part of this phase of works, as close as possible to the positions intended but a topsoil bund caused the repositioning of some (Fig. 2). For many of the trenches in this phase of works the topsoil had been previously removed and so only the remaining overburden was stripped under archaeological supervision. The trenches were all 2m wide and ranged in length from 22m to 29.6m and in depth from 0.15 to 0.70m. A metal detector was used to enhance the recovery of metal finds. All features were 3

7 examined by hand but where it could be shown that they were obviously modern (land drains and allotment features) were recorded on the trench record sheet and no further work was undertaken on these features. A complete list of trenches giving lengths, breadths, depths and a description of sections and geology is given in Appendix 1. A list of all excavated/ recorded features forms Appendix 2. Trench 176 Trench 176 was aligned north south and was 23m long and 0.52m deep. The stratigraphy comprised 0.45m of topsoil above 0.07m of brown silty clay subsoil above brickearth with some gravel natural geology. A linear feature was investigated at 10m from the south end, which lay close to and parallel with a field drain. It was considered to be a wheel rut or similar associated with the laying of the drain. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 177 Trench 177 was aligned NW SE and was 22.70m long and 0.40m deep. The stratigraphy comprised 0.45m of topsoil above 0.07m of brown silty clay subsoil above brickearth with some gravel natural geology. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 178 Trench 178 was aligned NE SW and was 25.50m long and 0.38m deep. The stratigraphy comprised 0.20m of topsoil above 0.16m of brown silty clay subsoil above brickearth with some gravel natural geology. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 179 Trench 179 was aligned NE SW and was 28.50m long and 0.45m deep. The stratigraphy comprised 0.30m of topsoil above 0.12m of brown silty clay subsoil above brickearth natural geology. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 180 Trench 180 was aligned NW SE and was 22m long and 0.52m deep. The stratigraphy comprised 0.35m of topsoil above 0.17m of brown silty clay subsoil above brickearth natural geology. A modern circular pit was observed at 2m from the north-west end. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. 4

8 Trench 181 Trench 181 was aligned west - east and was 25.40m long and 0.44m deep. The stratigraphy comprised 0.4m of topsoil directly above brickearth natural geology. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 182 (Pl. 1) Trench 182 was aligned roughly west east and was 26.80m long and 0.50m deep. The stratigraphy consisted of 0.28m of topsoil and 0.17m light grey brown silty sand subsoil overlying natural geology of mid yellow/red and pale grey silty clay brickearth with small stone inclusions. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 183 Trench 183 was aligned SE NW and was 25.00m long and 0.15m deep. The topsoil had been previously removed and so the stratigraphy consisted of 0.15m light grey brown silty sand subsoil overlying mid red brown brickearth with silty gravel patches. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 184 (Figs 3 and 4; Pl. 2) Trench 184 was aligned SE NW and was 25.20m long and 0.30m deep. The topsoil had been previously removed and so the stratigraphy consisted of 0.27m light grey brown silty sand subsoil overlying mid red brown brickearth natural geology (with gravel to north). A ditch (1000) was recorded aligned north south, which was 1.10m wide and 0.30m deep and filled with friable dark brown grey silty clay (1050) with infrequent flinty gravel. Brick and tile fragments of late post-medieval (likely 19th century) date were recovered from this fill. Trench 185 (Pl. 3) Trench 185 was aligned SE NW and was 25.20m long and 0.27m deep. The topsoil had been previously removed and so the stratigraphy consisted of 0.27m light grey brown silty sand subsoil overlying mid red brown brickearth with frequent gravel natural geology. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 186 Trench 186 was aligned north south and was 25.50m long and 0.20m deep. The topsoil had been previously removed and so the stratigraphy consisted of 0.20m light grey brown silty sand subsoil overlying mid red brown 5

9 gravel with occasional patches of red brown brickearth natural geology. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 187 (Figs 3 and 4; Pl. 4) Trench 187 was aligned NE SW and was 26.70m long and 0.40m deep. The stratigraphy consisted of 0.22m of topsoil and 0.18m light grey brown silty sand subsoil overlying natural geology of mid red brown gravel with occasional patches of red brown brickearth. A gully (1001) was recorded aligned north-south, at 13m form the south-west end of the trench. This gully was 0.90m wide and 0.70m deep and filled with (1051) soft light grey brown silty clay with infrequent small gravel inclusions. No finds were recovered. Trench 188 (Figs 3 and 4 Pls 5 and 6) Trench 188 was aligned ESE WNW and was 27.80m long and 0.42m deep. The stratigraphy consisted of 0.28m of topsoil and 0.14m light grey brown silty sand subsoil overlying mid red brown gravel with occasional; patches of red brown brickearth natural geology. A north-south ditch (1002) was recorded which was 1.30m wide and 0.40m deep and filled with two deposits, the uppermost of which (1053) comprised soft/ friable dark brown grey silty clay with infrequent flinty gravel inclusions, the lower fill (1052) comprised loose mid red brown silty clay with occasional stone inclusions. No finds were recovered. A modern field drain was aligned parallel to this ditch, some 3m further west and wheel ruts further west again. Trench 189 Trench 189 was aligned ESE WNW and was 29.60m long and 0.44m deep. The stratigraphy consisted of 0.28m of topsoil and 0.16m light grey brown silty sand subsoil overlying mid red brown silty gravel with occasional pockets of mid red brown brickearth natural geology. Wheel ruts were clear throughout the trench but no deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered Trench 190 Trench 190 was aligned east west and was 25.00m long and 0.70m deep. The stratigraphy consisted of 0.08m of topsoil and 0.17m mixed rubble and topsoil made ground, overlying 0.05m light grey gravelly sand made ground, which in turn overlay 0.22m mid red brown silty clay with rubble made ground, above 0.01m Terram, overlying 0.17m mid grey clay with rubble made ground, which in turn overlay mid red brown silty gravel with occasional pockets of mid red brown brickearth natural geology. Between 9.5m from the west end to the east end of the trench, concrete overlay the natural geology and was not removed. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. 6

10 Trench 191 (Pl. 7) Trench 191 was aligned SW NE and was 26.20m long and 0.30m deep. The stratigraphy consisted of 0.10m of topsoil and 0.20m light grey brown silty sand subsoil overlying natural geology of mid yellow/red and pale grey silty clay brickearth with small stone inclusions. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 192 (Pl. 8) Trench 192 was aligned NE SW and was 28.70m long and 0.43m deep. The stratigraphy consisted of 0.24m of topsoil (only at the south-west end) and 0.19m light grey brown silty sand subsoil overlying natural geology of mid red brown gravel with occasional patches of red brown brickearth. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 193 Trench 193 was aligned west east and was 25.50m long and 0.42m deep. The stratigraphy comprised 0.2m of topsoil above 0.22m of brown silty clay subsoil above brickearth with some gravel natural geology. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 194 Trench 194 was aligned west east and was 24.50m long and 0.42m deep. The stratigraphy comprised 0.30m of topsoil above 0.12m of brown silty clay subsoil above brickearth with some gravel. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Trench 195 Trench 195 was aligned NW SE and was 26m long and 0.46m deep. The stratigraphy comprised 0.36m of topsoil above 0.10m of brown silty clay subsoil above brickearth with some gravel. No deposits of archaeological interest were observed and no finds were recovered. Finds A few fragments of modern brick and tile from ditch 1000 were retained on site. 7

11 Conclusion Of the 20 trenches excavated in this phase of works, only three revealed deposits of possible archaeological interest. One of these (1000) was unambiguously of late post-medieval date with a second (1002) probably so. The third (1001) was undated. No artefacts were recovered from a search of the spoilheaps. The results of this phase of evaluation suggests this area of the site has no archaeological potential. References Austrums, R and Cook, J, 2008, Chadwell Heath, Romford, geophysical survey report, Stratascan, Upton upon Severn BGS, 1976, British Geological Survey, 1:50,000, Sheet 257, Drift Edition, Keyworth NPPF, 2012, National Planning Policy Framework, Dept Communities and Local Govt, London PPG16, 1990, Archaeology and Planning, Dept of the Environment Planning Policy Guidance 16, HMSO Preston, S 2007, Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Romford, London Borough of Havering, an archaeological deskbased assessment, Thames Valley Archaeological Services report 07/155, Reading Weale, A, 2009, Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Romford, London Borough of Havering, an archaeological evaluation (phase 1), Thames Valley Archaeological Services report 07/155b, Reading 8

12 APPENDIX 1: Trench details 0m at south or west end Trench Length (m) Breadth (m) Depth (m) Comment m topsoil; m; subsoil; 0.52m+ brickearth with gravel natural geology. Field drain and rut? m topsoil; m; subsoil; 0.38m+ brickearth with gravel natural geology m topsoil; m; subsoil; 0.38+m brickearth with gravel natural geology m topsoil; m; subsoil; 0.42m+ brickearth natural geology m topsoil; m; subsoil; 0.42m+ brickearth natural geology. Modern pit at 2m m topsoil; 0.40m+ brickearth natural geology m topsoil; m; subsoil; 0.45m+ brickearth natural geology. [Pl. 1] m light grey brown silty sand subsoil (topsoil removed); 0.15m+ brickearth with gravel natural geology m light grey brown silty sand subsoil (topsoil removed); 0.30m+ brickearth natural geology. Ditch [Pl. 2] m light grey brown silty sand subsoil (topsoil removed); 0.27m+ brickearth natural geology. [Pl. 3] m light grey brown silty sand subsoil (topsoil removed); 0.20m+ brickearth natural geology m topsoil; m subsoil; 0.40m+ natural geology. Gully 1001 [Pl. 4] m topsoil; m; subsoil; 0.42m+ natural geology. Ditch 1002 [Pls 5-6] m topsoil; m subsoil; 0.20m+ natural geology m topsoil; m topsoil and rubble made ground; m grey gravelly sand made ground;, m; red brown silty clay with rubble made ground; m Terram;, m mid grey clay with rubble made ground;, 0.70m+ natural geology m topsoil; m subsoil; 0.30m+ mid yellow red and pale grey silty clay brickearth (natural geology). [Pl. 7] m topsoil; m subsoil 0.43m+ gravel with patches of red brown silty clay natural geology. [Pl. 8] m topsoil; m; subsoil; 0.42m+ brickearth with gravel natural geology m topsoil; m; subsoil; 0.42m+ brickearth with gravel natural geology m topsoil; m; subsoil; 0.46m+ brickearth with gravel natural geology. 9

13 APPENDIX 2: Feature details Trench Cut Fill (s) Type Date Dating evidence Ditch Late post-medieval Brick and tile Gully Undated , 1053 Gully Modern? Unconsolidated fill 10

14 OASIS FORM - Print view OASIS DATA COLLECTION FORM: England List of Projects Manage Projects Search Projects New project Change your details HER coverage Change country Log out Printable version OASIS ID: thamesva Project details Project name Short description of the project Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Romford Twenty trenches required to complete an evaluation (see thamesva ) revealed only three features of possible interest. Two ditches were probably late post-medieval and one gully was undated. Project dates Start: End: Previous/future work Any associated project reference codes Any associated project reference codes Any associated project reference codes Any associated project reference codes Type of project Site status Current Land use Monument type Significant Finds Yes / Not known WBL09 - Sitecode WBL09 - Museum accession ID CHR07/155 - Contracting Unit No. P Planning Application No. Field evaluation None Other 14 - Recreational usage NONE None NONE None 1 of 4 05/09/ :43 AM

15 OASIS FORM - Print view Methods & techniques Development type Prompt Position in the planning process ''Metal Detectors'',''Sample Trenches'' Golf course Direction from Local Planning Authority - PPG16 After full determination (eg. As a condition) Project location Country England Site location GREATER LONDON HAVERING ROMFORD Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Whalebone Lane North, Romford Study area Hectares Site coordinates TQ N E Point Height OD / Depth Min: 23.00m Max: 24.00m Project creators Name of Organisation Project brief originator Project design originator Project director/manager Project supervisor Project supervisor Type of sponsor/funding body Name of sponsor/funding body Thames Valley Archaeological Services English Heritage/Department of Environment Steve Ford Steve Ford Danielle Milbank Susan Porter Developer Cranford Golf Academy Project archives Physical Archive Exists? Digital Archive recipient Digital Archive ID No Museum of London WBL09 2 of 4 05/09/ :43 AM

16 OASIS FORM - Print view Digital Contents Digital Media available Digital Archive notes Paper Archive recipient Paper Archive ID Paper Contents Paper Media available Paper Archive notes ''other'' ''Images raster / digital photography'' temporarily with TVAS in Reading pending deposition Museum of London WBL09 ''Stratigraphic'',''Survey'' ''Context sheet'',''correspondence'',''drawing'',''manuscript'',''matrices'',''microfilm'',''miscellaneous Material'',''Photograph'',''Plan'',''Report'',''Section'',''Survey '' temporarily with TVAS in Reading pending deposition Project bibliography 1 Grey literature (unpublished document/manuscript) Publication type Title Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Romford, London Borough of Havering: an archaeological evaluation phase 2 Author(s)/Editor(s) Porter, S Other bibliographic details 07/155c Date 2013 Issuer or publisher Thames Valley Archaeological Services Place of issue or publication Reading Description A4 comb-bound client report URL Entered by Entered on 9 May 2013 Steve Preston (tvas@tvas.co.uk) OASIS: Please English Heritage for OASIS help and advice ADS Created by Jo Gilham and Jen Mitcham, Last modified Wednesday 9 May 2012 Cite only: for this page 3 of 4 05/09/ :43 AM

17 OASIS FORM - Print view 4 of 4 05/09/ :43 AM

18 SITE SITE TQ Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Whalebone Lane North, Romford, London Borough of Havering, 2013 Archaeological Evaluation - Phase 2 Figure 1. Location of site within Chadwell Heath, Romford and Greater London. Reproduced from Ordnance Survey Explorer 174 at 1:12500 Ordnance Survey Licence WBL 09

19 Eastern Avenue West Driving range no access 182 Phase 2 trenching The Warren School Phase 1 trenching TQ Crown Farm London Road c N Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Whalebone Lane, Romford, London Borough of Havering, 2013 Archaeological Evaluation - Phase 2 Figure 2. Location of trenches for this phase (red) and previous phase (blue) m

20 Trench 187 N 13m m Trench 188 7m m N Trench 184 not bottomed 1m 5m 8m 1000 N Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Whalebone Lane North, Romford, London Borough of Havering, 2013 Archaeological Evaluation - Phase 2 8m bo Figure 3. Detail of trenches. 0 5m

21 Trench 184 Trench 177 NE SW 23.79maOD ESE WNW 24.17m Trench 178 SE NW 24.25m Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Whalebone Lane North, Romford, London Borough of Havering, 2013 Archaeological Evaluation - Phase 2 WBL 09 Figure 4. Sections.

22 Plate 1. Trench 182, looking north east, Scales: 2m and 1m. Plate 2. Trench 184, looking north, Scales: 2m and 1m. 187 Plate 3. Trench 185, looking north, Scales: 2m and 1m. Plate 4. Trench 187, looking north east, Scales: 2m and 1m. WBL 09 Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Whalebone Lane North, Romford, London Borough of Havering, 2013 Archaeological Evaluation - Phase 2 Plates 1-4.

23 Plate 5. Trench 188, looking north west, Scales: 2m and 1m. Plate 6. Trench 188, ditch 1002 looking south, Scales: 0.5m and 0.1m. 192 Plate 7. Trench 191, looking north east, Scales: 2m and 1m. 192 Plate 8. Trench 192, looking north east, Scales: 2m and 1m. Chadwell Heath Golf Club, Whalebone Lane North, Romford, London Borough of Havering, 2013 Archaeological Evaluation - Phase 2 Plates 5-8. WBL 09

24 TIME CHART Calendar Years Modern AD 1901 Victorian AD 1837 Post Medieval AD 1500 Medieval AD 1066 Saxon AD 410 Roman AD 43 BC/AD Iron Age 750 BC Bronze Age: Late Bronze Age: Middle Bronze Age: Early 1300 BC 1700 BC 2100 BC Neolithic: Late Neolithic: Early 3300 BC 4300 BC Mesolithic: Late Mesolithic: Early 6000 BC BC Palaeolithic: Upper Palaeolithic: Middle Palaeolithic: Lower BC BC 2,000,000 BC

25 Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd, De Beauvoir Road, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 5NR Tel: Fax: Web: