ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING REPORT
______________________________________
Church Farm, Hitcham Road, Kettlebaston KBA 010
A REPORT ON THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING, 2004 (Planning app. no. B/02/01755/FUL)
John Craven Field Team
Suffolk C.C. Archaeological Service
� July 2004
Lucy Robinson, County Director of Environment and Transport Endeavour House, Russel Road, Ipswich, IP1 2BX
______________________________________
SCCAS Report No. 2004/111
Contents
List of Figures
List of Contributors Acknowledgements
Summary
SMR information
Introduction Methodology and Results Conclusion
Appendix 1: Brief and specification
List of Figures
1. Site location plan 2. Site plan
3. 0005 section 4. 0007 section
5. Site on the OS map of c.1880
List of Contributors
All Suffolk C.C. Archaeological Service unless otherwise stated.
John Craven Supervisor
Kelly Powell Post excavation Supervisor
Acknowledgements
This project was funded by Actionbond Ltd and was monitored by R.D. Carr (Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service, Conservation Team). The fieldwork was carried out by John Craven from Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service, Field Team. The project was managed by John Newman, who also provided advice during the production of the report.
Illustrations were produced by Kelly Powell.
Summary
An archaeological monitoring of footing trenches for a residential property on land at Church farm, Hitcham Road, Kettlebaston, located five undated features sealed beneath modern deposits associated with the demolished farm buildings. They may represent a level of medieval/post- medieval activity in the area with two possible ditches forming part of a wider water management system connected to nearby ponds.
SMR information
Planning application no. B/02/01755/FUL
Date of fieldwork: 16th � 20th July 2004
Oasis Reference: Suffolkc1-3215
Grid Reference: TL 9667 5025
Funding body: Actionbond Ltd
Introduction
Three site visits were made from 16th to 20th July 2004 to monitor the excavation of footing trenches for the construction of one house and garage. The work was carried out to a Brief and Specification issued by R.D. Carr (Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service, Conservation Team) to fulfil a planning condition on application B/02/01755/FUL. The work was funded by the developer, Actionbond Ltd.
Interest in the site was based upon its location within the historic core of the settlement of Kettlebaston. The site lies within 100m of the medieval church and has a small road frontage. A ditch system in the area suggests early settlement enclosures, the trenches are located within 10m of a linear, �L� shaped, pond to the south and east, and a second pond 25m to the west, which together may be parts of a wider water management system. Medieval features had previously been located in footing trenches for residential development 200m to the south-west (KBA 010) and so there was further potential for identifying medieval settlement. However the site until recently had been covered with farm buildings and therefore some truncation of archaeological levels was expected.
Methodology and Results
(Fig. 2)
An initial removal of the overburden across the development footprint of the property did not cut through the modern deposits. The potential for observing archaeological levels was therefore restricted to the footing trenches, which were approximately 0.6m wide and 1.2-1.4m deep.
The trenches showed a series of modern deposits overlying the natural grey/green clay subsoil. These deposits included layers of chalk, redeposited clay, gravel and a basal layer of flints mixed with charcoal blackened loam and clay. Pieces of modern ironwork and corrugated roofing were present in this basal layer which was immediately above the natural clay. Apparently associated with these deposits were three timber posts, approximately 0.3-0.4m in diameter and 1.0-1.2m deep.
Five features were identified beneath these deposits, cut into the natural clay. The dating of these features is uncertain although they were sealed beneath the modern material.
0001 was visible on the east side of the easternmost trench, sealed beneath 0.30m of modern material. It was probably a pit, measuring 1.5m wide and 1m deep and filled with a homogenised dark grey/green clay with traces of loam and charcoal.
0003 was a similar sized pit to 0001, sealed beneath 0.55m of modern material, measuring 1.5m in diameter and 1m deep. The fill, 0004, was a dark grey/black clay with scattered charcoal flecks.
0005 (Fig. 3) appeared to be a linear feature, aligned north-south, sealed beneath 0.3m of modern material. It measured 0.9m wide and 1.1m deep and had a fill, 0006, of dark grey/black clay/loam with fragments of charcoal and wood. The lower 0.2m of the fill was waterlogged.
Path Treakles
(um)
Brick 0m
.
77
Cottage
The
The Croft
Rectory
Bramble
Cottage
TCB
Old
School Cottage
St Mary's Church Pond
Church Farm Development area
Hall
LB
FB
BM 75.67m
House location
Church House
Pond
0 25 50
metres
KBA 009 � Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council
Stone Cottage Kettlebaston Licence No. 100023395 2004.
0 0.5 .. 1 � Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council
kilometres Licence No. 100023395 2004.
Figure 1. Site location plan
0005
0007
Posts
0010
0 2.5 5
metres
0003
0001
Fig 2. Site plan
Figure 3. 0005 section
0007 (Fig. 4) was a similar north-south linear feature, sealed beneath 0.3m of modern material and measuring 1m wide and 1.2m deep. It appeared to butt end to the south but continued north off of the site; approximately 3m of its length was visible. The main fill, 0008, was a dark grey/black clay/loam with traces of charcoal and wood fragments. A waterlogged basal fill, 0009, was a loam/peat with traces of charcoal and large pieces of wood.
Figure 4. 0007 section
0010 was a layer extending 1m into the plot on the western edge. It was sealed by 0.30m of modern deposits and was 0.60m thick and consisted of a dark grey/brown clay/loam with traces of charcoal and small fragments of brick.
Conclusion
Disturbance and truncation of the site caused by the farm buildings was extensive. The 0.3-0.5m of modern materials are clearly related to the farm buildings and yards, most of which appear on the OS map of c.1880 (Fig. 5). The three timber posts are probably part of these structures. As these deposits lie directly on the clay subsoil it is apparent that complete truncation of earlier ground levels has occurred.
� Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Suffolk County Council
Licence No. 100023395 2004.
Figure 5. Site on the OS map of c.1880.
The features that have survived are all of a substantial size and depth and sealed beneath the modern deposits suggesting they predate the late 19th century. 0001 and 0003 are probable pits
but their exact form, date and function are unclear, as is the layer 0010. 0005 and 0007 appeared to be linear features, as opposed to pits, and the fills, which appeared to be the result of natural silting, contained sizable amounts of organic material, particularly in their waterlogged lower fills. This indicates that they may be related to the surrounding ponds, perhaps disused drainage channels in a wider water management or enclosure system.
Appendix 1
SUFFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICE - CONSERVATION TEAM ?
Brief and Specification for Archaeological Monitoring of Development
CHURCH FARM, KETTLEBASTON
Although this document is fundamental to the work of the specialist archaeological contractor the developer should be aware that certain of its requirements are likely to impinge upon the working practices of a general building contractor and may have financial implications, for example see paragraphs 2.3, 2.4 & 4.3.
1. Background
1.1 Planning permission to develop on this site has been granted conditional upon an acceptable programme of archaeological work being carried out (application B/02/01755/FUL). Assessment of the available archaeological evidence indicates that the area affected by development can be adequately recorded by archaeological monitoring.
1.2 The development area is within 100m of the medieval church and is in the historic core
of the settlement with minor frontage onto an early roadway. There is a ditch system associated with the area which also suggests early settlement enclosures. It is understood that the pre existing pig farm structures and over-site have been removed, so some truncation of deposits is to be expected.
1.3 In accordance with the standards and guidance produced by the Institute of Field Archaeologists this brief should not be considered sufficient to enable the total execution of the project. A Project Design or Written Scheme of Investigation (PD/WSI) based upon this brief and the accompanying outline specification of minimum requirements, is an essential requirement. This must be submitted by the developers, or their agent, to the Conservation Team of the Archaeological Service of Suffolk County Council (Shire Hall, Bury St Edmunds IP33 2AR; telephone/fax: 01284 352443) for approval. The work must not commence until this office has approved both the archaeological contractor as suitable to undertake the work, and the PD/WSI as satisfactory. The PD/WSI will provide the basis for measurable standards and will be used to establish whether the requirements of the planning condition will be adequately met.
1.4 Detailed standards, information and advice to supplement this brief are to be found in �Standards for Field Archaeology in the East of England� Occasional Papers 14, East Anglian Archaeology, 2003.
2. Brief for Archaeological Monitoring
2.1 To provide a record of archaeological deposits which are damaged or removed by any development [including services and landscaping] permitted by the current planning consent.
2.2 The main academic objective will centre upon the potential of this development to produce evidence for earlier occupation of the site.
2.3 The significant archaeologically damaging activities in this proposal are likely to be the excavation of building footings.
2.4 Footing trenches and the upcast soil, are to be observed after they have been excavated by the building contractor. Adequate time is to be allowed for the recording of archaeological deposits during excavation, and of soil sections following excavation (see 4.3).
3. Arrangements for Monitoring
3.1 To carry out the monitoring work the developer will appoint an archaeologist (the archaeological contractor) who must be approved by the Conservation Team of Suffolk County Council�s Archaeological Service (SCCAS) - see 1.3 above.
3.2 The developer or his archaeologist will give the Conservation Team of SCCAS five working days notice of the commencement of ground works on the site, in order that the work of the archaeological contractor may be monitored. The method and form of development will also be monitored to ensure that it conforms to previously agreed locations and techniques upon which this brief is based.
3.3 Allowance must be made to cover archaeological costs incurred in monitoring the development works by the contract archaeologist. The size of the contingency should be estimated by the approved archaeological contractor, based upon the outline works in paragraph 2.3 of the Brief and Specification and the building contractor�s programme of works and time-table.
3.4 If unexpected remains are encountered the Conservation Team of SCCAS must be informed immediately. Amendments to this specification may be made to ensure adequate provision for archaeological recording.
4. Specification
4.1 The developer shall afford access at all reasonable times to both the County Council Conservation Team archaeologist and the contracted �observing archaeologist� to allow archaeological observation of building and engineering operations which disturb the ground.
4.2 Opportunity must be given to the �observing archaeologist� to hand excavate any discrete archaeological features which appear during earth moving operations, retrieve finds and make measured records as necessary.
4.3 In the case of footing trenches unimpeded access at the rate of one and a half hours per 10 metres of trench must be allowed for archaeological recording before concreting or building begin. Where it is necessary to see archaeological detail one of the soil faces is to be trowelled clean.
4.4 All archaeological features exposed must be planned at a minimum scale of 1:50 on a plan showing the proposed layout of the development.
4.5 All contexts must be numbered and finds recorded by context.
4.6 The data recording methods and conventions used must be consistent with, and approved by, the County Sites and Monuments Record.
5. Report Requirements
5.1 An archive of all records and finds is to be prepared consistent with the principles of Management of Archaeological Projects (MAP2), particularly Appendix 3.This must be deposited with the County Sites and Monuments Record within 3 months of the completion of work. It will then become publicly accessible.
5.2 Finds must be appropriately conserved and stored in accordance with UK Institute of Conservators Guidelines. The finds, as an indissoluble part of the site archive, should be deposited with the County SMR if the landowner can be persuaded to agree to this. If this is not possible for all or any part of the finds archive, then provision must be made for additional recording (e.g. photography, illustration, analysis) as appropriate.
5.3 A report on the fieldwork and archive, consistent with the principles of MAP2, particularly Appendix 4, must be provided. The report must summarise the methodology employed, the stratigraphic sequence, and give a period by period description of the contexts recorded, and an inventory of finds. The objective account of the archaeological evidence must be clearly distinguished from its interpretation. The Report must include a discussion and an assessment of the archaeological evidence. Its conclusions must include a clear statement of the archaeological value of the results, and their significance in the context of the Regional Research Framework (East Anglian Archaeology, Occasional Papers 3 & 8, 1997 and 2000).
5.4 A summary report, in the established format, suitable for inclusion in the annual �Archaeology in Suffolk� section of the Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology, must be prepared and included in the project report.
5.5 County Sites and Monuments Record sheets must be completed, as per the county SMR manual, for all sites where archaeological finds and/or features are located.
5.6 At the start of work (immediately before fieldwork commences) an OASIS online record http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/project/oasis/ must be initiated and key fields completed on Details, Location and Creators forms.
5.7 All parts of the OASIS online form must be completed for submission to the SMR. This should include an uploaded .pdf version of the entire report (a paper copy should also be included with the archive).
Specification by: R D Carr
Suffolk County Council
Archaeological Service Conservation Team Environment and Transport Department
Shire Hall
Bury St Edmunds Suffolk IP33 2AR
Date: 14 July 2004 Reference: /Kettlebaston-ChurchFarm07
This brief and specification remains valid for 12 months from the above date. If work is not carried out in full within that time this document will lapse; the authority should be notified and a revised brief and specification may be issued.
If the work defined by this brief forms a part of a programme of archaeological work required by a Planning Condition, the results must be considered by the Conservation Team of the Archaeological Service of Suffolk County Council, who have the responsibility for advising the appropriate Planning Authority.