Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
A.P.A.C. Ltd.
Archaeological Perspectives Analysis Consultancy
Prepared for:
Liddell + Associates
By: Dr N Phillips.
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
1. Summary
Liddell+Associates are the architects acting for Mr P Moon, the owner of the
property.
GGAT, therefore, recommended that in order for the work to progress, the client
would need to engage an archaeologist to undertake preliminary evaluation work
at the site.
Dr N Phillips from A.P.A.C. Ltd visited the site on 31st July 2013 and after
discussions with the agent and GGAT agreed to accept the work.
The evaluation work produced a sequence of ceramic finds ranging back to the
12th century; possibly associated with contemporary surfaces.
Copyright Notice:
A.P.A.C. Ltd. retains copyright of this report under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988.
The Ordnance Survey has granted A.P.A.C. Ltd a Copyright Licence (No. 100046577) to reproduce map information; Copyright remains
otherwise with the Ordnance Survey.
1
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
1. Summary .................................................................................................................................1
2. Figures .....................................................................................................................................3
3. Plates .......................................................................................................................................3
4. Introduction .............................................................................................................................4
5. Location and Description of the Evaluation Area ...................................................................4
6. Brief Archaeological Description and Historical Background ...............................................4
7. Geology and topography .........................................................................................................5
8. Aims and Objectives ...............................................................................................................5
9. Scope of the Work ...................................................................................................................6
10. Methodology .......................................................................................................................6
11. Evaluation Trenches Results ...............................................................................................7
12. Discussion and Interpretation ............................................................................................10
13. Impact ................................................................................................................................10
14. Copyright ...........................................................................................................................11
15. Archive ..............................................................................................................................11
16. Staff ...................................................................................................................................11
17. Bibliography ......................................................................................................................12
2
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
2. Figures
3. Plates
01 Position of trench
02 Initial clearance to [102] with [103] in the fore ground
03 Find {9}
04 Long view section at central W edge showing section above {6} [100] [101] [102] [103] [104]
05 S aspect of [108] exposure with detached piece of clay
06 SW corner section [100] [101] [102] [103] [104] [107] [108]
07 Central west edge of trench [104] and find {14}
08 Long view. [103] top left over [106] [107] [109]. Centre [108] bund with [107] right
09 SW corner. [108] left. [106] foreground.
10 N half. [108] left. [109] right, [106] top right
11 Overall view of features {108] and [106] [118]
12 SE section detail: [100] [101] [102] [103] [107] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] [115] [116]
(flash)
13 VN Overview [100] [101] [102] [103] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] [115] [116]
good lighting
14 VE Overview [100] [101] [102] [103] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] [115] [116]
good lighting
15 Position of Trench 2
16 Setting out Trench 2
17 Cobbles [203] with remnant of [202] at south edge, top. [200][202] right. [204] left. [205] bottom
left
18 South section rectification sequence 2 Centre left. [200] [201] [202] [203] [204] [210] [212] [209]
19 Cobbles [203] right [209] bottom right [211] bottom left [208] centre left [204] top right. [205]
[213] top centre
20 Detail of section [203] [210] [212] [209]
21 Cobbles [203] centre [209] right [211] bottom right[208] bottom centre [204] top right. [205]
bottom right
22 Rectification sequence, detail with flash: 1 SE corner. Feature [204], [210][212] removed [209] at
bottom
23 Cobbles [203] left with {205] centre and [208] top
24 Rectification sequence, detail with flash: 3. E corner. Feature [204], [210][212] right. [205]
removed [213] possible [204]
25 Recording
26 Backfilled
Appendices
3
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
4. Introduction
This report on an archaeological evaluation has been prepared by Dr Neil Phillips, A.P.A.C. Ltd, in response to a
proposed programme of works, to construct ‘two new dwellings and associated works’ at the rear of 10 Bank St
Chepstow, NP16 5EN, (DC/2012/00946).
The client, Mr P. Moon; having submitted a planning application to Chepstow Town Council (CTC) through his
agents, Liddell + Associates; (pl.app.no 2012/00946), had been advised that the proposed work would have an
archaeological restraint, (MON2050/JBHD).
The stated reason was that: the application area is situated inside an archaeologically sensitive area ‘within the
medieval town’ … ‘some 60m inside the Port Wall a scheduled Ancient Monument Cadw ref: MM002’, (ibid.).
The archaeological restraint was identified by Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust, (GGAT), advisers to
Monmouthshire County Council (MCC), in such matters.
The GGAT guidance to MCC cited Planning Policy Wales 5th ed, 2012 Section 6.5.1 which notes that:
“the desirability of preserving an ancient monument and its setting is a material consideration in
determining a planning application whether that monument is scheduled or unscheduled’.
‘where research indicates that important archaeological remains may exist, the planning
authority should request the prospective developer to arrange for an archaeological field
evaluation to be carried out before any decision on the planning application is taken’.
(MON2050/JBHD).
The location of the site, fig 01 is just off the High St, Chepstow town centre, behind Barclays Bank on the parallel
Bank St.
A scant amount of evidence, and a few chance finds, suggest a Roman presence in Chepstow from as early as the 1st
century to as late as the 4th. It is probable that the presence was related to a probable ferry crossing which may have
grown into a settlement later on.
Unfortunately, no evidence has yet been found to confirm this and neither has any thing been found to confirm a
continuation of presence after the Roman withdrawal, to the coming of the Normans.
It is the Norman period that dominates the archaeology of Chepstow, a name first recorded in 1308 as Chepestowe,
possibly meaning ‘market place’, (Ekwall, E. 1977).
Chepstow had originally been known to the Normans as ‘Strigull’ with its castle, first mentioned in Domesday,
Castellum de Striguil, (Morris) now largely accepted as the first stone castle in the UK, 1067-71, (see Turner &
Johnson 2006).
The castle and surrounds including the evaluation site are bounded by a formidable wall, itself a Scheduled Ancient
Monument MM002, dated to c 1248 and measuring some 1100 meters in length, enclosing some 53 hectares.
The wall is a mere 60m from the evaluation site fig 02.
4
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
It has also been suggested that the area of the evaluation site is close to the 13th century road from the Port Gate to
the river (MON2050/JBHD).
An early map of Chepstow by Iacobum Millerd shows a stylistic representation of the walled town of Chepstow and
a portion of it has been reproduced in fig 02, 1668 Millerd.
Adjacent to the 1668 map is the later 1881 Ordnance Survey map of roughly the same area and on both maps is the
outline of the proposed development site transposed from the block plan 2128/4, supplied by Liddell + Associates.
The 1668 map identifies the position of the present No 10 Bank Street as a gap between an almost continuous street
frontage, formed along the north west of an open square, ‘Old Market Square’ 1687; later Bank Square 1807, Back
St 1814, (Waters 1974) and Beaufort Square 1881, fig 02.
Waters also suggests that Bank St was originally the main road called ‘Hocker Hill Street’ (ibid) which may allude
to GGAT’s suggestion of a route from the Port Gate.
The rear of the 1668 property would appear to be a formal orchard with ambulatory accessible from the square. The
adjacent rear area, to the north east, is similar with a more geometric layout bounded with equidistant trees. The rear
areas of the properties to the south east are not accessible from the square and contain only trees with no formal
outlay.
The property itself would appear to have a longer NW/SE axis, in 1668.
The present frontage to the site, No 10, possibly dates to the 18th century, (MON2050/JBHD), although, its first
cartographic presence is not recorded until the 1st edition Ordnance Survey maps, 1881, fig 02.
At this time the frontage property appears to be square in plan with the rear area having been divided into two
accessed by a short external stair.
Waters records that between 1830-1859, the property had a printing press belonging to James Clark which in 1855
began to produce the Chepstow Weekly Advertiser, however by 1874, the property had become unfit for human
habitation.
Interestingly, No 9 Bank street, to the south west, though to be the ‘most ancient house in the street’ (ibid), retains
probably its original plan from which it is possible to interpret the changes to no 10.
The solid geology of the site is formed of Clifton Down Limestone; http://www.bgs.ac.uk/geoindex/.
At the beginning of the evaluation, the site was an enclosed and landscaped back garden featuring a lawn terrace and
patio on two levels with various garden features, see background of fig 03.
In accordance with the design brief, DB/EV/BKC/13 the aim of the evaluation was to:
Elucidate the character, distribution, extent and importance of any potential archaeological remains, extant in the
development area; allowing for the production of a sufficiently detailed report to be used to inform and mitigate any
associated development.
5
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
This evaluation report provides sufficiently detailed information to allow informed decisions to safeguard the
archaeological resource, to be taken on the basis of its contents.
The evaluation established the presence and potential extent of significant archaeological deposits, features and
structures, which may were identified in the fieldwork.
The evaluation recovered enough information to enable assessment of the archaeological implications of the study
area.
This report includes a detailed summary of the methodology, site history, deposits/features/ structures/artefacts
uncovered and interpretation of the results.
The archaeology of the application site as a whole, in its wider local or regional context, was considered, although
the evaluation trenching was be confined to those areas which will be directly affected by the development or some
aspect of it.
10. Methodology
Excavation:
Two trenches, 2m x 2m, were manually excavated within the designated parcel of land as shown in fig 03.
Both trenches reached archaeological horizons, thereby, allowing for assessments of character, distribution, extent
and importance, of at least the minimum number of archaeological features, to be understood.
Recording:
Single context excavation was used in both trenches with findings recorded on pro forma context sheets on site; later
digitized and cross-referenced to finds and photographs and included in Appendix I.
Section and plan drawings at a scale of 1:20 were undertaken in both trenches to record the most significant plan
and sequence. These were digitised in Adobe illustrator and presented in figs.
The excavation process was recorded with a digital camera set to 8 megapixles in both RAW and jpeg format. The
photographs were initially processed in Adobe Photoshop and exported into Adobe Illustrator for Plate layout. A
complete list of photographs was created, cross referenced to contexts, finds and report Plates, Appendix II.
All finds were listed as per context assemblage and placed in sealed bags, clearly marked with sequence number and
context. All finds were then washed, dried and catalogued, Appendix III. Some finds deemed significant were sent
to the designated ceramics expert for verification, (Steve Clarke).
The client has not commented on his intentions for the finds so at the time of writing they are to be returned to the
client.
Survey:
A survey of the site boundary and completed evaluation trenching including all important features was undertaken
using a Topcon GPT 3007 REDM, Reflectorless Electronic Distance Measurement, Total Station.
The surveyed data was initially processed in Civilcad 6 and corrected Ordnance Survey data provided by the clients
agent, (Liddell + associates 2128-1 & 2128-4)
The results were exported into Autocad for scaling and clearing up before being processed in Adobe Illustrator for
publication.
Research:
6
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
Research was undertaken at the following venues in order to complete a background history of the site
Presentation Notes:
All contexts are denoted [#] in the text, listed in Appendix I and illustrated in fig 04; following the text section.
Photographs used in the text are listed Pl #, listed in appendix II and can be found following the figure section.
All finds denoted {#} in the text and are listed in Appendix III with images IIIa.
Trench 1
The location of trench 1 was to the south of the proposed development, in an area of lawn [100], Pl 01. The chosen
position directly evaluates the foot print of one of the proposed buildings but in an effort to minimise disturbance
and best organise spoil distribution, its exact orientation was constrained by the surrounding garden features.
The trench was set out and the turf removed and used to construct a retaining wall for the spoil. The turf removal
impacted upon [100] & [101] both of which had depths of around 100mm with the latter producing modern
assemblages {1}, {2} & {3}.
The shallowness of the stratigraphy led to portions of [102] and [103] in the southern end, being partially exposed
during turfing as can be seen after the trench was cleaned with a trowel Pl 02. The majority of the photograph shows
[102] which produced two mostly 17th/19th century assemblages {4} & {10} and the remains of small mammal
skeletons {8} & {9}, Pl 03. The ranging rod marks a rat hole and the position of skeleton assemblage {8}; the two
isolated bricks, top left, measure 22.5mm x 11mm x 6mm.
[103] a deposit of small coal produced no finds and was restricted to the southern half of the trench by a bund of
compacted clay [108], Pl 04 & Pl 05.
Pl 04 shows the west section at the south west corner; of note is the vertical edge/cut [105] between [103] and [108],
to the right.
Pl 05 shows the full remains of [108] with [102] removed to the left to reveal [107] and with [103] removed on the
right, also revealing [107].
Within [103], towards the bottom of the west section, Pl 06, was an isolated lens of course grained ferrous material
[104] which produced two assemblages {5}, {7} & {14}. In the former were two shards of glass and one sherd of
ceramic suggestive of 19th 20th century deposition. In {7} and {14} were ferrous products possibly indicative of
ironworking.
Part of the assemblage {14}, an iron eyelet and a pan tile with fused iron slag, is shown in situ in Pl 07 at the
interface between [104] & [106].
Beneath [103], in the south west corner of the trench was a possible wall, [106], built of small angular limestone
rubble, which can be seen in the top left of Pl 08 and in plan view in PL 09. Embedded within the wall [106] were
assemblages {6}, {12} & {16} all of which point to an 18th/19th century origin with the exception of one sherd of
17th c ‘Devon ware’ (Clarke pers com).
Later in the evaluation, a continuation of [106]; labelled on site as [118] was revealed to the north of, and running
under [108], Pl 10 & Pl 11. Finds uncovered in [118] were similar in period to [106] including one sherd of 17th/18th
century slipware.
At this point, the excavation was effectively divided into two parts by the almost central clay bund [108] with the
southern half foreshortened by the wall [106], Pl 08.
7
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
A decision was made to excavate the southern half of the trench to examine any footings to [106]. The next context
encountered was a soft sandy clay context running to a depth of around 154mm which produced the 17th-19th
century assemblage {11}.
Features [106] and [108] were seen to have been built on top of [107] although in the case of [108] the interface was
difficult to establish.
Later excavation to the north of [108] identified [117] with [107] confirming sequence [106/118] over [107/117]
with similar period finds assemblage {19} Pl 11.
Continuing the excavation in the south east corner only, the next context reached was that of [109], a 95mm band of
grey black sandy clay containing a large percentage of lime granules and charcoal flecks; Pl 12 shows the entire
sequence with [109] at the 6th layer from the top. The section is shown in fig04.
Context [109] produced a diverse assemblage {13}, dateable ceramics of which were equally distributed between
17th/18th and 18th/19th century but including a single sherd of 12th century ‘Bristol Ham Green’, earthenware, (Clarke
pers com).
Later excavation to the north of [108] identified [119] with [109] again confirming a compatible sequence [106/118]
over [107/117] over [109/119] with similar period finds assemblage {21} at which point the excavation in trench 1
ceased.
Beneath [109] was a grey white compacted layer of angular limestone tumble [110] which extended to down some
275mm and was devoid of any finds.
Beneath [110] at an approximate depth of 1m below surface was a 200mm layer of non compacted limestone in a
brown sand which also produced no finds.
Although the last two sequences produced no finds, the deposits [110] & [112] did not look natural and so further
excavation was undertaken which reached context [113], Pl 12, level with the bottom red 200mm graduation of the
ranging rod.
This 193mm thick context was made up of grey/brown sandy clay with occasional orange clay lenses and some lime
granules. [113] also produced a large assemblage of dateable ceramics representing a 13th-17th century period.
The sequence beneath [113] was very difficult to distinguish due to the small working area but it was recorded as a
thin band of compacted limestone in grey sandy fill [114] with small lenses of orange clay [115] over a cobbled
floor [116], Pl 13 & Pl 14.
[116] & [115] produced no finds but [114] had a slightly earlier potential period range from 12th – 18th century.
Trench 2.
Presentation Notes:
All contexts are denoted [#] in the text, listed in Appendix I and illustrated in fig 05; following the text section.
Photographs used in the text are listed Pl #, listed in appendix II and can be found following the figure section.
All finds denoted {#} in the text and are listed in Appendix III with images IIIa.
The location of trench 2 was to the north of the proposed development, in an area garden surrounded by a shrubbery
[200], Pl 15. The chosen position directly evaluates the foot print of the second of the proposed buildings but its
exact orientation was constrained by the surrounding garden features.
The trench was set out and the gardening debris removed to clear an area for excavation, Pl 16.
The sequence consisted of a 100mm bed of black topsoil [200] over a 130mm deposit of dark brown, humic, sandy
soil [201]. These two contexts were virtually indistinguishable by colour and had been greatly disturbed by roots
from the surrounding shrubs and trees.
The find assemblage produced from [200] was datable to 19th-20th centuries {21}, possibly even 21st; as was the
majority of the finds assemblage from [201], {23}.
8
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
The later did however produce one sherd of 13th century ‘Bristol Radcliff’ and one sherd of 17th century ‘North
Devonware’, (Clarke pers com).
It is extremely likely; judging by the composition and position in the garden, that context [201] is an imported fill of
garden soil which would explain the two anomalous sherds.
In the centre of the southern part of the trench; removal of [201] revealed [202] a slightly chamfered, linear lens of
compacted sandy lime with occasional flecks of charcoal. The finds assemblage from [202], {24} consisted of a
single shard of 18th 19th century blue glass hexagonal poison bottle and 7 natural flint nodules.
The lime lens that is [202] can be seen in Pl 17 at the top centre of the picture above the horizontal white tag resting
on the cobbles, [203]. It is also visible in section, Pl 18, as two curved lines above the cobbles which extend towards
the left wall to a continuation of the cobbles. The section is shown in fig 05.
Judging by its configuration, position in relation to the underlying cobbles and high percentage of lime, it is possible
that [202] was a constructed surface over the underlying cobbles, [203].
Pl 17 records the extent of the cobbled surface of random placed stone. It is noticeable that the [203] has no defined
edges which suggest that it is a partial survival. Certainly the east side, (left of picture) has been cut [206] forming a
gully as there is a continuation of the cobbles in the trench edge, (top left).
Context [203] extends across the centre of the trench for about 1300mm until it reaches [208], a disorganized tumble
of angular limestone which produced a mostly ceramic finds assemblage dateable across 17th-19th centuries, Pl 19
top left.
The cut [206] was excavated revealing a fill of soft black sandy soil [204] with a mostly ceramic assemblage {28}
dateable to the 17th century (Clarke pers com). A shallow spread of [204] was also found to the west (right) of [203]
which added 4 fragments of clay pipe stem and an oyster shell to the assemblage {28}.
The next context below [204] was [210], a loose deposit of small angular stone and, lime in brown sand which as Pl
18 illustrates was also found to the right of [203]. [210] produced no finds.
Pl 20 shows a sectional view of [203] on the west side from which it can be seen that [210] is continuous as a
deposit beneath [203] the upper cobbles. The lower cobbles are [209] which underlie [210] by around 14mm, Pl 21.
The lower cobble surface [209] is of similar construction to [203] but is edged with upright long stones along its
northern side, Pl 19 & Pl 21.
Context [209] does not appear to be on the same alignment as [203] but it has to be considered that any possible
edge to [203] is no longer present.
Between [210] & the protruding stones of [209] was a possible thin occasional deposit of [212] but it was difficult to
interpret with any certainty; however, [212] was evident within the cut of [206] to the east of [203] where it
presented as a fill of soft black sandy clay producing mostly ceramic assemblage {29}; potentially dateable as 17th
century (Clarke pers com).
Excavating beyond [212] in an increasingly narrow, deep pit, the excavation was terminated at a stone surface
which may be a continuation of [209], although there is a discrepancy in levels see fig 05 Pl 22.
The cut [206] and its various fills have been discussed above but there is a variation at the its northern extent where
a pit had been dug; cut [207], possibly in the early 20th century, and used to dispose of some domestic debris,
mostly glass bottles, [205] {25} & {26} PL 23 & Pl 24.
Context [205] was emptied of its contents to reveal a deposit of soft black sandy soil [213] which produced some
17th/18th century ceramics.
Context [213] differed slightly from [212] by shade interpreted as the cut [207] but this may be an error due to the
nature of the fill and glass which made excavation hazardous and the reduced size of the pit, Pl 24.
9
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
At the very eastern edge of pit [207], a deposit of orange sand [214] was reached but it extended under the side of
the trench and was buried between two large stones, so the pit excavation was terminated at around 900m.
The northern edge of the trench has already been mentioned above in relation to the context [208] a tumble of
angular stone forming a northern edge to [203], however, a difference was noticeable at the western end of [208], in
that the loose stone tumble ended and gave way to a level area of lime granules over large limestone boulders, [211].
This can be seen quite clearly in Pl 19 which shows the area of [211] in the bottom left corner.
The abrupt and edged end of [209] appeared to be built on top of or abutting [211] but without destroying the
archaeology it was not possible to confirm the sequence.
At the end of the excavation a final set of scaled photographs were taken and plan and section drawings were made
Pl 25.
The context sections and features were then surveyed in with an REDM as was the position of the final trench
layout.
A plastic membrane was used to cover the features and the trench was backfilled by hand, Pl 26 PL 27
It is clear from the evaluation that the upper surfaces of Trench 1; to at least context [104], have been subject to
recent disturbance which has redistributed earlier finds from the 18th and 19th centuries as well as three earlier
erratics of 17th century slipware.
The sequences from [104] and reaching to [111] are more dominated by an earlier mix of 17th to 18th century finds
with some 19th century mixed in and one piece of 13th century Ham Green. The possible rubble wall [106/118]
would appear to have been in use during this period.
Beneath [111] however the finds are dominated by medieval ceramics, some reasonably dated to the 12th and 13th
centuries whilst the majority have a longer manufacture period from the 14th to 17th centuries.
The lowest feature found; cobbles [116] would, from the finds and sequence, appear to be a medieval surface.
The evaluation of trench 2 revealed a different record of activity judging from the period spread of finds.
Most of the upper sequence of 2 is dominated by garden loam, probably imported and containing a majority of 18th
to 19th century domestic debitage as well as two ceramic erratics; one 13th century and one 17th.
The upper cobble surface [203] produced no finds but was cut by [205] predominantly 19th century fill and cut [204]
17th century fill.
The earlier cobble surface [209] again produced no finds but did appear to have the rubble wall [208] built against it
which contained a range of 17th to 18th century finds.
13. Impact
The evaluation shows that there are some surviving archaeological features in relatively shallow positions in the
area of both trenches.
The features in the area of trench 1 do not appear to be structural and may be of relatively recent origin. A deeper
feature, the cobble surface off [116] is of potentially more archaeological significance but at 1290mm is beneath the
limit of the proposed foundations.
10
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
The proposed work in the area of trench 2 will have more of an impact on the archaeological resources in that the
two cobble surfaces are within the depth of the proposed foundations.
The evaluation could not establish the form and function nor extent of these two surfaces but it is possible that the
upper surface is 17th century.
14. Copyright
APAC. Ltd will retain full copyright of any reports and specialist reports, under the Copyright, Designs and Patents
Act of 1988 with all rights reserved. The Project Team hereby give permission for the monitoring authority to use
any documentation directly relating to the project as described in this Project Design following a period of 12
months after the evaluation is completed.
15. Archive
A copy of the final report & project design will be deposited with the HER.
16. Staff
Dr. Neil Phillips, AIFA.
Post ex
Mr A. O. Phillips.
The copyright for this report shall remain with the A.P.A.C. Ltd.
11
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
17. Bibliography
Ekwall, E., 1977 The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Place Names. (4th ed). Clarendon
Press: Oxford.
Institute of Field
Archaeologists. Standard and Guidance for an archaeological watching brief. 2001.
Code of Conduct and the Code of Approved Practice for the regulation of
Contractual Arrangements in Field Archaeology. 2002.
Mapping:
12
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow EV/CBK/13
Online sources: British Geological Survey http://www.bgs.ac.uk/geoindex/
Promap http://www.promap.co.uk
13
10 Bank St, Chepstow
Google Maps
Wall
Trench 2
Ro
ck
er
y
y
soil
98.3
er
3
ck
Ro
paving
Shed
Wall
lawn
Ro
ck
er
y
Wall
Trench 1
97.9
4
paving
paving
Location:
Rear of 10 Bank St
Chepstow
Notes:
Type:
Trench Plan
Stage: North set at magnetic
Archaeological N
Evaluation
Period:
10/09/2013
Produced for:
Moon & Co
Scale at A4: BAR
Survey: Trench survey N Phillips
Dr. N. Phillips
Processing: Overlaid on top of survey
Dr. N. Phillips 2128/1 CM. Liddell
15/09/2013
A.P.A.C. Ltd
36 Hatherleigh Rd,
Abergavenny, Monmouthshire
1 metre
NP7 7RG
apac.philips@btinternet.co.uk
PLAN SECTION
N
A
A A
OD
100
117
101
109
102
106
107 108
117 103
118
109
107
107 110 109
108
1m
108 110
117
1m
112
104
103 113
106 116
114
0 1m 2m
2m A
0 1m 2m
N
PLAN SECTION
b b
OD
208 200
211
201
202
205 204
203 210 204
213
210 209
214
212
1m
209
1m
203
209
0 1m 2m
204
210
212
b b
2m
0 1m 2m
DSC05114
DSC05113
Plate 01: Position of trench Plate 02: Initial clearance to [102] with [103] in the fore ground
DSC05120
DSC05124
Plate 03: Small mammal {8} in [102] above [108] Plate 04: Long view section at central W
A.P.A.C. Ltd EV/BKC/13
edge showing section above {6} [100]
[101] [102] [103] [104]
10 Bank St, Chepstow
DSC05131
DSC05126
Plate 05: S aspect of [108] exposure with detached piece of clay Plate 06: SW corner section [100] [101] [102] [103] [104] [107] [108]
DSC05134
DSC05118
Plate 07: Central west edge of trench [104] and find {14} Plate 08: Long view. [103] top left over
A.P.A.C. Ltd EV/BKC/13
[106] [107] [109]. Centre [108] bund
with [107] right
10 Bank St, Chepstow
DSC05137
DSC05146
Plate 09: SW corner. [108] left. [106] foreground.
DSC05151
Plate 11: Overall view of features {108] and [106] [118] Plate 10: N half. [108] left. [109] right, [106]
A.P.A.C. Ltd EV/BKC/13
top right
Name of site
DSC05145
DSC05180
Plate 13: Overview [100] [101] [102] [103] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111]
[112] [113] [114] [115] [116] good lighting
DSC05179
Plate 12: SE section detail: [100] [101] [102] [103] [107] [109] [110] [111] [112] Plate 14: Overview [100] [101] [102] [103] A.P.A.C. Ltd ??/???//09
[113] [114] [115] [116] (flash) [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113]
[114] [115] [116] good lighting
10 Bank St, Chepstow
DSC05153
DSC05152
Plate 15: Position of Trench 2 Plate 16: Setting out Trench 2
DSC05210
DSC05162
Plate 17: Cobbles [203] with remnant of [202] at south edge, top. Plate 18: South section rectification
A.P.A.C. Ltd EV/BKC/13
[200][202] right. [204] left. [205] bottom left sequence 2 Centre left. [200] [201] [202]
[203] [204] [210] [212] [209]
10 Bank St, Chepstow
DSC05205
DSC05189
Plate 19: Cobbles [203] right [209] bottom right [211] bottom left [208] Plate 20: Detail of section [203] [210] [212] [209]
centre left [204] top right. [205] [213] top centre
DSC05206
DSC05167
Plate 21: Cobbles [203] centre [209] right [211] bottom right[208] Plate 22: Rectification sequence, detail
A.P.A.C. Ltd EV/BKC/13
bottom centre [204] top right. [205] bottom right with flash: 1 SE corner. Feature [204],
[210][212] removed [209] at bottom
10 Bank St, Chepstow
DSC05208
DSC05171
Plate 23: Cobbles [203] left with {205] centre and [208] top Plate 24: Rectification sequence, detail with flash: 3. E corner. Feature
[204], [210][212] right. [205] removed [213] possible [204]
DSC05206
DSC05186
5 sherds earthenware
1 sherd white glazed stoneware
1 sherd black lead pot glaze
1 green shard 1mm thick glass
15 bone fragments (Bovine)
4 clay pipe stems
1 tusk Boar (Sus)
2 teeth (Opus)
4 oyster shells
1 piece plaster
18 TR1 114 1 sherd medieval Malvern earthenware pot (Clarke) 12th-14th 03/09/13
(2 bags, 1 1 sherds brown glazed earthen ware with yellow glazed design (Clarke) Med
bone, 1 1 sherds glazed, medieval, earthenware pot handle, with chevron cuts design (Clarke)
ceramics) 1 sherd green – brown glazed Devon ware (Clarke) 17th
1 sherd black glazed earthenware? (Clarke) 17th-18th
1 sherd Staffordshire slipware (Clarke)
4 sherds pan tile (Clarke)
1 sherd green - brown glazed earthenware? (Clarke)
8 sherds post med pot (Clarke)
1 clay pipe stem
4 bones, one a tooth (bovine)
3 oyster shells
19 TR1 117 3 sherds Staffordshire slipware (Clarke) 17th-18th 04/09/13
2 sherds Nottingham ware (Clarke)
2 sherds brown lead glazed earthenware (Clarke)
1 sherd dark brown green Malvern earthenware (Clarke)
1 white painted salt glazed sherds earthenware 18th-19th
1 sherds white glazed stoneware with embossed design
1 sherds off white tin glaze plate
8 clay pipe stem fragments
3 shards dark green glass 3mm
2 sherds white china 19th-20th
1 piece slate
1 oyster shell
2 sheep teeth
20 TR1 118 1 sherd Staffordshire slipware 17th-18th 04/09/13
1 sherd tin glazed stoneware pot 18th-19th
1 sherd dark green glazed earthenware sherd
1 sherd glazed earthenware
21 TR1 119 1 sherd green glazed earthenware pot rim, Somerset (Clarke) 17th 04/09/13
1 sherd Staffordshire slipware (Clarke) 17th 18th
3 sherds lightly coloured oxidised earthenware, from north Devon (Clarke)
1 sherd mustard yellow glazed earthenware rim, Donyatt (Clarke) Pos/med
1 sherd Malvern B5 (Clarke)
2 sherds earthenware unglazed (Clarke)
1 sherd tin glaze applied handle (Clarke)
3 shards amber glass
22 TR2 200 1 sherd hand painted blue & white !8th-19th 04/09/13
1 sherd white glazed stoneware pot base
2 sherds glazed earthenware pancheon
5 sherds three men on a bridge willow pattern china plate
3 sherds off white china plate
1 blue glass bottle bottom,.3mm
1 shard clear white glass, 3mm thick
1 clay pipe partial funnel and stand
1 piece plaster covered iron hinge 20th
8 sherds earthenware flower pot
1 cockle shell
23 TR2 201 1 sherd external glaze Bristol Radcliff C2 (Clarke) 13th 05/09/13
(3 bags) 1 sherd North Devon ware (Clarke) 17th
8 fragments of pan tile 19th 20th
1 buff coloured sherd of large stoneware container
1 buff coloured sherd of stoneware ink pot
2 grey stoneware sherds of marmalade/jam pot
1 sherd internal salt glazed bowl
2 sherds earthenware pancheon
3 sherds unglazed earthenware
11 shards blue glass, 6 bottle tops with neck, 1 bottom
1 clear glass bottle bottom,1mm thick
3 shards green glass, same bottle, with “not to be taken” written on the side 1mm thick
4 shards clear glass, 1mm thick
1 aqua glass bottle top
1 shard amber glass
1 shard clear glass bottle base
A.P.A.C. Ltd Appendix III EV/CBK/13
Finds Index Bank street Chepstow
DSC05390
1
101
DSC05407
2
101
DSC05396
4
102
DSC05403
5
104
DSC05380
6
106
DSC05404
7
104
DSC05373
8
102
38 rat bones
1 clay pipe fragment
DSC05373
9
102
DSC05381
10
102
DSC05392
11
107
DSC05384
12
106
DSC05385
13
109
Ham Green
DSC05405
14
104
Iron or glass
droplet
DSC05399
15
111
DSC05399
16
106
DSC053408
1
17
113
DSC05374
2
17
113
DSC05375
3
17
113
DSC05377
1
18
114
DSC05409
2
18
114
DSC05394
19
117
DSC05391
20
118
DSC05392
21
119
DSC05401
22
200
DSC05388
23
201
Bristol Radcliff C2
DSC05397
23
201
DSC05387
24
202
DSC05393
25
205
DSC05400
26
205
6 shards clear glass, 2 are one piece of a bottle top,1 whole bottle top, 1 is the bottom of a small square bottle all 1mm 19th-20th
9 shards blue glass bottle. One bottom, 2 tops, 2mm
3 blue glass bottles missing tops 3mm thick
3 clear aqua glass bottle tops a necks
1 shard aqua glass 3mm thick
1 shard aqua glass 1mm thick
2 shards aqua glass 2mm thick one top with neck, one bottom piece
1 shard dark blue glass varying thickness
2 clay pipe stems
1 piece glazed brown stoneware
1 piece plaster
1 iron nail
DSC05402
26
205
6 shards clear glass, 2 are one piece of a bottle top,1 whole bottle top, 1 is the bottom of a small square bottle all 1mm 19th-20th
9 shards blue glass bottle. One bottom, 2 tops, 2mm
3 blue glass bottles missing tops 3mm thick
3 clear aqua glass bottle tops a necks
1 shard aqua glass 3mm thick
1 shard aqua glass 1mm thick
2 shards aqua glass 2mm thick one top with neck, one bottom piece
1 shard dark blue glass varying thickness
2 clay pipe stems
1 piece glazed brown stoneware
1 piece plaster
1 iron nail
DSC05383
27
208
DSC05395
28
204
DSC05378
29
212
1 sherd earthenware with brown glaze and yellow, Newent slipware (Clarke) 17th
4 sherds earthenware (Clarke) ?
1 sherd glazed earthenware (Clarke) ?
1 sherd green glazed stoneware, from Wiltshire (Clarke) ?
1 oyster shell
1 boar tusk
DSC05379
30
213
A.P.A.C. Ltd.
Archaeological Perspectives Analysis Consultancy
Design Brief
for an
Archaeological Evaluation
At
Pre Planning.
Prepared for:
Liddell + Associates
By: Dr N Phillips.
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow DB/EV/CBK/13
1. Summary
GGAT, therefore, recommended that in order for the work to progress, the client
would need to engage an archaeologist to undertake preliminary evaluation work
at the site.
Dr N Phillips from A.P.A.C. Ltd visited the site on 31st July 2013 and after
discussions with the agent and GGAT agreed to accept the work.
Copyright Notice:
A.P.A.C. Ltd. retains copyright of this report under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988.
The Ordnance Survey has granted A.P.A.C. Ltd a Copyright Licence (No. 100046577) to reproduce map information; Copyright remains
otherwise with the Ordnance Survey.
1
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow DB/EV/CBK/13
1. Summary .................................................................................................................................1
2. Figures .....................................................................................................................................2
3. Introduction .............................................................................................................................3
4. Location and Description of the Evaluation Area ...................................................................3
5. Brief Archaeological Description and Historical Background ...............................................3
6. Geology and topography .........................................................................................................4
7. Aims and Objectives ...............................................................................................................4
8. Scope of the Work ...................................................................................................................4
9. Methodology ...........................................................................................................................4
10. Survey..................................................................................................................................5
11. Documentary Research .......................................................................................................5
12. Procedures ...........................................................................................................................5
13. Assessment ..........................................................................................................................6
14. Analysis and Report ............................................................................................................6
15. Archive ................................................................................................................................7
16. Copyright .............................................................................................................................8
17. Health & Safety ...................................................................................................................8
18. Project Monitoring ..............................................................................................................8
19. Project Management ............................................................................................................8
20. Resources ............................................................................................................................9
21. Bibliography ......................................................................................................................10
2. Figures
2
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow DB/EV/CBK/13
3. Introduction
This Project Design for an archaeological evaluation has been prepared by Dr Neil Phillips, A.P.A.C. Ltd, in
response to a proposed programme of works, to construct ‘two new dwellings and associated works’ at the rear of
10 Bank St Chepstow, NP16 5EN, (DC/2012/00946).
The client, Mr P. Moon; having submitted a planning application to Chepstow Town Council (CTC) through his
agents, Liddell + Associates; (pl.app.no 2012/00946), has been advised that the proposed work would have an
archaeological restraint, (MON2050/JBHD).
The stated reason is that the application area is situated inside an archaeologically sensitive area ‘within the
medieval town’ … ‘some 60m inside the Port Wall a scheduled Ancient Monument Cadw ref: MM002’, (ibid.).
The archaeological restraint was identified by Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust, (GGAT), advisers to
Monmouthshire County Council (MCC), in such matters.
The GGAT guidance to MCC cites Planning Policy Wales 5th ed 2012 Section 6.5.1 which notes that:
“the desirability of preserving an ancient monument and its setting is a material consideration in
determining a planning application whether that monument is scheduled or unscheduled’.
‘where research indicates that important archaeological remains may exist, the planning
authority should request the prospective developer to arrange for an archaeological field
evaluation to be carried out before any decision on the planning application is taken’.
(MON2050/JBHD).
The location of the site, fig 01 is just off the High St, Chepstow town centre, behind Barclays Bank on the parallel
Bank St.
A scant amount of evidence, and a few chance finds, suggest a Roman presence in Chepstow from as early as the 1st
century to as late as the 4th. It is probable that the presence was related to a probable ferry crossing which may have
grown into a settlement later on.
Unfortunately, no evidence has yet been found to confirm this and neither has any thing been found to confirm a
continuation of presence after the Roman withdrawal, to the coming of the Normans.
It is the Norman period however, which dominates the archaeology of Chepstow. The castle now largely accepted as
the first stone castle in the UK, 1067-71 is surrounded by a formidable wall c 1248 some 1100 meters in length and
enclosing some 53 hectares.
The wall itself is a Scheduled Ancient Monument, Cadw Ref: MM002 and the proposed site is situated in close
proximity to it at 60m.
It has been suggested that the area of the site is close to the 13th century road from the Port Gate to the river (ibid.).
The frontage to the site, No 10, is suggested as dating to the 18th century and is recorded on the 1st edition Ordnance
Survey maps, 1881. Interestingly the 1st edition maps show structures to the rear of the property in the vicinity of
the proposed site, fig 02.
3
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow DB/EV/CBK/13
The solid geology of the site is formed of Clifton Down Limestone; http://www.bgs.ac.uk/geoindex/.
At present, the site is an enclosed and landscaped back garden featuring a lawn terrace and patio on two levels with
various garden features, fig 03.
Elucidate the character, distribution, extent and importance of any potential archaeological remains, extant in the
development area; allowing for the production of a sufficiently detailed report to be used to inform and mitigate any
associated development.
The evaluation report will provide sufficiently detailed information to allow informed decisions to safeguard the
archaeological resource, to be taken on the basis of its contents.
The evaluation will attempt to; specifically, establish the presence and extent of potential significant archaeological
deposits, features and structures, which may be identified in the fieldwork.
The evaluation will attempt to recover enough information to enable assessment of the archaeological implications
of the study area.
Resulting from the evaluation, a report on the results will be produced, which will include a detailed summary of the
methodology, site history, deposits/features/ structures/artefacts uncovered and interpretation of the results.
The archaeology of the application site as a whole, in its wider local or regional context, will be considered,
although the evaluation will be confined to those areas which will be directly affected by the development or some
aspect of it.
9. Methodology
The trenching strategy has been drawn up with reference to discussion with Neil Maylan, GGAT and Mr C
McGonagle, Liddell+Associates.
Two trenches, 2m x 2m, are to be excavated within the designated parcel of land as shown in fig 03.
Trench 1 will evaluate an area within the foot print of the two dwellings, at the point of the party wall. The exact
position will be determined to minimise potential problems with tree roots.
Trench 2 will examine the existing patio area abutting the rear of No 10 and the first terrace bank which is to be cut
back in the proposed plans.
Both trenches will be excavated manually to the archaeological horizon or a proposed depth of 1.2m; whichever
comes first. This will allow for the character, distribution, extent and importance of at least the minimum number of
archaeological features to be understood.
Should the depth need to be increased then a hand auger will be used to examine the site further.
4
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow DB/EV/CBK/13
Parts of the trenches may be excavated to the base of any archaeological resource, or 1.2m, in order to facilitate a
better understanding.
A topographical survey will be undertaken of the site to locate it to National Grid datum. The survey will also locate
any relevant boundaries and any extant features, to accurately, facilitate any future work.
Sufficient documentary research will be undertaken to place the results of the evaluation in their historic context.
Assessment and analysis of all data collected or compiled will be undertaken and the results thereof compiled into
report form.
A complete archive of the work undertaken will be deposited with the appropriate archive institution.
10. Survey
Continuous survey will continue throughout the evaluation trenching with all important finds or features recorded
using a Topcon GPT 3007 REDM, Reflectorless Electronic Distance Measurement, Total Station.
The location of the evaluation trenches will also be marked at this time.
Surveyed data will be processed in Civilcad 6 and corrected to ground station Data.
Final processing will be done at the end of the work with all data being transferred into Autocad for plotting and
Adobe Illustrator for publication.
Research will been undertaken to complete the background history of the site. It is proposed to contact the following
to this end:
12. Procedures
The timetable for the programme has not been determined but contingency plans are in place to address potential
delays such as for poor weather or unexpected discoveries.
Evaluation trenching has been strategically placed in order to maximise the archaeological potential.
Trenching, will determine the nature, depth, survival and extent of any archaeological features identified.
Any significant features and structures will be left in-situ. Where archaeological deposits are found, the overall
depth of such deposits will be tested to determine the extent, date, nature, condition and significance of the deposits.
The archaeological contractor will be responsible for securing information on any services within the evaluation
areas and will take all reasonable precautions to avoid damage to such services.
All artefacts recovered during the project will be retained and related to the contexts from which they derived.
Archaeological deposits will be recorded using the MoLAS recording system that has been adopted by English
Heritage’s Central Archaeology Service.
All typologically distinct and closely datable finds will be recorded 3 dimensionally.
5
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow DB/EV/CBK/13
Artefacts/ecofacts will be collected and recorded stratigraphically; with all artefacts labelled, packed and stored in
appropriate materials and conditions to ensure that no deterioration occurs. All artefact/ecofact processing/storage
will be carried out in accordance with UKIC (United Kingdom Institute for Conservation) guidelines and will
accord with relevant Institute of Field Archaeologists Guidelines on Finds Work.
Any features containing deposits of environmental or technological significance will be sampled, following advice
given in English Heritage Centre for Archaeology Guidelines. Environmental Archaeology: A Guide to Theory and
Practice of Methods of Sampling and Recovery to Post –Excavation, 2002.
All finds will be treated with at least the minimum acceptable standard for the conservation of artefacts and samples
as advised by The UK Institute of Conservations Guidelines for the Treatment of Finds from Archaeological Sites
Any human remains identified will be left in situ with recording limited to the position of the grave, alignment,
burial position and stratigraphic relationships. The relevant authorities Ministry of Justice, will be informed of the
discovery.
In the event of removal of human remains being necessary, this will be undertaken with compliance to relevant
Ministry of Justice Regulations.
The photographic record will comprise a digital camera system with a resolution of 8mp.
All photographs will be recorded in digital format on annotated cards for inclusion in the archive.
The drawn record will comprise plans of the site at a suitable scale, trench plans at scale 1:20 and sections at scale
1:10. A profile of the deposits in each trench will be recorded, even where no archaeology is present.
No area will be back-filled, until GGAT Curatorial has inspected it, unless written permission is granted in advance.
All trenching will be backfilled with the material excavated. A protective membrane will be placed over trenching
where significant archaeological remains are encountered.
13. Assessment
Upon completion of the site, work an assessment of the site archive will be undertaken to include all written, drawn,
and photographic records, artefacts and ecofacts/samples.
Resulting from the assessment a catalogue by context of all artefactual material found, quantified by number,
weight, or both and containing sketches of significant artefacts will be compiled.
Artefacts will be assessed to provide dating, social, economic, and technological information. Special or unusual
features will be highlighted and reference made to other material recovered from the immediate environs of the
evaluation site.
The requirements for artefact conservation will be assessed and discussed with a specialist conservator.
Any environmental or technological samples that are taken will be assessed in order to determine their significance
and value for further investigation.
Specialist assessment reports on artefact assemblages and environmental samples may be deemed necessary.
A site matrix will be prepared to include all contexts identified during the evaluation.
Within three months of the completion of the fieldwork, a copy of the fully illustrated report will be submitted to the
client, Monmouth County Council (planning), and GGAT Historic Environment Record.
6
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow DB/EV/CBK/13
A non-technical summary.
A table of contents.
An introduction with acknowledgements, including a list of all those involved in the project and the
location and description of the study area.
A statement of the project aims.
The archaeological/historical background of the evaluation area, indicating past and present land use,
accompanied by relevant maps, plans and photographs.
A location plan and gazetteer of areas/sites of known or potential archaeological significance within the
project area.
A summary description of the evaluation results including any archaeologically significant
features/deposits or potential features/deposits identified within the each trench.
A discussion of the location, nature, extent, date, quality, condition and significance of any archaeological
deposits/features uncovered, together with a discussion of their relationship with known archaeology in the
vicinity.
Survey and excavation plans at appropriate scales. Each trench will be presented in the report with at least
one plan (plan 1:20) and section (scale 1:10) as well as a photograph.
Other maps, plans, drawings and photographs as appropriate.
A description of the finds and environmental samples collected including an exposition of the
methodologies employed, a statement on the presence or absence of material and an assessment of
preservation. A summary interpretation of the finds including reference to any unusual or important
features of the assemblage will also be included. Specialist reports will be included of important groups of
finds, materials and samples.
An interpretation of the results with a statement of the significance of any identified archaeological
features/sites on a local, regional and national scale.
An identification of any research implications arising from the work.
A bibliography of sources consulted and a supplementary bibliography of any sources identified but not
available for consultation.
An index to the project archive and a statement of its location/proposed repository.
Appendices to the report will include a copy of the Project Design.
A summary report on the evaluation will be published in a suitable local journal, with a record note
presented to the appropriate national period journal(s).
15. Archive
A project archive of the work will be created consisting of all original records, artefacts, ecofacts/samples and all
documentation that relates to the evaluation. This primary archive will be retained by APAC. Ltd.
A Copy of the archive will be deposited with the Gwent County Records Office, Ebbw Vale.
In the event of the evaluation yielding significant archaeological artefacts, the Archaeological Contractor will
endeavour to persuade the legal owner of any artefacts, to transfer them to Chepstow Museum.
Chepstow Museum Service will be notified of the intention to deposit any artefacts which will be accompanied by a
copy of the archive.
The project has been designated a project code – EV/CBK/13: all significant documents and packaging will carry
this code number.
The archive will be prepared according to the Management of Archaeological Projects, English Heritage, Second
Edition, (1991) so the records will be fully ordered and indexed.
The archive will comply with the United Kingdom Institute for Conservation (Archaeology Section) Guidelines for
the Preparation of Excavation Archives for Long-Term Storage (1990) the Society of Museum Archaeologists
Towards An Accessible Archive (1995) and to the reasonable requirements of Monmouth Museum.
The archive will be deposited within twelve months of the completion of the evaluation and with the agreement of
the landowner.
A synopsis of the archive will be lodged with the Historic Environment Record.
7
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow DB/EV/CBK/13
A synopsis of the project will be submitted to CBA Wales.
16. Copyright
The Project Team will retain full copyright of any reports and specialist reports, under the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act of 1988 with all rights reserved. The Project Team hereby give permission for the monitoring authority
to use any documentation directly relating to the project as described in this Project Design following a period of 12
months after the evaluation is completed.
The Project Team will operate in accordance with the health and safety procedures as set out in:-
The Health and Safety Work Act (1974) and related legislation.
The Standing Conference of Archaeology Unit Managers Health and Safety Manual 2002).
The Council for British Archaeology Handbook no. 6, Safety in Archaeological Fieldwork (1989).
In accordance with the CDM Regulation, The Project Team will prepare a Risk Assessment in relation to
the archaeological works prior to the commencement of the evaluation.
A First-Aid kit and Accident Book will be kept on site at all times, with a Health and Safety file.
The Archaeological Contractor understands that the project may require monitoring involvement. As a matter of
courtesy, a copy of this written scheme of investigation will be sent to the monitoring authority (LPA – GGAT).
Dr N.Phillips has been active in archaeology since 1997, completing his 1st degree in 1999 followed by a research
Phd in 2004. Dr Phillips started and has been director of A.P.A.C. Ltd since 2004. A.P.A.C. Ltd is an archaeological
consultancy specialising in landscape archaeology and survey work. Currently at AIFA standard he is about to apply
for an upgrade to MIFA. Steve Clarke MIFA of Monmouth Archaeology has agreed to cover him in this regard if
the need arises.
Dr Phillips interests lie locally with the Medieval period although he has been involved in international Palaeolithic
projects both in the UK as well as Europe and Africa.
Project management of recent industrial works include the Iron works at Angidy Tintern for TAP and The AONB.
He is also working with EH as project manager for the Alverstone project a multiphase wooden causeway Iron
Age/Romano British.
8
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow DB/EV/CBK/13
20. Resources
Staff:
9
A.P.A.C. Ltd 10 Bank St, Chepstow DB/EV/CBK/13
21. Bibliography
Institute of Field
Archaeologists. Standard and Guidance for an archaeological watching brief. 2001.
Code of Conduct and the Code of Approved Practice for the regulation of
Contractual Arrangements in Field Archaeology. 2002.
Promap http://www.promap.co.uk
10
10 Bank St, Chepstow
Google Maps
TR2
2 dwellings TR1
footprint