Evaluation at Cardwell Farm

35 evaluation trenches, across the areas on the posited route of the Roman road to determine if any structural features relating to its construction and use survive, and evaluation trenches to examine any other areas that might be identified from the desk based assessment, walkover and geophysical surveys as being of potential interest The scheme of evaluation trenching across the Phase 2 site at Land at Cardwell Farm undertaken in December 2025 completed the investigation aim of determining the presence or absence of archaeology features and deposits through the excavation of 30 of the 35 proposed trenches. A specific aim of the investigation was to determine the presence or otherwise of a Roman road which may have followed a course through the Phase 2 site. No indication of remains related to a Roman road were encountered within the evaluation trenches placed across the projected alignment, or in a reoriented trench agreed with HET to maximise coverage with the area. The Phase 2 site was crossed by multiple phases of field drains, including ceramic pipes and French drain style channels. Several linear features were recorded across the site though no dating evidence was retrieved. A linear feature recorded in Trench 11 looked to approximately align with a north-west/south-east orientated anomaly noted on LIDAR and may represent a previous continuation of a field boundary detailed to the north on the Ordnance Survey map of 1847 (Plate 3). Additionally, the base of the ditch was irregular and heavily rooted, suggesting it may have been a hedgerow planted in a gully. Likewise, a linear feature recorded within Trench 26 looked to have been the remnant of a hedge boundary in the south-east of the site. A small, shallow pit of undetermined function was recorded in Trench 23, no dating evidence was found. The sparse remains encountered across the Phase 2 site and lack of any dating evidence make a firm interpretation difficult although it is likely that most, if not all of the features recorded were agricultural in nature related to field boundaries and drainage in the Post-medieval and modern period and therefore of low significance. Two of the encountered features were slightly more enigmatic. The gully in trench 11 did not match with any recorded or visible boundaries and the pit in trench 23 was of indeterminate origin. However, the gully was very similar to the other boundaries encountered in trenches 8 and 26 and was on a similar alignment, and the pit in trench 23 was possible associated with the drainage gully in the same trench, possibly indicating that they are of a similar function and date. For this reason, it is recommended that no further archaeological investigation is required within the phase 2 development area.