Desk based assessment draws together the available archaeological, historic, topographic and land-use information in order to clarify the heritage significance and archaeological potential of the site. A review of the available evidence has shown that the study site occupies land which was within the medieval and post-medieval settlement of Bury St Edmunds, and therefore has potential to contain buried remains from this period. There is also some potential for the presence of limited artefactual remains from the prehistoric, Roman and Saxon periods, but a low potential for occupation remains from these periods based on current evidence. However, the construction of the existing building, as well as previous development within the study site during the 20th century, would have subjected any remains to substantive truncation due to excavations required for footings and landscaping. As such any remains within the study site are likely to be highly fragmentary and of limited value. Therefore, it is considered that the study site has a low potential to contain buried archaeological remains of significance. Any remains which may be present would be disturbed and of limited archaeological value. The construction of the proposed development would remove any archaeological remains which may be present. However, it has been shown that any remains that are likely to be present would have a low archaeological value. As such the proposed development would not result in the loss of any buried remains of significance. The archaeological interest of the study site could therefore be secured by a programme of archaeological works, secured via planning condition should consent be granted. On this basis it is clear that the impact of the proposed development on the archaeological potential of the study site could be adequately mitigated, and the development made acceptable in terms of archaeological impacts. It therefore accords with the requirements in paragraph 197 of the NPPF and policy DM20 of the local plan.
William Bedford (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: