The archaeological watching brief comprised of a general topsoil strip across the car parking area which was to be stoned up to provide an all weather surface. The area was scanned with a metal detector prior to stripping and then scanned again after the strip was complete. The intention being to recover any finds that no longer registered in comparison to the initial survey and recover them from the spoil. All work was carried out according to the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) standards and according to the Written Scheme of Investigation. A digital colour photographic record was maintained. The car parking area excavated measured approximately 15.5m x 15m. The initial metal detector scan identified 10 targets. The strip varied in depth between 0.08m and 0.49m to account for the natural topography of the site which sloped down from north to south. The uppermost deposit comprised of (102) a mid orange brown slightly clayey sand topsoil which measured up to 0.23m thick. This overlay (102), a compact dark orange clayey silt which exceeded 0.26m in thickness. The second scan revealed that 7 of the 10 previously identified targets were no longer present. The remaining targets which were clustered in the southern corner of the site where a remnant of topsoil (101) remained in situ. The 7 targets were recovered from the topsoil and all comprised of modern rubbish including an oil filter, remnants of sheet iron and barbed wire. The recovered metal detecting targets were all modern and appear to relate to contemporary use of the field. It is possible that the concentration of finds in this area is related to its proximity to the site access where vehicular traffic and activity could be considered to be most frequent. It would appear that all of this material was within the topsoil (101). The 3 remaining targets that were not disturbed are all within an area of undisturbed topsoil and are likely to represent a continuation of the modern activity already identified. No archaeological features or artefacts were present within the development area.
James Roberts (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: