The building recording and archaeological evaluation were conducted in accordance with the WSI (Boyd 2023) drawn up in consultation with the DCHET and in line with CIfA guidelines and best practice. The work follows the guidelines laid down in CIfA's Standard and Guidance for the Archaeological Investigation and Recording of Standing Buildings or Structures (2020) and Historic England's Understanding Historic Buildings: A Guide to Good Recording Processes (2016). The discussion of the setting follows the approach outlined in the appropriate guidance (National Highways guidance and Historic England 2017). This report looks at both plots in separate sections below, starting with No.36. The historic building recording was carried out by E. Wapshott MCIfA and A. Allen ACIfA between July 2023- August 2024. The buildings were viewed before and during works. The archaeological monitoring Boyd 2023) drawn up in consultation with the DCHET and in line with CIfA guidelines and best practice. A total of five areas were covered by the archaeological monitoring: within the footprint of the former no.37 Boutport Street (Area 04); within no.36 Boutport Street (Areas 05-07) and to the rear of no.36 Boutport Street (Area 08). The archaeological monitoring was undertaken by Peter Webb and Phoebe Scrivener between April 2024 and August 2025. Both Nos. 36 providing limited evidence for the former layout of this level of the building and the potential for the full floor plan to be identified, including possible phasing of elements of the structure. The apparent 'terracing'/basement cut for the structures suggests that it is unlikely that earlier features survive beneath the identified features, though excavation across much of the area did not extend beneath the identified floor surfaces and natural substrate was only identified in small areas. The updated building recording further confirmed that No.37 predated most of the standing fabric of No.36 and the build lines and roofline 'ghost' of this demolished building can in fact be seen in the party wall and in its excavated footprint.
Webb et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: