The stated aim of the archaeological evaluation, as agreed between DCC planning department's archaeology section and AD archaeology, and set out in AD Archaeology's WSI is to establish the presence or absence of significant archaeological features and/or deposits. Should significant deposits and/or features be located the aim of the evaluation is to determine the nature, extent, date and state of preservation of the deposits in order to inform potential subsequent stages of mitigation. The Archaeological Practice. agreed to undertake the project on these terms and adhere to all points included in the previously agreed WSI. The proposed archaeological evaluation took the form of 22 trenches. Of these trenches, 18 of them were set out with dimensions of 40 x 1.80 m and 4 of them with dimensions of 20 x 1.80 m for a total of 1440m�, a 4% sample of the site area. In field 1, ephemeral bases of the NE-SW plough furrows identified in the geophysical survey were identified in most trenches. All of these were extremely shallow, and none produced finds. No other finds or features of archaeological significance were noted. In field 2, ephemeral bases of plough furrows along the other, NW-SE grain were observed in most trenches. All furrows noted in the trenches likely represent the remains of 19th century of later ploughing. The only other feature excavated was the deep sub-rectangular pit that almost certainly represents a mechanically excavated geotechnical pit or similar. Anomalies in field 2 identified on the geophysical survey were thought to represent ditches bounding a modern track, an interpretation seemingly supported by satellite imagery. These remains were not identified in trenches 1, 8 or 10. It is possible that even if the linear anomalies identified by the survey constitute roadside gullies, they may have been excavated or worn into the topsoil and buried ploughsoil and not made any mark on the natural surface.
Adam Leigh (2024) studied this question.