an archaeological desk-based assessment of land at the
TRANSCRIPT
ASE front coverAn Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment of Land at
the Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site,
Brodrick Road, Hampden Park, Eastbourne, East Sussex
NGR 559991, 102561 NGR TQ 599 025
Eastbourne Borough Council
Project No. 4003 Report No. 2009122
Caroline Russell BA, PhD
An Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment of Land at the Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site,
Brodrick Road, Hampden Park, Eastbourne, East Sussex
NGR 559991, 102561 NGR TQ 599 025
Eastbourne Borough Council
Caroline Russell BA, PhD
August 2009
Archaeology South-East,
Portslade E. Sussex BN41 1DR
Tel: 01273 426830 Fax: 01273 420866
[email protected] www.archaeologyse.co.uk
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ i
Summary A Desk Based Assessment has been prepared for the proposed Eastbourne Academy site, Brodrick Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex. The Site is currently occupied by Eastbourne Technology College and Hampden Park Sports Centre. The proposed development will probably be confined to the northeast which has been heavily built upon already. However, this part of the Site has been largely levelled in modern times for the construction of the school and sports centre. Geotechnical data indicates that the playing fields were used for dumping landfill in the 1960s to a depth of 2-4m. The Site has been assessed as having low potential for containing archaeological remains for every period. The evidence has been reviewed and recommendations for further mitigation are offered.
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
_____________________________________________________________________
3.0 Planning Background
5.0 Cartographic Evidence
6.0 Aerial Photographs
7.0 Walkover Survey
9.0 Existing Impacts on Archaeological Potential
10.0 Impact of Proposed Development
11.0 Recommendations
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ iii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Fig. 1 Site Location and Archaeological Data Fig. 2 Site Plan Fig. 3 Archaeologically Sensitive Areas Fig. 4 Part of Estate Map, c. 1760 (ESRO ACC 5786/29) Fig. 5 Part of Estate Map, c. 1760 (ESRO ACC 5786/31) Fig. 6 Willingdon Tithe, 1842 (ESRO TD/E 56) Fig. 7 OS 25-inch, 1875 Fig. 8 OS 25-inch, 1899 Fig. 9 OS 25-inch, 1910 Fig. 10 OS 25-inch, 1925-1928 Fig. 11 OS 25-inch, 1961-1962 Fig. 12 OS 25-inch, 1973-1975 Fig. 13 Historic Landfill Site Fig. 14 Academy Location, with Existing School Fig. 15 Academy Location, without Existing School Fig. 16 Academy Location, in Playing Field
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ iv
PLATES Plate 1 The Combe, looking west Plate 2 Culvert at W side of Site, looking west Plate 3 Culvert at E side of Site, looking west Plate 4 Tree line, looking northeast Plate 5 Willow and ash trees, looking south
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 1
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Archaeology South-East (a division of the University College London
Centre for Applied Archaeology) has been commissioned by Miller Bourne Architects to carry out an archaeological appraisal, consisting of a desk based assessment (DBA) and preliminary walkover survey of the proposed Eastbourne Academy site, Brodrick Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex (Figs 1 & 2). This document is part of an Inception / Feasibility Study for Eastbourne Technical College which has been identified to become an Academy.
1.2 This report follows the recommendations set out by the Institute for
Archaeologists (formerly the Institute of Field Archaeologists) in Standards and Guidance for Archaeological Desk-Based Assessments (IFA 2001) and utilises existing information in order to establish as far as possible the archaeological potential of the Site.
1.3 The Site location is shown on Fig. 1. Centred on National Grid Reference
559991, 102561, the Site is situated c. 1.2km to the east of the South Downs. Although low-lying itself, it is a high point in the locality with the land falling in height to just above sea level to both the south and east. The Site is largely bound by the housing and flats that either line or are accessed off Brodrick Road, Lindfield Road, Parkfield Avenue, Henfield Road and Faygate Road. Lindfield School is adjacent to its entrance on Brodrick Road.
1.4 A wider Study Area with a radius of 1km has been considered to place the
Site in context (Fig. 1). 1.5 It should be noted that this form of non-intrusive appraisal cannot be seen
to be a definitive statement on the presence or absence of archaeological remains within any area but rather as an indicator of the area’s potential based on existing information. Further non-intrusive and intrusive investigations such as geophysical surveys and machine-excavated trial trenching may be needed to conclusively define the presence/absence, character and quality of any archaeological remains in a given area.
1.6 In drawing up this desk based assessment, cartographic and
documentary sources held by the East Sussex Record Office at Lewes have been consulted. Archaeological data was obtained from the Historic Environment Record held by East Sussex County Council (ESCC). Listed Building and Conservation Area data was acquired from English Heritage and Eastbourne Borough Council. Relevant sources held within the Archaeology South-East library were utilised, and appropriate Internet databases interrogated. These included: The Defence of Britain Project, The English Heritage NMR Excavation Index and National Inventory, and the Magic website, which holds government digital data of designated
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
sites (Scheduled Ancient Monuments, Registered Historic Parks and Gardens and Registered Historic Battlefields) in GIS map form. Relevant aerial photographs from the National Monuments Record, Swindon, have also been also obtained.
2. SITE TOPOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY 2.1 The Site is situated on largely level land at a height of mostly 15m OD.
The Study Area is located between the eastern dipslopes of the South Downs to the west, Shinewater Lake to the northeast and an elongated area of lower-lying marshland to the southeast. The Site borders Lindfield School to the northwest. Both it and the school stand in a sub-rectangular area of land defined by Parkfield Avenue to the west, Lindfield Road to the south, Brodrick Road to the north and Henfield Road and Haygate Road to the east. Semi-detached houses with front and back gardens face onto these streets, with a greater mix of housing being found to the east side of the Site.
2.2 According to the British Geological Survey 1:50,000 map (Sheet 334,
Eastbourne), the natural geology of the Site comprises both Upper Greensand and Gault Clay of the Cretaceous Period. Geotechnical data supplied by the client indicates made ground (landfill) across the southern half of the Site (the playing fields) to a depth ranging between 2m and 4.3m.
3. PLANNING BACKGROUND 3.1 Town and Country Planning Legislation and Procedures Government guidance to local authorities is given in Planning Policy
Guidance Notes (PPGs). ‘PPG16 covers Archaeology and Planning. PPG 15 “Planning and the Historic Environment”, although concerned principally with listed buildings and conservation areas, also includes references to elements of the historic environment.
Consideration of detailed planning issues is beyond the remit of this
report, but the general background as relating to archaeological matters can be briefly summarised as follows:
Archaeological remains should be seen as a finite, and non-renewable, resource...care must be taken to ensure that [they] are not needlessly or thoughtlessly destroyed. (PPG 16 para. 6).
Where nationally important remains, whether scheduled or not, and
their settings, are affected by proposed development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation. [In the case of]
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 3
remains of lesser importance...planning authorities will need to weigh the relative importance of the archaeology against other factors including the need for the proposed development (PPG 16 para. 8).
If physical preservation in situ is not feasible, an archaeological
excavation...may be an acceptable alternative (PPG 16 para. 13). ...the key to the future of the great majority of archaeological sites lies
with local authorities, acting within the framework set by central government...Appropriate policies in development plans and their implementation through development control will be especially important. (PPG 16 para 14).
3.2 South East Plan
The South East Plan (published 06/05/2009) sets out strategic policies concerning the whole of the South East Region, and partly replaces the now defunct county-level structure plans. The relevant policy covering the historic environment is summarised below:
Policy BE7: Management of the Historic Environment
Seeks to encourage local authorities and other bodies to support the conservation and, where appropriate, the enhancement of the historic environment.
3.3 Eastbourne Borough Local Plan The Eastbourne Borough Local Plan (adopted September 2003) also has
policies relating to historic sites. The Local Plan is due to be replaced by the Eastbourne Borough Local Development Framework - until this happens, many Local Plan policies remain in force, including:
Policy UHT9: Historic Parks and Gardens
Seeks to preserve the character, appearance or setting of registered
Historic Parks and Gardens and of parks of local interest.
Policy UHT15: Conservation Areas
Seeks to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of Conservation Areas.
Policy UHT17: Listed Buildings
Seeks to preserve the character and setting of Listed Buildings.
Policy UHT18: Buildings of Local Interest
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 4
Seeks to preserve the character or appearance of Buildings of Local Interest.
Policy UHT20: Archaeological Sites and Scheduled Monuments
Seeks to prevent development proposals that would adversely affect sites
and monuments of archaeological and historic interest, both scheduled and non-scheduled. Includes requirements for developers to evaluate archaeological potential, with preservation in situ or by record as appropriate.
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 4.1 Introduction
The Historic Environment Record maintained by East Sussex County Council (ESCC), and held at County Hall, Lewes, was consulted, together with the NMR National Inventory and Excavation Index. Listed Building and Conservation Area data was acquired from English Heritage and ESCC. Details were taken of all archaeological sites and listed buildings within the defined Study Area. The identified sites are tabulated in Appendix 1 and shown plotted on Fig. 1.
4.2 Scheduled Ancient Monuments and Designated Sites 4.2.1 These comprise cultural heritage sites of a higher degree of status and
significance, some of which enjoy a certain degree of legal protection from development and include Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs), Listed Buildings, Historic Parks and Gardens, and Conservation Areas. These designations and others such as Archaeologically Sensitive Areas and Areas of High Archaeological Potential are typically detailed in Borough Council Local Plans and County Council Plans with appropriate planning policies pertaining to each category.
4.2.2 Conservation Areas No Conservation Areas are recorded within the Study Area. 4.2.3 Listed Buildings Six Listed Buildings are recorded within the Study Area (Sites 11-13 and
15-17). All are Grade II Listed Buildings. Elm Tree Cottage and the Rippingtons house (Sites 11 and 12) date to the 18th century whilst Haystoun House (Site 13) was built in c. 1860 and the houses of New Place and Field Place and St Mary’s Church (Sites 15-17) were constructed in the early to mid 20th century. All except the church beside Hampden Park and Field Place on Huggetts Lane are sited on Church Street in Willingdon village.
4.2.4 Archaeologically Sensitive Areas (ASA) Three Archaeologically Sensitive Areas are recorded within the Study
Area (Fig. 3). The larger ASA covers the south side of the Study Area, where a cluster of sites are located (Sites 1, 2, 4 and 9), including prehistoric findspots and a possible medieval settlement (both Site 1). The second Archaeologically Sensitive Area covers a small outlying built-up area to the medieval village of Willingdon. Sited along Church Road, it comprises a listed 18th century cottage (Site 11). The third comprises the Willingdon Levels to the north and east.
4.2.5 Other Designations
________________________________________________________________________
No other designations apply. 4.3 Archaeological Periods Represented 4.3.1 The timescale of the archaeological periods referred to in this report is
shown below. The periods are given their usual titles. It should be noted that for most cultural heritage assessment purposes the boundaries between them are not sharply distinguished, even where definite dates based on historical events are used. All site numbers refer to Fig. 1.
Prehistoric: Palaeolithic (c. 750,000 BC - c. 10,000 BC) Prehistoric: Mesolithic (c. 10,000 BC - c.5,000 BC) Prehistoric: Neolithic (c. 5,000 BC - c.2,300 BC) Prehistoric: Bronze Age (c. 2,300 BC - c. 600 BC) Prehistoric: Iron Age (c. 600 BC - AD 43) Romano-British (AD 43 - c. AD 410) Anglo-Saxon (c. AD 410 - AD 1066) Medieval (AD 1066 - AD 1485) Post-medieval (AD 1486 to date) 4.4 Prehistoric 4.4.1 Palaeolithic surface sites and Mesolithic flint scatters are abundant from
the South Downs between Brighton and Eastbourne (Woodcock 1999, 11; Drewett 1999a, 15). Between the Cuckmere River and Eastbourne, the Neolithic is represented by the causewayed enclosure on the hill that overlooks the Site (The Combe), a number of long barrows including that on Wilmington Hill, and several stone axes (Drewett 1999b, 17). Early Bronze Age occupation within the area is depicted by a few settlement sites, the round barrows at Crowlink and some flat axes (Greatorex 1999, 19). The barrows on The Combe are undated but may also be Bronze Age. There are no Middle Bronze Age settlements (ibid, 19), whilst evidence for Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age habitation comprises the settlements at Eastbourne and Healthy Brow, a possible hillfort at Belle Tout and a metal hoard at Wilmingdon (Hamilton & Manley 1999a, 21). Further evidence of bronze Age occupation was provided by an archaeological evaluation in September and October 1995 which identified a Late Bronze Age wooden trackway to run west from Shinewater Park across the proposed route of the A22 road improvement scheme (Greatorex 1995). A full-scale excavation of track affected by the development was undertaken later in the year (Greatorex 1998). Middle Iron Age sites and pottery have yet to be found (ibid, 21) but the Late Iron Age is observed through the odd individual coin or coin hoard (Hamilton and Manley 1999b, 23).
4.4.2 Five prehistoric sites are recorded within the Study Area (Sites 1-5). Site 1
relates to a productive prehistoric find-spot in a garden 0.63km to the south of the Site. Amongst other later medieval material, the owners of
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 7
the property collected a large amount of flintwork, including a Mesolithic ‘Thames pick’- type hand axe, and quantities of Bronze Age and Iron Age pottery. Sites 2 and 3 are each the findspot of one or two Neolithic axes found both c. 0.75km to the southwest and north of the Site respectively. Sites 4 and 5 are both possible Bronze Age barrow sites discovered c. 0.88km to the south and 0.88km to the east of the Site respectively (see section 4.6.3 on the date of the former site).
4.5 Romano-British 4.5.1 Known Romano-British settlement between the Cuckmere River and
Pevensey comprises just one large early villa by the coast, although there is a scattering of other Romano-British sites (excluding temples and industrial sites) on and off the Downs, mostly away from the river valley (Rudling 1999, 24-25). Villas in the 3rd and 4th centuries began to decline in the Coastal Plain of Sussex, which may have been partly due to raids from the Anglo-Saxons. A military fort at Pevensey was established in c. AD293 to protect the southern coastline from such attacks.
4.5.2 One Romano-British site is recorded within the Study Area: Site 6 refers
to a possible hoard of Romano-British coins discovered c. 0.38km to the east of the Site. Romano-British pottery was uncovered near this site in 1930, during the laying of an estate road at Site 8.
4.6 Anglo-Saxon 4.6.1 The capture of the fort at Pevensey towards the end of the 5th century
enabled the Saxons to break away from Romano-British control (White 1999, 28-29). Early Anglo-Saxon occupation is represented by a discrete cluster of 5th to 7th century cemetery sites near Willingdon (an Anglo- Saxon cemetery, MES652, is said to have been excavated and recorded to the immediate east of the Study Area but there is no evidence to support this). This settlement became a Hundred meeting place during the Late Anglo-Saxon period, as did Eastbourne (Gardiner 1999, 30). Like Chichester, Steyning and Lewes, Eastbourne was an important focal point. It functioned as a port and had an estate belonging to King Alfred and a minster church. Closer to the Study Area, there is an Anglo-Saxon site, located 0.98km to the southwest of the Study Area, which may have been a settlement or salt working site located on top of earlier such sites of prehistoric / Romano-British date (MES7289).
4.6.2 The place-name evidence for the north half of the Site is revealing.
Cartographic evidence (see Ch. 5) shows that the land was called ‘(The) Great Hidney’ or ‘Great Hydneye’ in the 18th and 19th centuries. ‘Hyd’ is the Anglo-Saxon term for ‘Hide’, which meant ‘as much land as could be tilled with one plough’ (Parish 1957, 58). The suffix of ‘eye’ is the Anglo- Saxon word for ‘islands, or at least lands elevated above a waterish level’ (Lower 1870a, 234). The name of Hidney/Hydneye survives today within
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 8
the Study Area as a road to the east of the railway track and a bridge to the south end of Shinewater Lake.
4.6.3 One Anglo-Saxon site is recorded within the Study Area: Site 7 is the
findspot of a cinerary urn discovered close to, if not actually at, the possible Bronze Age barrow site (Site 4). This may imply that the provisional date for the barrow is incorrect. So too may its location on flat ground which is unusual for barrows.
4.7 Medieval 4.7.1 Willingdon and Ratton (to the immediate south of the former) are both
mentioned in the Domesday Book (Williams & Martin 2003, 50). Held by Earl Godwin prior to the Conquest, the Count of Mortain now held Willingdon. Willingdon predominantly comprised meadow and salt-pans, with little woodland (measured in size for three pigs only). The minster church within the village dates to the 11th century (Rushton 1999, 37) and according to the NMR, has a late 12th/early 13th century tower and a 14th century nave, aisle and chancel. It is today known as the Church of St Mary the Virgin (LBS No. 295782 and NMR_NATINV-408612). Market rights may have been granted to Willingdon in 1301 (Bleach & Gardiner 1999, 43). In the Anglo-Saxon period, Ratton was a manor held of King Edward by Osweard, Cana and Frani (Williams & Martin 2003, 50). These lands were subsequently held of the Count of Mortain by Ralph, Morin and Hugh. As with Willingdon, the land was mostly meadow and salt-pans but with some pasture and no woodland. Clearly, both Willingdon and Ratton would have had access to woodland as a resource for fuel. Lower (1870a, 247) records that in the ‘earlier history of Ratton’ the estate extended into the ‘parishes of Willingdon and Eastbourne and continued by a narrow strip of land into the distant parishes of Hellingly, Chiddingly and Heathfield’. If this holds true for the medieval period, fuel for at least Ratton may have been transported in from these more densely wooded locations.
4.7.2 Hydneye or Hidney was a medieval port located in Willingdon (Bleach &
Gardiner 1999, 42). It belonged to the Cinque Port confederacy, along with the Head Port of Hastings and the ports of Pevensey, Winchelsea, Rye and Northeye (in Bexhill). Both Hydneye and Northeye in the marshes were small in comparison to the rest and had already significantly declined by 1300. Hydneye is considered to be located c. 0.83km to the east of the Site (at the end of The Hydneye road), on the basis of the medieval pottery and the dated floor of a building discovered during ‘tentative digging’ in 1930 (Budgen 1931, 277). The village seems to have adopted a pre-existing Anglo-Saxon place-name, which may imply that the area was settled throughout the transition period. The village may have had a strong link with the north half of the Site, considering that they both share the same name. This may have been in the form of a routeway through the Site to the village.
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 9
4.7.3 Four medieval sites are recorded within the Study Area (Sites 8-10). The
deserted medieval village of Hydneye (Site 8) may not have been the only medieval settlement sited within the Study Area, as a significant quantity of 12th to 14th century pottery, oven tiles and bone fragments, found at Site 1 may imply the presence of a nearby settlement contemporary with Hydneye. In 2004, Archaeology South-East excavated four ditches 0.8km to the south of Site 1 (Site 9). The ditches were dated to the medieval period on the small pottery assemblage from two of them. Medieval pottery was also discovered on Willingdon Road, near to the west border of the Study Area (Site 10).
4.8 Post-Medieval 4.8.1 The Parker family held the Ratton estate for nearly three centuries (Lower
1870a, 247) until it was bequeathed by Walter Parker to Nathaniel Trayton in 1750 and by his brother Edward Trayton to Samuel Durrant in 1761 (www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a, accessed 7/08/2009). In 1769, Durrant sold the estate and the manor of Willingdon to George Thomas. Sir George died in 1775 and the Ratton estate passed to his son William and later, in 1829, to his grandson Inigo Thomas. Additions to the estate were made between 1834 and 1881, after which it declined until its sale in 1922. In 1901, the woodland and lake were sold by Lord Willingdon to Eastbourne Corporation. Having been used as a decoy to attract wildfowl for the estate kitchens, the lake had probably fallen into disuse by the end of the 19th century. Within the space of a year the woodland and lake were converted into a park (Hampden Park - named after Lord Willingdon’s grandfather, Viscount Hampden). It was to be the first Corporation owned park in Eastbourne. The Old Manor House of the estate lies directly outside the Study Area on Park Lane (LBS No. 293595). It is a Grade II Listed Building built in the late 17th century by Sir George Thomas (Lower 1870a, 247). Only the gatehouse remains of the earlier house, although it was still standing in full towards the end of the 18th century (ibid, 246).
4.8.2 The village of Willingdon has several Listed Buildings located on Church
Street, both within and outside the Study Area. With the exception of the church with its potential Anglo-Saxon origins, those buildings standing outside the Study Area are 18th or 19th century in date. Amongst them is the church hall (LBS No. 295783), which was originally the village school and school-master’s house, and a block of cottages of almshouse character (LBS No. 295792).
4.8.3 Seven post-medieval sites are recorded within the Study Area (Sites 11-
17). All but Site 14 are Listed Buildings (of Grade II status). Four of these buildings where built on Church Street: Elm Tree Cottage (Site 11) and the Rippingtons house (Site 12) are both 18th century in date whilst Haystoun House (Site 13) was constructed in c. 1860 and the New Place
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 10
house (Site 15) in 1912. Field Place (Site 16) is located on Huggetts Lane, close to New Place, and was designed by the same local architect, John D Clarke, 12 - 13 years later. The fifth Listed Building is St Mary’s Church (Site 17) on Decoy Drive, beside Hampden Park, which was built between 1952 and 1954. Hampden Park Station was opened in 1888 (Site 14).
5. CARTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE 5.1 The earliest available map of the Site in any great detail dates to c. 1760
when the Site was owned by Sir William Thomas of Ratton in Willingdon. His lands were surveyed at this time by Richard Budgen. However, the map has parts missing and so only the north side of the Site can be observed (Fig. 4). This is a trapezoidal field of pasture called ‘Great Hidney’. Nevertheless, it appears from other surviving parts of the map that the southern half of the Site lay within parkland (Fig. 5; see enclosed land to northeast corner).
5.2 The Ordnance Survey Draft 1-inch map of c1800 (not reproduced) shows
that the Site underwent no apparent change in land use. The north side was still a field whilst the south remained within ‘Ratton Park’.
5.3 Change had still yet to occur by 1842, when the tithe map for the Parish of
Willingdon was drawn up (Fig. 6). The Site now came under the ownership of Inigo Thomas, the grandson of Sir George Thomas. ‘The Great Hidney’ (plot 224) was farmed by Charles Ade as pasture whilst the southern half of the Site (plot 223) continued to be part of the park and was occupied by Arnold Denman. A ditch divides the two areas. Inigo Thomas appears to have owned at least part of the Ratton estate, as he was also the landowner of the sedge plantation (plot 238) and Decoy Pond (plot 239), both of which were part of the estate in c. 1760. Both survive today as The Coppice and Hampden Park.
5.4 The 1st edition OS map of 1875 shows the ditch to the east side to be
well-lined with trees (Fig. 7). A second ditch flows away from the older ditch and through the southeast corner of the Site. It may have served as a field boundary. By 1899, the Park had shrunk in size and no longer covered the field(s) in which the south part of the Site lies (Fig. 8). A road had been built that passed directly in front of the Site. Within a decade, the name of this ‘New Road’ had changed to ‘Brodrick Road’ (Fig. 9). A footpath ran alongside the older ditch. No change occurred again to the Site until the construction on Brodrick Road of ‘Hampden Park Secondary Modern School’ sometime between 1925 and 1962 (Figs. 9-11). A playing field lay directly behind it whilst tennis courts and a small rectangular building had been built to the south of the main drain. This drain now had a footbridge across it and was still clearly in use whilst the other drain, although still visible, appears to have been abandoned. By
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 11
1975, the school (‘Hampden Park County Secondary School’) had extended into the old playing field and two new playing fields had been created to the south of the tennis courts (Fig. 12). The diagonally aligned ditch seems to have been levelled off in the process.
5.5 In conclusion, the predominant land use of the Site since c. 1760 has
been as pasture and parkland. 6. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 6.1 A search was made of the vertical and oblique collections of the National
Library of Air Photographs held at the National Monuments Record Centre, Swindon. The search area comprised a 1km radius circle centred on NGR 559991, 102561. A total of just three vertical prints were available from the NMR collection, spanning the period between 1946 and 1950. Nine vertical prints and one oblique print, dating from 1953 to 1980, had also been requested but could not be located, predominantly because they were not held as contact prints.
Table 1: Vertical Aerial Photographs
Sortie No. Frames Date Scale RAF/106G/UK/1725 4048 10/09/1946 1:10500 RAF/541/535 4270 30/05/1950 1: 10250 RAF/541/535 4271 30/05/1950 1: 10250
Note: The following prints were requested but not obtained: the oblique print CAP8174 and the vertical prints OS/53T42, Frames 152 and 153; OS/53T41, Frames 11 and 12; MAL/62511, Frames 97632-97634; MAL/63635, Frame 121268 and MAL/80002, Frame 75.
6.2 Unfortunately, there was insufficient time to obtain the requested
photographs prior to the deadline set for completion of this report. 7. WALKOVER SURVEY 7.1 A walkover survey by the author was undertaken in respect of the site on
6th August 2009. The weather was good and all external areas of the Site were accessible and inspected.
7.2 The objective of the walkover survey was to identify historic landscape
features not plotted on existing maps, together with other archaeological surface anomalies or artefact scatters, and also to assess the existence of constraints or areas of disturbance that may have impacted the predicted archaeological resource. The walkover survey was rapid, within the parameters of the project, and was not intended as a detailed survey.
7.3 The Site comprises Eastbourne Technology College, some buildings of
which front Brodrick Road, and Hampden Park Sports Centre, which is located behind the school. The buildings are almost wholly confined to
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 12
the north half of the Site, where a basketball court and several car parks are also located. With the land here naturally sloping to the south, it had to be substantially terraced for the construction of the buildings. The grassed over area to the immediate north of the two adjacent car parks appears to be the only area left untouched. The margins of the school and sports centre have been landscaped with grass and a number of trees have been planted on a bank to the east of the sports centre.
7.4 The southern half of the Site is separated from the north by a landscaped
bank of varying height and prominence, at the base of which is a large rectangular area of flat land. This predominantly comprises a playing field but also has tennis courts and a small building. It appears that this area has been reclaimed, with a bed of clay and layer of topsoil having been laid in the early 1960’s (pers. comm. Lindsay Hawkins, Site Estate Manager). On walking down onto the playing field it becomes clear that the Site is overlooked to the west by The Combe (Plate 1). The drain observed as late as 1975 in an OS map (Fig. 11) can no longer be seen, having at some time been converted into a culvert. This runs close to or beneath the bank and also under a concrete slab path beside the tennis courts (Plates 2 and 3). The OS maps also show that the drain followed a field boundary and part of this may still exist today as mature trees of mostly ‘lime’ trees with the odd sycamore (Plate 4). However, the trees stand outside the Site (behind metal fencing erected by Eastbourne Borough) to help define the south perimeter of Lindfield School. The metal fence runs further east to separate the sports centre from the school. The boundary around the rest of the playing field is piecemeal, having been erected by those occupying the houses and flats that adjoin it. The only other mature trees observed around the playing field (two Weeping Willows and an Elm) where found to the southeast. (Plate 5) Their maturity suggests that they may have been present when this part of the Site (the southern part) was located within Ratton Park.
7.5 No evidence of any archaeological or historic landscape features were
observed on the Site.
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 13
8. ASSESSMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL 8.1 A preliminary review of the cultural heritage evidence detailed earlier
indicates that the Site has limited archaeological potential. 8.2 Prehistoric 8.2.1 One findspot of Neolithic date and one barrow site of questionable
Bronze Age date are all that represent the prehistoric period within the Study Area. The ditches recorded on the maps within the southern half of the Site suggest that the land here did not have freely-draining soils, thus it had to be reclaimed in the early 1960’s for use as playing fields. Its wetness may have been more due to the nature of the underlying Gault Clay bedrock, which has the capacity to hold water well and may have created a localised perched water table. However, the slightly elevated position of the Site (particularly of the north half) above the present day marshland levels may suggest that waterlogged deposits, like those found at Shinewater Lake, are unlikely to be found here.
8.2.2 The potential of the Site for this period is low. 8.3 Romano-British 8.3.1 The Study Area has no definite evidence of Romano-British occupation. 8.3.2 The potential of the Site for this period is low.
8.4 Anglo-Saxon 8.4.1 The 11th century church stands directly outside the Study Area, along with
the Anglo-Saxon settlement that presumably developed around it. A cinerary urn of this date is also located close to but within the boundary to the Study Area. Anglo-Saxon activity is known, nevertheless, to have extended into the very centre of the Study Area from the Anglo-Saxon derived place-name evidence for the north half of the Site. If taken literally, the first element of ‘Hydneye’ may suggest that the land here was ploughed. With the Site having been part of a large estate in the post- medieval period, it is highly likely that its origin as such began in Anglo- Saxon times when the Site was probably part of the manor of Ratton.
8.4.2 The potential of the Site for this period is low. 8.5 Medieval 8.5.1 Although the location is not entirely definite, the deserted medieval village
and port of Hydneye is thought to have been sited to the east of the Study Area. Considering its meaning, the village is likely to have adopted the
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 14
place-name from the north half of the Site. One reason for this may be because a trackway over elevated dry land led eastwards directly through or (more probably) past this part of the Site, down to the presumed location of the settlement (note that Maywood Avenue runs along the top of Hydneye field and so it is likely that the route ran here, along the field boundary). That the Site appears to have retained its Anglo-Saxon name suggests great continuity of the Site between the two periods, possibly even in land use. The Site was still probably part of the Ratton manor, which was held by the Count of Mortain after the Conquest.
8.5.2 The potential of the Site for this period is low. 8.6 Post-Medieval 8.6.1 Documentary evidence reveals that the Site was part of an estate owned
by the Parker family at the beginning of the post-medieval period and perhaps also in the late medieval period. The first detailed map from c. 1760 shows the Site to be pasture to the north and parkland to the south. This division of land use continued until sometime between 1875 and 1899, during which time the south part of the Site became farmland and the name Hydneye for the north part was abandoned.
8.6.2 The potential of the Site for this period is low. 8.7 Summary of Potential 8.7.1 A desk-based assessment can generally only consider the potential of a
site in principle. As is the case here, its conclusions usually require testing by fieldwork in order to confirm whether remains are actually present and, if this is the case, to establish their character, condition and extent and thus indicate the weight that ought to be attached to their preservation. It must always be acknowledged that remains of a type for which there is no prior evidence may be found on a site by fieldwork.
8.7.2 The potential for discovery of new sites has been revealed by a review of
known archaeological sites in the immediate vicinity. The estimated potential for sites and/or findspots being located within the appraisal area can be summarised thus:
Prehistoric - Low Romano-British - Low Anglo-Saxon - Low Medieval - Low Post-medieval - Low 8.7.3 To conclude, the Site is considered to lie within an area of generally low
archaeological potential.
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 15
9. EXISTING IMPACTS ON ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL 9.1 The main impact on archaeological potential has been the construction of
the buildings within the northern half of the Site for both the school and sports centre. As the ground here slopes south, much of the land would have required levelling for the buildings, car parks and basketball court. Therefore, the likelihood that any potential archaeology, including that of any depth, has survived in the north half of the Site is probably limited to the small grassed over space to the north of the outlying car parks and the adjacent driveway, where the land still slopes south.
9.2 The south part of the Site is said to have been reclaimed by the laying of
a bed of clay and topsoil (pers. comm. Lindsay Hawkins, Site Estates Manager). Subsequent information gained indirectly from East Sussex County Council, via Andrew Moulson of Miller Bourne Architects, suggests that this half of the Site was a historic landfill site (Fig. 13) depositing ash rather than clay. Geotechnical data commissioned by Eastbourne Borough Council and supplied by the client indicates a mix of general landfill-type rubbish and clay. This made ground varies in depth across the playing field, from3.3m along its northern edge, thinning to 2- 2.4m across the centre and deepening to 4.3m along the southern boundary. The made ground may form a protective buffer above any potential archaeology located beneath, provided it was dumped directly on to the existing ground surface without any prior ground reduction.
10. IMPACT OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 10.1 At this stage the general location and form for the academy are still being
formulated, so the physical impact of the proposed development can only be considered in the broadest terms. Figs. 14-16 show three possibilities for location. Two of the options involve the construction of the academy to the east side of the north half or the Site. Here the existing school buildings may be left to stand (Fig. 14) or almost wholly demolished (Fig. 15). The third identified choice to date is for the academy to be built on the playing field, predominantly to the southwest side (Fig. 16). Development of the playing field is considered less desirable by Eastbourne Borough Council due to environmental issues and consideration for the local inhabitants (pers. comm. Andrew Moulson, Miller Bourne Architects). The sports centre will stand regardless of the final decision on location.
10.2 Most of the north part of the Site has already been levelled and built
upon. Any potential archaeology to survive past construction may hence be entirely located beyond these areas, to the northwest side of the Site. Figs 14 and 15 show that this specific area is currently located outside the development footprint of the buildings. Demolition of the existing buildings may disturb or destroy any potential archaeological deposits
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 16
surviving there due to the possible tracking of heavy machinery across it, for example.
10.3 The playing field is masked by a thick layer of made ground. The impact
of any groundworks in this area will be dependant on whether the made ground is to be removed, and whether the ground beneath is undisturbed. Footing trenches and service runs through the original ground surface following the removal of the made ground will have a greater potential adverse impact than piled footings sunk through the made ground.
11. RECOMMENDATIONS 11.1 The Site has been shown to have a low potential for containing
archaeological deposits, based on current evidence. The evidence suggests that the Site’s history prior to the construction of the current buildings was as open, probably arable fields and, latterly, historic parkland. The Site lies on the Greensand shelf at the foot of the chalk scarp - the historic character of this landscape is generally that of small nucleated settlements surrounded by enclosed fields of medieval origin. The presence of medieval sites to the east, south and west of the Site would seem to conform to this pattern. Nevertheless, the presence of archaeological deposits within the Site cannot be ruled out. It should be borne in mind that the locations of prehistoric or Romano-British settlement sites and field systems may have borne little relationship to later ones.
11.2 A number of preliminary recommendations will be offered in this section
to provide a suggested framework for future mitigation. It should be stressed at this point that suggested ground plans are the only details currently available for any proposed site development, so the full ground- level impact can only be considered in the broadest terms. The recommended response can be divided into two phases for both sides of the Site. All of the following comments should be discussed with East Sussex County Council Archaeological Officers.
11.3 North Side of Site
If the location option for the academy involves the demolition of most of the school, it is recommended that a limited programme of trial trenching should take place in the northwest corner of the school grounds to determine the presence or absence of archaeological deposits. The footprint of the existing school does not merit any archaeological works, having been built upon levelled ground. Trial trenching is a cost-effective method of quickly determining the presence or absence of archaeological deposits.
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
11.4 South Side of Site
The playing fields have received some substantial landscaping in recent history – however, this appears to have included ground levelling through the dumping of material, implying that original ground surfaces may survive intact beneath, although this is not known for certain. The mitigation will depend on the foundation design. If significant groundworks are planned after removal of the made ground, then a limited programme of trial trenching should take place to confirm the presence or absence of archaeological deposits.
11.5 The evaluation to each side of the Site should be to a suitable sample
size agreed with ESCC. Information provided by this initial phase of works can then be used to formulate an appropriate level of further mitigation as appropriate.
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 18
12. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Archaeology South-East would like to thank the following for their help
and advice in the preparation of this report: Ian Henham, Miller Bourne Architects Andrew Moulson, Miller Bourne Architects Greg Chuter, Assistant County Archaeologist, East Sussex County
Council Lindsay Hawkins, Site Estates Manager, Eastbourne Technology College Angharad Wicks, NMR enquiry and Research Services - Archaeology and
Aerial Photography East Sussex Record Office
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
NGR 559991, 102561
Prepared for Miller Bourne Architects
A Desk Based Assessment has been prepared for the proposed Eastbourne Academy site, Brodrick Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex. The Site is currently occupied by Eastbourne Technology College and Hampden Park Sports Centre. The proposed development will probably be confined to the northeast which has been heavily built upon already. However, this part of the Site has been largely levelled in modern times for the construction of the school and sports centre. Geotechnical data indicates that the playing fields were used for dumping landfill in the 1960s to a depth of 2-4m. The Site has been assessed as having low potential for containing archaeological remains for every period.
PLATES
Brodrick Road, Hampden Park, Eastbourne, East Sussex
NGR 559991, 102561 NGR TQ 599 025
Eastbourne Borough Council
Project No. 4003 Report No. 2009122
Caroline Russell BA, PhD
An Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment of Land at the Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site,
Brodrick Road, Hampden Park, Eastbourne, East Sussex
NGR 559991, 102561 NGR TQ 599 025
Eastbourne Borough Council
Caroline Russell BA, PhD
August 2009
Archaeology South-East,
Portslade E. Sussex BN41 1DR
Tel: 01273 426830 Fax: 01273 420866
[email protected] www.archaeologyse.co.uk
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ i
Summary A Desk Based Assessment has been prepared for the proposed Eastbourne Academy site, Brodrick Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex. The Site is currently occupied by Eastbourne Technology College and Hampden Park Sports Centre. The proposed development will probably be confined to the northeast which has been heavily built upon already. However, this part of the Site has been largely levelled in modern times for the construction of the school and sports centre. Geotechnical data indicates that the playing fields were used for dumping landfill in the 1960s to a depth of 2-4m. The Site has been assessed as having low potential for containing archaeological remains for every period. The evidence has been reviewed and recommendations for further mitigation are offered.
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
_____________________________________________________________________
3.0 Planning Background
5.0 Cartographic Evidence
6.0 Aerial Photographs
7.0 Walkover Survey
9.0 Existing Impacts on Archaeological Potential
10.0 Impact of Proposed Development
11.0 Recommendations
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ iii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Fig. 1 Site Location and Archaeological Data Fig. 2 Site Plan Fig. 3 Archaeologically Sensitive Areas Fig. 4 Part of Estate Map, c. 1760 (ESRO ACC 5786/29) Fig. 5 Part of Estate Map, c. 1760 (ESRO ACC 5786/31) Fig. 6 Willingdon Tithe, 1842 (ESRO TD/E 56) Fig. 7 OS 25-inch, 1875 Fig. 8 OS 25-inch, 1899 Fig. 9 OS 25-inch, 1910 Fig. 10 OS 25-inch, 1925-1928 Fig. 11 OS 25-inch, 1961-1962 Fig. 12 OS 25-inch, 1973-1975 Fig. 13 Historic Landfill Site Fig. 14 Academy Location, with Existing School Fig. 15 Academy Location, without Existing School Fig. 16 Academy Location, in Playing Field
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ iv
PLATES Plate 1 The Combe, looking west Plate 2 Culvert at W side of Site, looking west Plate 3 Culvert at E side of Site, looking west Plate 4 Tree line, looking northeast Plate 5 Willow and ash trees, looking south
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 1
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Archaeology South-East (a division of the University College London
Centre for Applied Archaeology) has been commissioned by Miller Bourne Architects to carry out an archaeological appraisal, consisting of a desk based assessment (DBA) and preliminary walkover survey of the proposed Eastbourne Academy site, Brodrick Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex (Figs 1 & 2). This document is part of an Inception / Feasibility Study for Eastbourne Technical College which has been identified to become an Academy.
1.2 This report follows the recommendations set out by the Institute for
Archaeologists (formerly the Institute of Field Archaeologists) in Standards and Guidance for Archaeological Desk-Based Assessments (IFA 2001) and utilises existing information in order to establish as far as possible the archaeological potential of the Site.
1.3 The Site location is shown on Fig. 1. Centred on National Grid Reference
559991, 102561, the Site is situated c. 1.2km to the east of the South Downs. Although low-lying itself, it is a high point in the locality with the land falling in height to just above sea level to both the south and east. The Site is largely bound by the housing and flats that either line or are accessed off Brodrick Road, Lindfield Road, Parkfield Avenue, Henfield Road and Faygate Road. Lindfield School is adjacent to its entrance on Brodrick Road.
1.4 A wider Study Area with a radius of 1km has been considered to place the
Site in context (Fig. 1). 1.5 It should be noted that this form of non-intrusive appraisal cannot be seen
to be a definitive statement on the presence or absence of archaeological remains within any area but rather as an indicator of the area’s potential based on existing information. Further non-intrusive and intrusive investigations such as geophysical surveys and machine-excavated trial trenching may be needed to conclusively define the presence/absence, character and quality of any archaeological remains in a given area.
1.6 In drawing up this desk based assessment, cartographic and
documentary sources held by the East Sussex Record Office at Lewes have been consulted. Archaeological data was obtained from the Historic Environment Record held by East Sussex County Council (ESCC). Listed Building and Conservation Area data was acquired from English Heritage and Eastbourne Borough Council. Relevant sources held within the Archaeology South-East library were utilised, and appropriate Internet databases interrogated. These included: The Defence of Britain Project, The English Heritage NMR Excavation Index and National Inventory, and the Magic website, which holds government digital data of designated
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
sites (Scheduled Ancient Monuments, Registered Historic Parks and Gardens and Registered Historic Battlefields) in GIS map form. Relevant aerial photographs from the National Monuments Record, Swindon, have also been also obtained.
2. SITE TOPOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY 2.1 The Site is situated on largely level land at a height of mostly 15m OD.
The Study Area is located between the eastern dipslopes of the South Downs to the west, Shinewater Lake to the northeast and an elongated area of lower-lying marshland to the southeast. The Site borders Lindfield School to the northwest. Both it and the school stand in a sub-rectangular area of land defined by Parkfield Avenue to the west, Lindfield Road to the south, Brodrick Road to the north and Henfield Road and Haygate Road to the east. Semi-detached houses with front and back gardens face onto these streets, with a greater mix of housing being found to the east side of the Site.
2.2 According to the British Geological Survey 1:50,000 map (Sheet 334,
Eastbourne), the natural geology of the Site comprises both Upper Greensand and Gault Clay of the Cretaceous Period. Geotechnical data supplied by the client indicates made ground (landfill) across the southern half of the Site (the playing fields) to a depth ranging between 2m and 4.3m.
3. PLANNING BACKGROUND 3.1 Town and Country Planning Legislation and Procedures Government guidance to local authorities is given in Planning Policy
Guidance Notes (PPGs). ‘PPG16 covers Archaeology and Planning. PPG 15 “Planning and the Historic Environment”, although concerned principally with listed buildings and conservation areas, also includes references to elements of the historic environment.
Consideration of detailed planning issues is beyond the remit of this
report, but the general background as relating to archaeological matters can be briefly summarised as follows:
Archaeological remains should be seen as a finite, and non-renewable, resource...care must be taken to ensure that [they] are not needlessly or thoughtlessly destroyed. (PPG 16 para. 6).
Where nationally important remains, whether scheduled or not, and
their settings, are affected by proposed development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation. [In the case of]
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 3
remains of lesser importance...planning authorities will need to weigh the relative importance of the archaeology against other factors including the need for the proposed development (PPG 16 para. 8).
If physical preservation in situ is not feasible, an archaeological
excavation...may be an acceptable alternative (PPG 16 para. 13). ...the key to the future of the great majority of archaeological sites lies
with local authorities, acting within the framework set by central government...Appropriate policies in development plans and their implementation through development control will be especially important. (PPG 16 para 14).
3.2 South East Plan
The South East Plan (published 06/05/2009) sets out strategic policies concerning the whole of the South East Region, and partly replaces the now defunct county-level structure plans. The relevant policy covering the historic environment is summarised below:
Policy BE7: Management of the Historic Environment
Seeks to encourage local authorities and other bodies to support the conservation and, where appropriate, the enhancement of the historic environment.
3.3 Eastbourne Borough Local Plan The Eastbourne Borough Local Plan (adopted September 2003) also has
policies relating to historic sites. The Local Plan is due to be replaced by the Eastbourne Borough Local Development Framework - until this happens, many Local Plan policies remain in force, including:
Policy UHT9: Historic Parks and Gardens
Seeks to preserve the character, appearance or setting of registered
Historic Parks and Gardens and of parks of local interest.
Policy UHT15: Conservation Areas
Seeks to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of Conservation Areas.
Policy UHT17: Listed Buildings
Seeks to preserve the character and setting of Listed Buildings.
Policy UHT18: Buildings of Local Interest
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 4
Seeks to preserve the character or appearance of Buildings of Local Interest.
Policy UHT20: Archaeological Sites and Scheduled Monuments
Seeks to prevent development proposals that would adversely affect sites
and monuments of archaeological and historic interest, both scheduled and non-scheduled. Includes requirements for developers to evaluate archaeological potential, with preservation in situ or by record as appropriate.
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 4.1 Introduction
The Historic Environment Record maintained by East Sussex County Council (ESCC), and held at County Hall, Lewes, was consulted, together with the NMR National Inventory and Excavation Index. Listed Building and Conservation Area data was acquired from English Heritage and ESCC. Details were taken of all archaeological sites and listed buildings within the defined Study Area. The identified sites are tabulated in Appendix 1 and shown plotted on Fig. 1.
4.2 Scheduled Ancient Monuments and Designated Sites 4.2.1 These comprise cultural heritage sites of a higher degree of status and
significance, some of which enjoy a certain degree of legal protection from development and include Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs), Listed Buildings, Historic Parks and Gardens, and Conservation Areas. These designations and others such as Archaeologically Sensitive Areas and Areas of High Archaeological Potential are typically detailed in Borough Council Local Plans and County Council Plans with appropriate planning policies pertaining to each category.
4.2.2 Conservation Areas No Conservation Areas are recorded within the Study Area. 4.2.3 Listed Buildings Six Listed Buildings are recorded within the Study Area (Sites 11-13 and
15-17). All are Grade II Listed Buildings. Elm Tree Cottage and the Rippingtons house (Sites 11 and 12) date to the 18th century whilst Haystoun House (Site 13) was built in c. 1860 and the houses of New Place and Field Place and St Mary’s Church (Sites 15-17) were constructed in the early to mid 20th century. All except the church beside Hampden Park and Field Place on Huggetts Lane are sited on Church Street in Willingdon village.
4.2.4 Archaeologically Sensitive Areas (ASA) Three Archaeologically Sensitive Areas are recorded within the Study
Area (Fig. 3). The larger ASA covers the south side of the Study Area, where a cluster of sites are located (Sites 1, 2, 4 and 9), including prehistoric findspots and a possible medieval settlement (both Site 1). The second Archaeologically Sensitive Area covers a small outlying built-up area to the medieval village of Willingdon. Sited along Church Road, it comprises a listed 18th century cottage (Site 11). The third comprises the Willingdon Levels to the north and east.
4.2.5 Other Designations
________________________________________________________________________
No other designations apply. 4.3 Archaeological Periods Represented 4.3.1 The timescale of the archaeological periods referred to in this report is
shown below. The periods are given their usual titles. It should be noted that for most cultural heritage assessment purposes the boundaries between them are not sharply distinguished, even where definite dates based on historical events are used. All site numbers refer to Fig. 1.
Prehistoric: Palaeolithic (c. 750,000 BC - c. 10,000 BC) Prehistoric: Mesolithic (c. 10,000 BC - c.5,000 BC) Prehistoric: Neolithic (c. 5,000 BC - c.2,300 BC) Prehistoric: Bronze Age (c. 2,300 BC - c. 600 BC) Prehistoric: Iron Age (c. 600 BC - AD 43) Romano-British (AD 43 - c. AD 410) Anglo-Saxon (c. AD 410 - AD 1066) Medieval (AD 1066 - AD 1485) Post-medieval (AD 1486 to date) 4.4 Prehistoric 4.4.1 Palaeolithic surface sites and Mesolithic flint scatters are abundant from
the South Downs between Brighton and Eastbourne (Woodcock 1999, 11; Drewett 1999a, 15). Between the Cuckmere River and Eastbourne, the Neolithic is represented by the causewayed enclosure on the hill that overlooks the Site (The Combe), a number of long barrows including that on Wilmington Hill, and several stone axes (Drewett 1999b, 17). Early Bronze Age occupation within the area is depicted by a few settlement sites, the round barrows at Crowlink and some flat axes (Greatorex 1999, 19). The barrows on The Combe are undated but may also be Bronze Age. There are no Middle Bronze Age settlements (ibid, 19), whilst evidence for Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age habitation comprises the settlements at Eastbourne and Healthy Brow, a possible hillfort at Belle Tout and a metal hoard at Wilmingdon (Hamilton & Manley 1999a, 21). Further evidence of bronze Age occupation was provided by an archaeological evaluation in September and October 1995 which identified a Late Bronze Age wooden trackway to run west from Shinewater Park across the proposed route of the A22 road improvement scheme (Greatorex 1995). A full-scale excavation of track affected by the development was undertaken later in the year (Greatorex 1998). Middle Iron Age sites and pottery have yet to be found (ibid, 21) but the Late Iron Age is observed through the odd individual coin or coin hoard (Hamilton and Manley 1999b, 23).
4.4.2 Five prehistoric sites are recorded within the Study Area (Sites 1-5). Site 1
relates to a productive prehistoric find-spot in a garden 0.63km to the south of the Site. Amongst other later medieval material, the owners of
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 7
the property collected a large amount of flintwork, including a Mesolithic ‘Thames pick’- type hand axe, and quantities of Bronze Age and Iron Age pottery. Sites 2 and 3 are each the findspot of one or two Neolithic axes found both c. 0.75km to the southwest and north of the Site respectively. Sites 4 and 5 are both possible Bronze Age barrow sites discovered c. 0.88km to the south and 0.88km to the east of the Site respectively (see section 4.6.3 on the date of the former site).
4.5 Romano-British 4.5.1 Known Romano-British settlement between the Cuckmere River and
Pevensey comprises just one large early villa by the coast, although there is a scattering of other Romano-British sites (excluding temples and industrial sites) on and off the Downs, mostly away from the river valley (Rudling 1999, 24-25). Villas in the 3rd and 4th centuries began to decline in the Coastal Plain of Sussex, which may have been partly due to raids from the Anglo-Saxons. A military fort at Pevensey was established in c. AD293 to protect the southern coastline from such attacks.
4.5.2 One Romano-British site is recorded within the Study Area: Site 6 refers
to a possible hoard of Romano-British coins discovered c. 0.38km to the east of the Site. Romano-British pottery was uncovered near this site in 1930, during the laying of an estate road at Site 8.
4.6 Anglo-Saxon 4.6.1 The capture of the fort at Pevensey towards the end of the 5th century
enabled the Saxons to break away from Romano-British control (White 1999, 28-29). Early Anglo-Saxon occupation is represented by a discrete cluster of 5th to 7th century cemetery sites near Willingdon (an Anglo- Saxon cemetery, MES652, is said to have been excavated and recorded to the immediate east of the Study Area but there is no evidence to support this). This settlement became a Hundred meeting place during the Late Anglo-Saxon period, as did Eastbourne (Gardiner 1999, 30). Like Chichester, Steyning and Lewes, Eastbourne was an important focal point. It functioned as a port and had an estate belonging to King Alfred and a minster church. Closer to the Study Area, there is an Anglo-Saxon site, located 0.98km to the southwest of the Study Area, which may have been a settlement or salt working site located on top of earlier such sites of prehistoric / Romano-British date (MES7289).
4.6.2 The place-name evidence for the north half of the Site is revealing.
Cartographic evidence (see Ch. 5) shows that the land was called ‘(The) Great Hidney’ or ‘Great Hydneye’ in the 18th and 19th centuries. ‘Hyd’ is the Anglo-Saxon term for ‘Hide’, which meant ‘as much land as could be tilled with one plough’ (Parish 1957, 58). The suffix of ‘eye’ is the Anglo- Saxon word for ‘islands, or at least lands elevated above a waterish level’ (Lower 1870a, 234). The name of Hidney/Hydneye survives today within
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 8
the Study Area as a road to the east of the railway track and a bridge to the south end of Shinewater Lake.
4.6.3 One Anglo-Saxon site is recorded within the Study Area: Site 7 is the
findspot of a cinerary urn discovered close to, if not actually at, the possible Bronze Age barrow site (Site 4). This may imply that the provisional date for the barrow is incorrect. So too may its location on flat ground which is unusual for barrows.
4.7 Medieval 4.7.1 Willingdon and Ratton (to the immediate south of the former) are both
mentioned in the Domesday Book (Williams & Martin 2003, 50). Held by Earl Godwin prior to the Conquest, the Count of Mortain now held Willingdon. Willingdon predominantly comprised meadow and salt-pans, with little woodland (measured in size for three pigs only). The minster church within the village dates to the 11th century (Rushton 1999, 37) and according to the NMR, has a late 12th/early 13th century tower and a 14th century nave, aisle and chancel. It is today known as the Church of St Mary the Virgin (LBS No. 295782 and NMR_NATINV-408612). Market rights may have been granted to Willingdon in 1301 (Bleach & Gardiner 1999, 43). In the Anglo-Saxon period, Ratton was a manor held of King Edward by Osweard, Cana and Frani (Williams & Martin 2003, 50). These lands were subsequently held of the Count of Mortain by Ralph, Morin and Hugh. As with Willingdon, the land was mostly meadow and salt-pans but with some pasture and no woodland. Clearly, both Willingdon and Ratton would have had access to woodland as a resource for fuel. Lower (1870a, 247) records that in the ‘earlier history of Ratton’ the estate extended into the ‘parishes of Willingdon and Eastbourne and continued by a narrow strip of land into the distant parishes of Hellingly, Chiddingly and Heathfield’. If this holds true for the medieval period, fuel for at least Ratton may have been transported in from these more densely wooded locations.
4.7.2 Hydneye or Hidney was a medieval port located in Willingdon (Bleach &
Gardiner 1999, 42). It belonged to the Cinque Port confederacy, along with the Head Port of Hastings and the ports of Pevensey, Winchelsea, Rye and Northeye (in Bexhill). Both Hydneye and Northeye in the marshes were small in comparison to the rest and had already significantly declined by 1300. Hydneye is considered to be located c. 0.83km to the east of the Site (at the end of The Hydneye road), on the basis of the medieval pottery and the dated floor of a building discovered during ‘tentative digging’ in 1930 (Budgen 1931, 277). The village seems to have adopted a pre-existing Anglo-Saxon place-name, which may imply that the area was settled throughout the transition period. The village may have had a strong link with the north half of the Site, considering that they both share the same name. This may have been in the form of a routeway through the Site to the village.
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 9
4.7.3 Four medieval sites are recorded within the Study Area (Sites 8-10). The
deserted medieval village of Hydneye (Site 8) may not have been the only medieval settlement sited within the Study Area, as a significant quantity of 12th to 14th century pottery, oven tiles and bone fragments, found at Site 1 may imply the presence of a nearby settlement contemporary with Hydneye. In 2004, Archaeology South-East excavated four ditches 0.8km to the south of Site 1 (Site 9). The ditches were dated to the medieval period on the small pottery assemblage from two of them. Medieval pottery was also discovered on Willingdon Road, near to the west border of the Study Area (Site 10).
4.8 Post-Medieval 4.8.1 The Parker family held the Ratton estate for nearly three centuries (Lower
1870a, 247) until it was bequeathed by Walter Parker to Nathaniel Trayton in 1750 and by his brother Edward Trayton to Samuel Durrant in 1761 (www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a, accessed 7/08/2009). In 1769, Durrant sold the estate and the manor of Willingdon to George Thomas. Sir George died in 1775 and the Ratton estate passed to his son William and later, in 1829, to his grandson Inigo Thomas. Additions to the estate were made between 1834 and 1881, after which it declined until its sale in 1922. In 1901, the woodland and lake were sold by Lord Willingdon to Eastbourne Corporation. Having been used as a decoy to attract wildfowl for the estate kitchens, the lake had probably fallen into disuse by the end of the 19th century. Within the space of a year the woodland and lake were converted into a park (Hampden Park - named after Lord Willingdon’s grandfather, Viscount Hampden). It was to be the first Corporation owned park in Eastbourne. The Old Manor House of the estate lies directly outside the Study Area on Park Lane (LBS No. 293595). It is a Grade II Listed Building built in the late 17th century by Sir George Thomas (Lower 1870a, 247). Only the gatehouse remains of the earlier house, although it was still standing in full towards the end of the 18th century (ibid, 246).
4.8.2 The village of Willingdon has several Listed Buildings located on Church
Street, both within and outside the Study Area. With the exception of the church with its potential Anglo-Saxon origins, those buildings standing outside the Study Area are 18th or 19th century in date. Amongst them is the church hall (LBS No. 295783), which was originally the village school and school-master’s house, and a block of cottages of almshouse character (LBS No. 295792).
4.8.3 Seven post-medieval sites are recorded within the Study Area (Sites 11-
17). All but Site 14 are Listed Buildings (of Grade II status). Four of these buildings where built on Church Street: Elm Tree Cottage (Site 11) and the Rippingtons house (Site 12) are both 18th century in date whilst Haystoun House (Site 13) was constructed in c. 1860 and the New Place
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 10
house (Site 15) in 1912. Field Place (Site 16) is located on Huggetts Lane, close to New Place, and was designed by the same local architect, John D Clarke, 12 - 13 years later. The fifth Listed Building is St Mary’s Church (Site 17) on Decoy Drive, beside Hampden Park, which was built between 1952 and 1954. Hampden Park Station was opened in 1888 (Site 14).
5. CARTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE 5.1 The earliest available map of the Site in any great detail dates to c. 1760
when the Site was owned by Sir William Thomas of Ratton in Willingdon. His lands were surveyed at this time by Richard Budgen. However, the map has parts missing and so only the north side of the Site can be observed (Fig. 4). This is a trapezoidal field of pasture called ‘Great Hidney’. Nevertheless, it appears from other surviving parts of the map that the southern half of the Site lay within parkland (Fig. 5; see enclosed land to northeast corner).
5.2 The Ordnance Survey Draft 1-inch map of c1800 (not reproduced) shows
that the Site underwent no apparent change in land use. The north side was still a field whilst the south remained within ‘Ratton Park’.
5.3 Change had still yet to occur by 1842, when the tithe map for the Parish of
Willingdon was drawn up (Fig. 6). The Site now came under the ownership of Inigo Thomas, the grandson of Sir George Thomas. ‘The Great Hidney’ (plot 224) was farmed by Charles Ade as pasture whilst the southern half of the Site (plot 223) continued to be part of the park and was occupied by Arnold Denman. A ditch divides the two areas. Inigo Thomas appears to have owned at least part of the Ratton estate, as he was also the landowner of the sedge plantation (plot 238) and Decoy Pond (plot 239), both of which were part of the estate in c. 1760. Both survive today as The Coppice and Hampden Park.
5.4 The 1st edition OS map of 1875 shows the ditch to the east side to be
well-lined with trees (Fig. 7). A second ditch flows away from the older ditch and through the southeast corner of the Site. It may have served as a field boundary. By 1899, the Park had shrunk in size and no longer covered the field(s) in which the south part of the Site lies (Fig. 8). A road had been built that passed directly in front of the Site. Within a decade, the name of this ‘New Road’ had changed to ‘Brodrick Road’ (Fig. 9). A footpath ran alongside the older ditch. No change occurred again to the Site until the construction on Brodrick Road of ‘Hampden Park Secondary Modern School’ sometime between 1925 and 1962 (Figs. 9-11). A playing field lay directly behind it whilst tennis courts and a small rectangular building had been built to the south of the main drain. This drain now had a footbridge across it and was still clearly in use whilst the other drain, although still visible, appears to have been abandoned. By
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 11
1975, the school (‘Hampden Park County Secondary School’) had extended into the old playing field and two new playing fields had been created to the south of the tennis courts (Fig. 12). The diagonally aligned ditch seems to have been levelled off in the process.
5.5 In conclusion, the predominant land use of the Site since c. 1760 has
been as pasture and parkland. 6. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 6.1 A search was made of the vertical and oblique collections of the National
Library of Air Photographs held at the National Monuments Record Centre, Swindon. The search area comprised a 1km radius circle centred on NGR 559991, 102561. A total of just three vertical prints were available from the NMR collection, spanning the period between 1946 and 1950. Nine vertical prints and one oblique print, dating from 1953 to 1980, had also been requested but could not be located, predominantly because they were not held as contact prints.
Table 1: Vertical Aerial Photographs
Sortie No. Frames Date Scale RAF/106G/UK/1725 4048 10/09/1946 1:10500 RAF/541/535 4270 30/05/1950 1: 10250 RAF/541/535 4271 30/05/1950 1: 10250
Note: The following prints were requested but not obtained: the oblique print CAP8174 and the vertical prints OS/53T42, Frames 152 and 153; OS/53T41, Frames 11 and 12; MAL/62511, Frames 97632-97634; MAL/63635, Frame 121268 and MAL/80002, Frame 75.
6.2 Unfortunately, there was insufficient time to obtain the requested
photographs prior to the deadline set for completion of this report. 7. WALKOVER SURVEY 7.1 A walkover survey by the author was undertaken in respect of the site on
6th August 2009. The weather was good and all external areas of the Site were accessible and inspected.
7.2 The objective of the walkover survey was to identify historic landscape
features not plotted on existing maps, together with other archaeological surface anomalies or artefact scatters, and also to assess the existence of constraints or areas of disturbance that may have impacted the predicted archaeological resource. The walkover survey was rapid, within the parameters of the project, and was not intended as a detailed survey.
7.3 The Site comprises Eastbourne Technology College, some buildings of
which front Brodrick Road, and Hampden Park Sports Centre, which is located behind the school. The buildings are almost wholly confined to
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 12
the north half of the Site, where a basketball court and several car parks are also located. With the land here naturally sloping to the south, it had to be substantially terraced for the construction of the buildings. The grassed over area to the immediate north of the two adjacent car parks appears to be the only area left untouched. The margins of the school and sports centre have been landscaped with grass and a number of trees have been planted on a bank to the east of the sports centre.
7.4 The southern half of the Site is separated from the north by a landscaped
bank of varying height and prominence, at the base of which is a large rectangular area of flat land. This predominantly comprises a playing field but also has tennis courts and a small building. It appears that this area has been reclaimed, with a bed of clay and layer of topsoil having been laid in the early 1960’s (pers. comm. Lindsay Hawkins, Site Estate Manager). On walking down onto the playing field it becomes clear that the Site is overlooked to the west by The Combe (Plate 1). The drain observed as late as 1975 in an OS map (Fig. 11) can no longer be seen, having at some time been converted into a culvert. This runs close to or beneath the bank and also under a concrete slab path beside the tennis courts (Plates 2 and 3). The OS maps also show that the drain followed a field boundary and part of this may still exist today as mature trees of mostly ‘lime’ trees with the odd sycamore (Plate 4). However, the trees stand outside the Site (behind metal fencing erected by Eastbourne Borough) to help define the south perimeter of Lindfield School. The metal fence runs further east to separate the sports centre from the school. The boundary around the rest of the playing field is piecemeal, having been erected by those occupying the houses and flats that adjoin it. The only other mature trees observed around the playing field (two Weeping Willows and an Elm) where found to the southeast. (Plate 5) Their maturity suggests that they may have been present when this part of the Site (the southern part) was located within Ratton Park.
7.5 No evidence of any archaeological or historic landscape features were
observed on the Site.
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 13
8. ASSESSMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL 8.1 A preliminary review of the cultural heritage evidence detailed earlier
indicates that the Site has limited archaeological potential. 8.2 Prehistoric 8.2.1 One findspot of Neolithic date and one barrow site of questionable
Bronze Age date are all that represent the prehistoric period within the Study Area. The ditches recorded on the maps within the southern half of the Site suggest that the land here did not have freely-draining soils, thus it had to be reclaimed in the early 1960’s for use as playing fields. Its wetness may have been more due to the nature of the underlying Gault Clay bedrock, which has the capacity to hold water well and may have created a localised perched water table. However, the slightly elevated position of the Site (particularly of the north half) above the present day marshland levels may suggest that waterlogged deposits, like those found at Shinewater Lake, are unlikely to be found here.
8.2.2 The potential of the Site for this period is low. 8.3 Romano-British 8.3.1 The Study Area has no definite evidence of Romano-British occupation. 8.3.2 The potential of the Site for this period is low.
8.4 Anglo-Saxon 8.4.1 The 11th century church stands directly outside the Study Area, along with
the Anglo-Saxon settlement that presumably developed around it. A cinerary urn of this date is also located close to but within the boundary to the Study Area. Anglo-Saxon activity is known, nevertheless, to have extended into the very centre of the Study Area from the Anglo-Saxon derived place-name evidence for the north half of the Site. If taken literally, the first element of ‘Hydneye’ may suggest that the land here was ploughed. With the Site having been part of a large estate in the post- medieval period, it is highly likely that its origin as such began in Anglo- Saxon times when the Site was probably part of the manor of Ratton.
8.4.2 The potential of the Site for this period is low. 8.5 Medieval 8.5.1 Although the location is not entirely definite, the deserted medieval village
and port of Hydneye is thought to have been sited to the east of the Study Area. Considering its meaning, the village is likely to have adopted the
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 14
place-name from the north half of the Site. One reason for this may be because a trackway over elevated dry land led eastwards directly through or (more probably) past this part of the Site, down to the presumed location of the settlement (note that Maywood Avenue runs along the top of Hydneye field and so it is likely that the route ran here, along the field boundary). That the Site appears to have retained its Anglo-Saxon name suggests great continuity of the Site between the two periods, possibly even in land use. The Site was still probably part of the Ratton manor, which was held by the Count of Mortain after the Conquest.
8.5.2 The potential of the Site for this period is low. 8.6 Post-Medieval 8.6.1 Documentary evidence reveals that the Site was part of an estate owned
by the Parker family at the beginning of the post-medieval period and perhaps also in the late medieval period. The first detailed map from c. 1760 shows the Site to be pasture to the north and parkland to the south. This division of land use continued until sometime between 1875 and 1899, during which time the south part of the Site became farmland and the name Hydneye for the north part was abandoned.
8.6.2 The potential of the Site for this period is low. 8.7 Summary of Potential 8.7.1 A desk-based assessment can generally only consider the potential of a
site in principle. As is the case here, its conclusions usually require testing by fieldwork in order to confirm whether remains are actually present and, if this is the case, to establish their character, condition and extent and thus indicate the weight that ought to be attached to their preservation. It must always be acknowledged that remains of a type for which there is no prior evidence may be found on a site by fieldwork.
8.7.2 The potential for discovery of new sites has been revealed by a review of
known archaeological sites in the immediate vicinity. The estimated potential for sites and/or findspots being located within the appraisal area can be summarised thus:
Prehistoric - Low Romano-British - Low Anglo-Saxon - Low Medieval - Low Post-medieval - Low 8.7.3 To conclude, the Site is considered to lie within an area of generally low
archaeological potential.
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 15
9. EXISTING IMPACTS ON ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL 9.1 The main impact on archaeological potential has been the construction of
the buildings within the northern half of the Site for both the school and sports centre. As the ground here slopes south, much of the land would have required levelling for the buildings, car parks and basketball court. Therefore, the likelihood that any potential archaeology, including that of any depth, has survived in the north half of the Site is probably limited to the small grassed over space to the north of the outlying car parks and the adjacent driveway, where the land still slopes south.
9.2 The south part of the Site is said to have been reclaimed by the laying of
a bed of clay and topsoil (pers. comm. Lindsay Hawkins, Site Estates Manager). Subsequent information gained indirectly from East Sussex County Council, via Andrew Moulson of Miller Bourne Architects, suggests that this half of the Site was a historic landfill site (Fig. 13) depositing ash rather than clay. Geotechnical data commissioned by Eastbourne Borough Council and supplied by the client indicates a mix of general landfill-type rubbish and clay. This made ground varies in depth across the playing field, from3.3m along its northern edge, thinning to 2- 2.4m across the centre and deepening to 4.3m along the southern boundary. The made ground may form a protective buffer above any potential archaeology located beneath, provided it was dumped directly on to the existing ground surface without any prior ground reduction.
10. IMPACT OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 10.1 At this stage the general location and form for the academy are still being
formulated, so the physical impact of the proposed development can only be considered in the broadest terms. Figs. 14-16 show three possibilities for location. Two of the options involve the construction of the academy to the east side of the north half or the Site. Here the existing school buildings may be left to stand (Fig. 14) or almost wholly demolished (Fig. 15). The third identified choice to date is for the academy to be built on the playing field, predominantly to the southwest side (Fig. 16). Development of the playing field is considered less desirable by Eastbourne Borough Council due to environmental issues and consideration for the local inhabitants (pers. comm. Andrew Moulson, Miller Bourne Architects). The sports centre will stand regardless of the final decision on location.
10.2 Most of the north part of the Site has already been levelled and built
upon. Any potential archaeology to survive past construction may hence be entirely located beyond these areas, to the northwest side of the Site. Figs 14 and 15 show that this specific area is currently located outside the development footprint of the buildings. Demolition of the existing buildings may disturb or destroy any potential archaeological deposits
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 16
surviving there due to the possible tracking of heavy machinery across it, for example.
10.3 The playing field is masked by a thick layer of made ground. The impact
of any groundworks in this area will be dependant on whether the made ground is to be removed, and whether the ground beneath is undisturbed. Footing trenches and service runs through the original ground surface following the removal of the made ground will have a greater potential adverse impact than piled footings sunk through the made ground.
11. RECOMMENDATIONS 11.1 The Site has been shown to have a low potential for containing
archaeological deposits, based on current evidence. The evidence suggests that the Site’s history prior to the construction of the current buildings was as open, probably arable fields and, latterly, historic parkland. The Site lies on the Greensand shelf at the foot of the chalk scarp - the historic character of this landscape is generally that of small nucleated settlements surrounded by enclosed fields of medieval origin. The presence of medieval sites to the east, south and west of the Site would seem to conform to this pattern. Nevertheless, the presence of archaeological deposits within the Site cannot be ruled out. It should be borne in mind that the locations of prehistoric or Romano-British settlement sites and field systems may have borne little relationship to later ones.
11.2 A number of preliminary recommendations will be offered in this section
to provide a suggested framework for future mitigation. It should be stressed at this point that suggested ground plans are the only details currently available for any proposed site development, so the full ground- level impact can only be considered in the broadest terms. The recommended response can be divided into two phases for both sides of the Site. All of the following comments should be discussed with East Sussex County Council Archaeological Officers.
11.3 North Side of Site
If the location option for the academy involves the demolition of most of the school, it is recommended that a limited programme of trial trenching should take place in the northwest corner of the school grounds to determine the presence or absence of archaeological deposits. The footprint of the existing school does not merit any archaeological works, having been built upon levelled ground. Trial trenching is a cost-effective method of quickly determining the presence or absence of archaeological deposits.
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
11.4 South Side of Site
The playing fields have received some substantial landscaping in recent history – however, this appears to have included ground levelling through the dumping of material, implying that original ground surfaces may survive intact beneath, although this is not known for certain. The mitigation will depend on the foundation design. If significant groundworks are planned after removal of the made ground, then a limited programme of trial trenching should take place to confirm the presence or absence of archaeological deposits.
11.5 The evaluation to each side of the Site should be to a suitable sample
size agreed with ESCC. Information provided by this initial phase of works can then be used to formulate an appropriate level of further mitigation as appropriate.
Archaeology South-East Proposed Eastbourne Academy Site, Eastbourne
________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________ 18
12. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Archaeology South-East would like to thank the following for their help
and advice in the preparation of this report: Ian Henham, Miller Bourne Architects Andrew Moulson, Miller Bourne Architects Greg Chuter, Assistant County Archaeologist, East Sussex County
Council Lindsay Hawkins, Site Estates Manager, Eastbourne Technology College Angharad Wicks, NMR enquiry and Research Services - Archaeology and
Aerial Photography East Sussex Record Office
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
NGR 559991, 102561
Prepared for Miller Bourne Architects
A Desk Based Assessment has been prepared for the proposed Eastbourne Academy site, Brodrick Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex. The Site is currently occupied by Eastbourne Technology College and Hampden Park Sports Centre. The proposed development will probably be confined to the northeast which has been heavily built upon already. However, this part of the Site has been largely levelled in modern times for the construction of the school and sports centre. Geotechnical data indicates that the playing fields were used for dumping landfill in the 1960s to a depth of 2-4m. The Site has been assessed as having low potential for containing archaeological remains for every period.
PLATES