Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold

ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD EVALUATION, LANGOLD

Written Scheme of Investigation for Archaeological Field Evaluation

Prepared for: Gleeson Developments limited

SLR Ref: 406.03044.00190 Version No: 3 December 2020 Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

BASIS OF REPORT

This document has been prepared by SLR Consulting Limited with reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the manpower, timescales and resources devoted to it by agreement with Gleeson Developments Limited (the Client) as part or all of the services it has been appointed by the Client to carry out. It is subject to the terms and conditions of that appointment.

SLR shall not be liable for the use of or reliance on any information, advice, recommendations and opinions in this document for any purpose by any person other than the Client. Reliance may be granted to a third party only in the event that SLR and the third party have executed a reliance agreement or collateral warranty.

Information reported herein may be based on the interpretation of public domain data collected by SLR, and/or information supplied by the Client and/or its other advisors and associates. These data have been accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid.

The copyright and intellectual property in all drawings, reports, specifications, bills of quantities, calculations and other information set out in this report remain vested in SLR unless the terms of appointment state otherwise.

This document may contain information of a specialised and/or highly technical nature and the Client is advised to seek clarification on any elements which may be unclear to it.

Information, advice, recommendations and opinions in this document should only be relied upon in the context of the whole document and any documents referenced explicitly herein and should then only be used within the context of the appointment.

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

CONTENTS

1.0 SUMMARY ...... 1

2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND SITE DESCRIPTION...... 2 2.1 Development and Planning ...... 2 2.2 Location and Historical background ...... 2

3.0 GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS ...... 4 3.1 Aims and Objectives ...... 4 3.2 Regional Research Frameworks ...... 4 3.3 Variation to this WSI ...... 4 3.4 Personnel ...... 5 3.5 Standards ...... 6 3.6 Monitoring by the Planning Archaeologist ...... 7 3.7 Programme ...... 7 3.8 OASIS Record ...... 7 3.9 Health and Safety ...... 7

4.0 FIELDWORK METHODOLOGY ...... 8 4.1 Fieldwork ...... 8 4.1.1 Trial Trenches ...... 8 4.1.2 Feature Excavation ...... 9 4.1.3 Recording ...... 10 4.1.4 Environmental Sampling ...... 10 4.1.5 Artefacts and Ecofacts ...... 10 4.1.6 Treasure ...... 11 4.1.7 Human Remains ...... 11

5.0 ASSESSMENT, REPORT AND ARCHIVE ...... 12 5.1 Processing and Assessment ...... 12 5.2 Samples ...... 12 5.3 Report Review and Circulation ...... 12 5.4 Short Full Archive Report ...... 12 5.5 Interim Summary Report ...... 12 5.6 Assessment Report ...... 13 5.7 Full Archive Report ...... 13 5.8 Archive ...... 14 5.8.1 General ...... 14

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

5.8.2 Physical archive ...... 15 5.8.3 OASIS Record ...... 15 5.8.4 Digital Archive ...... 15

DOCUMENT REFERENCES

FIGURES Figure 1 Site Location ...... 3

DRAWING Drawing 1: Trial trench layout

APPENDIX Geophysical Report-ARS

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

1.0 Summary

This ‘written scheme of investigation’ (‘WSI’) for archaeological work is provided to assist Gleeson Developments Limited (‘the client’) with the discharge of a planning condition relating to the development of a site for up to 165 houses at Hodsock, Langold, Nottinghamshire off the A60 (‘the Site’). The proposed groundworks have the potential to harm or destroy any archaeological remains present. The WSI proposes archaeological work in the form of: • the excavation of trial trenches forming 3% coverage of the Site footprint; • an Interim Summary Report summarising the results of the evaluation; • potential mitigation, potentially in the form of further archaeological excavation; and • any further proportionate assessment, analysis, reporting and archiving in accordance with the requirements of the planning archaeologist.

Page 1

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

2.0 Project background and Site description

2.1 Development and Planning The development of the land was originally proposed by the landowner under application 17/01462/OUT, which received outline planning permission in 2017. The Client made a subsequent application in July 2020 with respect to the matters reserved under the outline permission, condition 11 of which required that: ‘No development shall take place on any phase of development until the applicant or successors in title has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological works for that phase in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the scheme shall be implemented in full accordance with the approved details.’1

2.2 Location and Historical background The Site is centred on National Grid reference 458888, 387589 / SK 58888 87589 (Figure 1), and is situated just off the A60 north of Langold village. It lies at around 30m AOD with a gentle slope to the east on an outcrop of Dolostone similar to that of the Cadeby formation to the west. It covers an area of c.7.5ha. A desk-based assessment for the development prepared by Phil Sidebottom Archaeological Consultancy2 identified a single known heritage asset within the Site, a Post-Medieval field boundary identified in aerial photography. The surrounding area has numerous known heritage assets, including Oldcotes Roman Villa around 1 km from the site and cropmark features in surrounding fields which are potentially indicative of Roman or Iron Age features. There is a growing body of evidence in general for occupation on the Dolostone in the Roman period, including recent excavations by SLR Consulting Ltd in Bolsover which revealed a Romano British enclosure. A geophysical survey on the Site conducted by ARS identified potential linear features (see Appendix 1) and evidence of Medieval and Post-Medieval field systems. The field itself was enclosed by 1805.

______1 17/01462/OUT, Bassetlaw Planning Portal 2 Sidebottom, P 2016: An Archaeological Desktop Assessment of land off Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire.

Page 2

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

Figure 1 Site Location

The Local Planning Authority is Bassetlaw District Council and their archaeological advisor (referred to in this document as the ‘planning archaeologist’) is Matthew Adams of Lincolnshire County Council. This document sets out the approach to the required archaeological work, comprising in outline: • the excavation of trial trenches forming 3% coverage of the footprint of the proposed works; • an Interim Summary Report summarising the results of the evaluation; • potential mitigation in the form of further archaeological excavation; and: • proportionate assessment, analysis, reporting and archiving in accordance with the requirements of the planning archaeologist.

Page 3

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

3.0 General Arrangements

3.1 Aims and Objectives Aims The investigation will address the following aims: • Test the results of geophysical survey and desk study to confirm whether archaeological remains survive within the development area; and • to assess significance and analyse the results of the investigation, interpret, report and disseminate the results at a standard proportional to their heritage significance Objectives • to establish the general deposit sequence on the site; • to establish the extent, nature and date of any man-made archaeological features or remains which may be present on the site;

• to undertake post-excavation analysis of the records, artefacts and samples recovered during the work to produce a report for submission to the local planning authority;

• to deposit an archive of site records, reports and artefacts with an appropriate body; and • disseminate the results of the work in appropriate venues..

3.2 Regional Research Frameworks The Midlands Regional Research Frameworks3 identify in their Research Agenda 5.4 Rural Settlement Patterns and Landscape and 5.5 Agricultural Economy 11 research topics that would apply to this investigation at Langold, assuming that the proximity of other Romano-British remains indicate that the geophysical anomalies are of Roman date. The results from this site investigation could help further our understanding of: • How and why did settlement forms and building traditions vary within the region and over time? • How did rural settlements relate to each other and to towns and military sites, and how may this have varied regionally and over time? • How did field and boundary systems relate to earlier systems of land allotment, and how did these boundary networks develop over time? • What patterns can be discerned in the location of settlements in the landscape? • What can we learn about the daily life of settlements and their role in the processing and marketing of agricultural products? • Can we chart more closely the processes of agricultural intensification and expansion and the development of field systems?

3.3 Variation to this WSI Any variation to this WSI required in the light of developing information will be subject to the approval of the planning archaeologist and the client

______

3 Knight, D., Vyner, B., and Allen, C., 2012 East Midlands Heritage : An Updated Research Agenda and Strategy for the Historic Environment of the East Midlands, Nottingham Archaeological Monographs 6

Page 4

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

3.4 Personnel The anticipated project personnel are set out in Table 1.

Table 1 Key personnel Role Name Contact details

Planning Matthew Adams Historic Environment Officer archaeologist Lincolnshire County Council Lancaster House 36 Orchard Street Lincoln LN1 1XX Tel: 01522 554823 / 07880 420 410 [email protected]

Project manager Tim Malim Technical Director SLR Consulting

Hermes House, Oxon Business Park Shrewsbury SY3 5HJ Tel:01743 239250/07776 183399

Lead Consultant Gavin Kinsley Principal Archaeologist SLR Consulting Floor 2, 15 High Pavement Nottingham NG1 7DX Tel: 07796 050308/0115 964 7280

Excavation Harry Towers Project Archaeologist director SLR Consulting Floor 2, 15 High Pavement Report author Nottingham NG1 7DX Tel: 07471 032 908 / 0115 964 7280

Excavation staff Suitably experienced Through SLR

On-site and off- SLR expertise, Trent & Specialists would be sub-contracted from Trent & Peak site specialist Peak Archaeology (TPA) Archaeology; the key specialists likely to be involved assessment and and other organizations are: analysis as appropriate Palaeoenvironmental / geoarchaeology: Dr Kristina Krawiec, specialist over five years at TPA Samples processing and archaeobotany: Stacey Adams recently with TPA, formerly with UCL since 2016

Page 5

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

Role Name Contact details

Post-excavation manager – Alison Wilson, TPA Prehistoric pottery - Sarah Percival - long-established specialist in prehistoric pottery analysis including East Midlands; Roman pottery - Jerry Evans - self employed finds specialist since 1992. Regional Roman pottery studies with a particular interest on Northern Roman Britain; Medieval & Post-medieval pottery - Chris Cumberpatch - freelance specialist in regional post-Roman ceramics since 1991; Bone - Kris Poole - PhD, Specialist in zooarchaeology working for TPA since 2002, animal bone from all periods; Human bone – Victoria Owen - Specialist in human bone analysis working for TPA; CBM - Phil Mills - freelance specialist in CBM and Romano-British pot since 2000; and RB/Med metalwork - Quita Mould - Freelance specialist reporting on leather and small metal finds from all periods since 1981. Lithic Specialist: George Nash, Principal, SLR Consulting, MCIfA

Destination Bassetlaw Museum Amcott House repository 40 Grove Street Retford DN22 6LD Tel: 01777 713749

3.5 Standards SLR and TPA are Registered Organisations with the CIfA (Chartered Institute for Archaeologists), which is an audited status ensuring compliance with their published standards and guidance. The WSI has been compiled in accordance CIfA standards and guidance4. SLR operates a quality assurance system confirming to ISO 9001.

______4 Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 2014: Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Field Evaluation and Standard and Guidance for Archaeological Excavation

Page 6

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

3.6 Monitoring by the Planning Archaeologist All archaeological work will be monitored by the planning archaeologist, directly on site and / or through summary reports and telephone / email with SLR as appropriate. The planning archaeologist will be updated by SLR as appropriate as the work proceeds and will be invited to visit the site by prior arrangement through SLR during the fieldwork in order to discuss any issues raised with SLR. The planning archaeologist’s monitoring is expected to include: • review email and telephone progress reports from the consultant; • if results merit it: one or more site visits to confirm the fieldwork is being undertaken in accordance with the WSI and discuss the findings and the approach to further work; and • review and discussion of all reports and archives drafts before submission.

3.7 Programme The fieldwork programme has yet to be determined. It is considered likely that fieldwork may commence in early January 2021. Interim updates will be provided to the planning archaeologist by SLR during site visits or by email and telephone as appropriate. The reporting programme will be confirmed following the completion of the fieldwork.

3.8 OASIS Record An OASIS record will be set up by SLR at the commencement of the project and completed along with the archive.

3.9 Health and Safety All work will be in accordance with all relevant health and safety procedures including those set out in:

• the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and related legislation;

• the Federation of Archaeological Managers and Employers (FAME) online H&S advice service Quest;

• the Council for British Archaeology Handbook no. 6, Safety in Archaeological Fieldwork (1989); and

• the SLR Health and Safety Handbook.

A Risk Assessment will be produced by SLR Consulting. These documents will be sent for the approval of the Client as CDM manager and will be read, acknowledged and followed by all SLR staff and their sub-contractors on site.

Page 7

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

4.0 Fieldwork Methodology

4.1 Fieldwork

4.1.1 Trial Trenches Layout 22 trial trenches will be mechanically excavated as per the layout in Drawing 01. All trenches will be 1.8m in width at trench floor level; areas and lengths at trench floor level are shown in Table 2. Their distribution is designed to capture potential features identified in the geophysical survey and provide coverage of other areas of potential archaeology. Their combined area is 1890 m2, covering c.3% of the Site. This is considered a sufficient sample size to address the aims and objectives of the project.

Table 2 Trial trench numbers, area (sqm) and lengths (m)

Trench no Area Length 01 90 50 02 90 50 03 90 50 04 90 50 05 90 50 06 90 50 07 90 50 08 90 50 09 90 50 10 90 50 11 90 50 12 90 50 13 90 50 14 90 50 15 90 50 16 90 50 17 90 50 18 45 25 19 45 25 20 90 50

Page 8

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

Trench no Area Length 21 90 50 22 90 50 Totals 1890 1050

There may need to be variations in trench locations should further constraints such as undocumented utilities be identified on site. Depths depend on the presence of a ploughsoil or brown earth soil above the Dolostone bedrock, which in places may be around 1m (previous SLR excavations in Bolsover and Palterton have shown a similar depth of soils above Dolostone). In the absence of buried soil bedrock may be as shallow as 0.2m BGL. Selected Trial Pits Excavation of a selection of the trial trenches will commence with a trial pit dug down to, and into if necessary, the natural geology to determine the correct excavation depth for trial trenches; this information will guide the planning of the trench excavation and provide evidence of any sub-topsoil deposit sequence, such as alluvial or colluvial deposition. This process may be omitted once sufficient understanding of the site deposit sequence has been achieved. Trial Trenches Following the trial-pits and in other trenches without pits, initial mechanical excavation of the trial trenches will be carried out in the following stages, under continuous archaeological control using a machine fitted with a back-acting toothless bucket to expose the surface of the Dolostone bedrock, which may be weathered to a sand or clay in places. Where an intermediate non-recent overburden is present (such as a ploughsoil), the machine will be used to clear the surface of the horizon to allow checking for archaeological features before proceeding with deeper excavation. Any archaeological features present will be investigated and recorded as set out in the remainder of this section. The results will be assessed in order to identify the areas of the site where there is little or no likelihood of the survival of archaeological remains, and these will be reported to the planning archaeologist. Should there be areas of significant archaeological features or deposits which will be affected by the development groundworks, mitigation will be required. This is to be agreed with the planning archaeologist and may be in the form of a wider ‘area excavation’ within the footprint of the proposed groundworks and where archaeological remains would be affected, or through development design modifications if practicable. Depending on the results of the trial trenches the areas could be quite extensive. Any mitigation work will be set out in an addendum to this WSI and will include location plans. It may require specific additions to the methodology following consultation.

4.1.2 Feature Excavation Within the trial trenches exposed archaeological features will be investigated in accordance with the project aims and objectives to the approval of the planning archaeologist. Provisionally the following scope will be applied:

• discrete features half-sectioned, except that larger features may receive a smaller amount of hand- excavation by agreement with the planning archaeologist; • with the agreement of the planning archaeologist, larger features may be part-excavated by machine under archaeological control, if necessary;

Page 9

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

• linear features will have investigative excavations (of a minimum length of 1m) distributed along the exposed length and to investigate terminals, and junctions with other features where necessary to determine the sequence; • a minimum 1m sample length of one long face of archaeologically-significant stratigraphy in each trench and area will be cleaned by hand to allow the site stratigraphy to be understood and recorded; • the investigation of features at the edge of excavations will include hand cleaning of the significant stratigraphy in the trench side above the feature, to record and gain understanding of the overlying stratigraphy. Should the above scope of excavation not yield sufficient information to allow the form and function of archaeological features/deposits to be determined, further excavation of such features/deposits may be required. If excavations reveal a substantial number of repetitive discrete features, such as stake-holes, these may be adequately sampled by excavation to understand their character rather than the complete excavation of all such features. Any variation of the above will be undertaken only in agreement with the planning archaeologist.

4.1.3 Recording The areas containing no significant archaeological features will be recorded in photographs and as written descriptions of deposit depths below surface. Wider areas will be recorded by text and drawings through use of proformas, plus suitably scaled plans and sections (a site plan and more detailed plans at 1:50, 1:20 and 1:10 as appropriate). Site photography will be provided in colour digital formats. Digital images will be captured on an SLR camera at a minimum resolution of 10 mega-pixels and saved as high quality .jpg files. The precise location of the excavated trenches, areas and baselines for hand-measurements will be recorded by survey grade differential GPS or total station as appropriate.

4.1.4 Environmental Sampling Deposit samples will be taken with the guidance of the project palaeo-environmental specialist in accordance with Historic England guidelines. Bulk samples of 40 litres or 100% of <40l features will be taken for flotation and subsequent recovery of charred plant remains and associated small bones or industrial debris. Initial assessment may consist of 10 litre sub samples from waterlogged deposits will be wet sieved and examined for biological remains in particular and 5 litre sub-samples from dry deposits to assess the potential of each sample. Samples worthy of further work will be fully processed. Issues to be addressed through sampling would include chronological and spatial variation and feature type within the site sequence. It is not anticipated that significant waterlogged deposits or deeply stratified remains will be widespread on this site, but if unexpected remains are uncovered a detailed strategy for their sampling and recording will be devised by the palaeo-environmental specialist in consultation with the planning archaeologist and the Client. It is not expected that pollen will be preserved on this geological formation and no pollen samples will be taken unless potential areas of special preservation are identified. If unusual remains are found it may be necessary to consult the Historic England Science Advisor.

4.1.5 Artefacts and Ecofacts All artefacts will be labelled, packed and stored in appropriate materials and conditions to ensure that no deterioration occurs. All artefact/ecofact processing and storage will be carried out in accordance with UKIC (United Kingdom Institute for Conservation) guidelines and will accord with the CIfA 2014 Standard and Guidance

Page 10

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020 for the collection, documentation, conservation and research of archaeological materials and Archaeological Archives: A Guide to best practice in creation, compilation, transfer and curation (2007).

4.1.6 Treasure The 1996 Act sets out the precious metal content required for a find to qualify as treasure; and it extends the definition of treasure to include other objects found in archaeological association with finds of treasure. Six categories of object are now classed as treasure:

• any object other than a coin which is at least 10% silver or gold by weight and more than 300 years old. • any coins that are at least 10% silver or gold by weight and come from a single find, provided the find contains at least two coins with a gold or silver content of at least 10%. The coins must be at least 300 years old at the time of discovery. Where finds consist of coins that are less than 10% gold or silver by weight, there must be at least 10 coins in the find and they must be at least 300 years old at the time of discovery for the find to be considered treasure. • any object, of whatever, composition, that is found in the same place as, or that had previously been together with, another object that is treasure. • any object (other than a coin), any part of which is base metal, which, when found is one of at least two base metal objects in the same find which are of prehistoric date; • any object, (other than a coin) which is of prehistoric date, and any part of which is gold or silver. • any object that would previously have been treasure trove but does not fall within the specific categories given above. If any objects are recovered that are deemed to potentially qualify as treasure, the archaeological contractor will inform the client and consult with the appropriate Finds Liaison Officer to determine the object’s status. Objects that qualify as treasure will be notified to the local coroner within fourteen days of discovery, in accordance with The Treasure Act 1996 Code of Practice and its amendment. The Treasure will initially be deposited with the Finds Liaison Officer. Intentional non-reporting can lead to imprisonment for up to three months, a fine of up to £5,000 (level 5), or both. Occupiers and landowners have the right to be informed of finds of treasure from their land and that they will be eligible for any rewards.

4.1.7 Human Remains Any human remains identified will be initially left in situ until the relevant authorities have been informed of the discovery and any necessary licenses arranged, in accordance with the provisions of Section 25 of the Burial Act of 1857.

Page 11

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

5.0 Assessment, Report and Archive

Subject to the approval of the planning archaeologist the assessment and reporting detailed in this section may be carried out on parts of the excavation area in order to meet the Client’s development programme.

5.1 Processing and Assessment Immediately upon completion of the fieldwork, the field records will be tidied, checked, amended and completed as necessary. These records will include digital surveys, any other digital record, hand-written, drawn, and photographic records, and all artefacts, ecofacts and samples. Where the results are sufficiently complex to merit it, a site sequence-matrix will be prepared for each area to include all contexts identified. All finds recovered during the fieldwork will be washed, marked, bagged and labelled as a minimum according to the individual deposit from which they were recovered. Samples and artefacts will be sent for external specialist assessment as necessary.

5.2 Samples A full record of all samples taken will be made on site. Dating samples will be sent to an appropriately accredited dating facility.

5.3 Report Review and Circulation Prior to general circulation, copies of each report generated will be provided to:

• the client; • the planning archaeologist; and • the relevant archaeological specialists.

SLR will take into account any observations on the content of the draft report made by the Client and the planning archaeologist before the final version is issued.

5.4 Short Full Archive Report Should there be no discoveries of archaeological significance a short full archive report would be provided summarising the methodology, the areas inspected and lack of finds with brief discussion of the archaeological significance of the results. The report would be uploaded to the OASIS record and no archive deposited with the destination repository. Otherwise staged reporting will be provided with up to three stages, as appropriate, as set out in the remainder of this sub-section.

5.5 Interim Summary Report Where there are discoveries of archaeological significance, within four weeks of completion of the fieldwork, an Interim Summary Report will be completed. The Report will contain:

• mapping of locations of all fieldwork and a summary of any features found; and • a written summary of the results of the fieldwork and an appraisal of their significance.

Page 12

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

5.6 Assessment Report Where there are discoveries of archaeological significance, such as from an excavation undertaken as mitigation for the development impact, an Assessment Report will be provided. Appropriately selected palaeoenvironmental samples will be assessed and reported on by appropriate specialist palaeoenvironmental sub-contractors. Artefacts will be assessed to provide dating, social, economic, and technological information. Special or unusual features would be highlighted and reference made to other material recovered from the immediate environs of the site. The requirements for artefact conservation will be assessed and discussed with a specialist conservator. Where appropriate, within six months of completion of the fieldwork a detailed post-excavation Assessment Report will be completed. It will contain at least:

• a non-technical summary • the project’s planning background, locational details, and geological and archaeological context • the aims of the fieldwork and the methods employed • the nature, location, extent, date, significance and quality of any archaeological and environmental material uncovered • the nature and location of any subsoil deposits encountered • the remaining archaeological potential of the area after construction • suitable illustration in drawings and photographs, including a site location plan, a location plan of the monitoring locations, and where appropriate, larger-scale plans and sections of individual watching-brief areas and features • specialist assessments of finds and environmental samples stating the range, quality and significance of the material with proposals for further detailed analysis where appropriate • outline recommendations for sampling strategies during any further fieldwork stages of the project • a list of the archive contents and details of the provision for its long-term storage, including any palaeoenvironmental samples taken • the significance of the results in relation to the project aims, and any relevance they may have in terms of the East Midlands Historic Environment Research Framework, and any comments on further work required to complete the project.

5.7 Full Archive Report Where there are discoveries of archaeological significance, there could be a further stage of analysis resulting from the assessments prior to completion of the Full Archive Report and Archive. Proposals for this further analysis will be made and an updated project design and resourcing statement agreed with the archaeological regulators. Synthetic publication and dissemination will be in both academic and popular forms. The Full Archive Report will contain the Assessment Report with any further specialist analyses incorporated. A report detailed as appropriate to the significance of the findings will be offered for publication to the appropriate archaeological journal.

Page 13

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

5.8 Archive

5.8.1 General The archive will comply with the guidance set out in Table 3.

Table 3 Guidance on Archiving Procedures

Organisation Year Title United Kingdom Institute for 1990 Guidelines for the Preparation of Excavation Archives for Conservation (Archaeology Long-Term Storage Section) (UKIC) Society of Museum 1995 Towards An Accessible Archive Archaeologists (SMA) Archaeological Archives Forum 2007 Archaeological Archives: A guide to best practice in (AAF) (revised creation, compilation, transfer and curation 2011) Museum and Galleries 1992 Standards in the Museum Care of Archaeological Commission (MGC) Collections

Digital data: on line http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/advice/guidelinesForDepositors Archaeology Data Service (ADS) and http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/advice/selectionGuidance

As appropriate the Archive Report, field records, artefacts, ecofacts, photographs and any other records and materials generated during the fieldwork will be sorted and ordered in accordance with the procedures in Transfer of Archives, and any additional local requirements, for long term storage and curation. The project archive might consist of all original records, artefacts, ecofacts/samples and all documentation that relates to the archaeological works and a list of contents. The archives would be prepared according to the methodology set out in MAP2 and Creation of Archives. SLR in conjunction with the planning archaeologist will jointly endeavour to get the agreement of the landowner to the deposition of the full site archive, and transfer of title, to the Archaeological Service. In accordance with Section 4 of Archaeological Archives, and in consultation with the planning archaeologist, a rigorous process of selection and discard would be followed so that only those elements that are considered of significance for potential future study will be retained. Bulk items such as ceramic building materials, stonework, large quantities of undiagnostic pottery, and material that is difficult and costly to conserve such as worked wood, may be selected for discard once appropriate recording and analysis has been undertaken, on site or in the laboratory at the post-excavation stage. Detailed discard proposals must be agreed by NCC prior to implementation. Where artefacts or ecofacts have been recovered during the investigation the owner will be contacted to arrange legal transfer of title to the receiving museum. The transfer of title would be affected by a standard letter supplied to the landowner for signature.

Page 14

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

5.8.2 Physical archive The physical archive including artefacts and ecofacts will be offered for permanent storage in the destination repository (see Table 1). The Planning Archaeologist and SLR will jointly try to persuade the owner to donate the artefacts by means of a Transfer of Title form. Temporary storage pending deposition would be with SLR for a period of up to five years after which responsibility for its maintenance would cease; if by this time no repository has accepted to take the material, then it would be returned to the client or some alternative option applied.

5.8.3 OASIS Record As noted above, the OASIS entry will be completed within 3 months of the completion of the archive. The OASIS entry will host the reports generated in PDF format.

5.8.4 Digital Archive The archive will be fully indexed and contain: • all ‘born-digital’ data such as images, survey data, digital correspondence and site data collected digitally • digital copies of • field records including potentially: ▪ site notebooks/diaries; ▪ photographs and photograph record sheets; ▪ drawings and drawing record sheets; ▪ context records; ▪ original finds records; • all post-fieldwork records including potentially: ▪ records of conservation and radiographs taken; ▪ sample records; ▪ other records including copies of correspondence relating to fieldwork; ▪ contractor’s survey reports (e.g. borehole, geophysical, documentary); and ▪ reports as issued. As appropriate the digital archive may be deposited with the Archaeology Data Service (ADS) within 6 months of the completion of the reporting and archiving. Alternative arrangements may be made with the agreement of the planning archaeologist. SLR Consulting Ltd would inform the planning archaeologist upon the deposition of the digital archive with the ADS.

Page 15

Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

DRAWING 1

Trial trench layout

Page 1

LEGEND

APPLICATION BOUNDARY

EVALUATION TRENCH GEOPHYSICS

EAST WEST R&F

MODERN SERVICE

POSSIBLE ARCHAEOLOGY

PROBABLE AGRICULTURE

PROBABLE ARCHAEOLOGY

PROBABLE DRAIN/BOUNDARY

2nd and 3rd FLOORS 15 MIDDLE PAVEMENT NOTTINGHAM NG1 7DX 3 T: +44 (0) 115 964 7280 A _ t www.slrconsulting.com u o y a l LANGOLD EVALUATION _ h c n ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD EVALUATION e r t _

1 TRIAL TRENCH LAYOUT _ 0 9 1

0 DRAWING 01 0 . 4

4 Scale Date 0 1:1,600 @A3 3 DECEMBER 2020

0 Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2020 Metres © This drawing and its content are the copyright of SLR Consulting Ltd and may not be reproduced or amended except by prior written permission. SLR Consulting Ltd accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons. Gleeson Developments Limited Archaeological Field Evaluation, Langold: WSI SLR Ref No: 406.03044.00190 Filename: 201202_406.03044.00190_Langold_WSI_text_rev3 December 2020

APPENDIX 1

Geophysical Survey

Page 1

Geophysical Survey of land east of Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire

View looking south across field 2

ARS Ltd Report 2017/112 October 2017 Compiled By: Richard Durkin

Archaeological Research Services Ltd Angel House Portland Square Bakewell DE45 1HB

Checked By: Robin Holgate MCIfA Tel: 01629 814540 Fax: 01629 814657

[email protected] www.archaeologicalresearchservices.com

Geophysical Survey of land east of Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire

Contents Page Executive Summary ……………………………………………………………………….……….…… 2 1.0 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………..…… 3 1.1 Background ……………………………………………………….………….... 3 1.2 Location, Topography and Geology …………….……..…………... 3 2.0 Archaeological Background……………………………………………………………………. 3 3.0 Methodology ……………………………………………………………………………….…..…... 3 4.0 Geophysical Survey Results …………………………………………………….….….……... 4 4.1 Introduction …………………………………………………….…………..…. 4 4.2 Anomalies…….…..……………………………………………..……….….…. 5 5 Discussion and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………...... 6 6 Archive deposition……………………………………………………………………………………. 6 7 Publicity, Confidentiality and Copyright …………………………….…………………….. 6 8 Statement of Indemnity …….……………………………………………………………….……. 6 9 Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………………………...…. 7 10 References ………………………………………………………………………………………….….. 7 Appendix 1: Figures ...... 8

List of Figures

Figure 1. Site location. Figure 2. Location of survey grids. Figure 3. Greyscale shade plot of processed gradiometer data. Figure 4. Interpretative plan. Figure 5. Trace plot field 1. Figure 5. Trace plot field 2.

Geophysical Survey of land east of Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents the results of a geophysical survey undertaken on land east of Doncaster Road in Langold Nottinghamshire. A geophysical survey was carried out in August 2017 to accompany a planning application for a residential housing development. The proposed development area (PDA) includes two agricultural fields and comprises an area of 7.56 hectares. The ground conditions were suitable for geophysical survey and the instrument chosen was a Bartington Grad 601 dual sensor fluxgate gradiometer.

The results of the geophysical survey, in terms of the quality and integrity of the data, are considered to be accurate and reliable. The results have not revealed any definite evidence of previously unrecorded archaeological remains within the PDA but have revealed a number of anomalies of possible archaeological origin in addition to the probable remains of a post- Medieval field boundary and agriculture. As the PDA is located on the Magnesian Limestone Ridge, a region which provides evidence for settlement from most periods yet has been subjected to continual agricultural practices (Sidebottom 2016), the anomalies which cannot be interpreted with any certainty may indicate the presence of truncated archaeological remains.

Geophysical Survey of land east of Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1.1.1 Archaeological Research Services Ltd (ARS Ltd) was commissioned by JVH Town Planning Consultants Ltd on behalf of Mrs Neave to undertake a geophysical survey of land east of Doncaster Road, Langold in Nottinghamshire. This is to accompany a planning application for a proposed residential housing development. The proposed development area (PDA) is centred at SK 58870 87607 and covers an area of 7.56 ha (Figure 1).

1.1.2 The objective of the geophysical survey was to identify any anomalies of archaeological origin within the PDA in order to identify and record the presence/absence, location, nature and extent of any surviving below-ground archaeological remains.

1.2 Location, Topography and Geology

1.2.1 The PDA comprises two generally flat arable fields (fields 1 and 2, Fig. 1). Both fields had recently been harvested; field 1 was under stubble and field 2 had been cultivated. The fields sit at approximately 30m AOD and are generally featureless.

1.2.2 Field 1 is bounded by the metalled track to Goldthorpe Farm to the north; the field boundary between fields 1 and 2 to the south; the remainder of the same field to the east and to the west a narrow strip of woodland with Doncaster Road beyond. Field 2 is bounded by the field boundary between fields 1 and 2 to the north; the remainder of the same field to the east; back gardens to properties on Goldthorpe Avenue and Goldthorpe Close to the south and to the west a narrow strip of woodland with Doncaster Road beyond.

1.2.3 The underlying solid geology consists of Dolomitised Limestone And Dolomite of the Zechstein Group - Sedimentary Bedrock formed approximately 251 to 271 million years ago in the Permian Period and commonly referred to as Magnesian Limestone (British Geological Survey 2017).

2.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

2.1 A full and detailed archaeological background is contained within the accompanying Archaeological Desktop Assessment of land off Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire (Sidebottom 2016).

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Magnetometry is a non-intrusive scientific prospecting technique that is the preferred geophysical technique used to determine the presence or absence of

Geophysical Survey of land east of Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire

buried archaeological features when site and geological conditions are favourable. It is an efficient and effective method for locating anomalies corresponding with archaeological features. The instrument chosen for this survey was a Bartington Grad 601 dual sensor fluxgate gradiometer which can detect weak changes in the Earth’s magnetic field caused by buried features.

3.2 All fieldwork and reporting was undertaken following Historic England and Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) standards and guidance (Gaffney et al . 2008; CIfA 2014a; 2014b).

3.3 The 30m by 30m survey grids were located to cover both fields in turn and aligned as shown in Figure 2. In total 98 survey grids, including partial grids, were set out and accurately positioned using a Leica Zeno 10 GNSS field controller with GS05 antenna cap which was connected to Leica Smartnet to receive corrections resulting in an accuracy of typically 0.6m or better. Each grid was then surveyed at 1m traverse intervals with the sampling at 0.25m (4 readings per metre) intervals. The survey was carried out in ‘zigzag’ mode with each alternate traverse walked in opposite directions. The range of the instrument was set at 100nT (0.01nT resolution).

3.4 The geophysical survey of field 1 was conducted between 8th and 10 th August; initially in heavy rain and then in dry and mild weather conditions on the final two days. The geophysical survey of field 2 was conducted between 29 th and 30 th August in dry and mild weather conditions. The ground conditions in both fields were suitable for geophysical survey.

3.5 Prior to commencing the survey the gradiometer was balanced and calibrated to the local conditions and this was repeated regularly throughout each day. At the end of each day the data was downloaded into a computer, checked and archived on the ARS Ltd server. The data was downloaded using Bartington Instruments’ Grad 601 Communication Application.

4.0 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY RESULTS

4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 The data was minimally processed using Geoplot software. The data was “clipped” (clipping parameters selected on the mean and standard deviation data values), “de- staggered” and the striping that can often appear in gradiometer data was removed by utilising the “zero mean traverse” function with thresholds applied. Finally the data was interpolated. To enhance the visibility of subtle features the data was viewed under a number of different clip plotting parameters.

4.1.2 Occasionally processing the data to compensate for directional sensitivity or to remove iron spikes caused by miscellaneous ferrous objects can also inadvertently disguise anomalies that may be of archaeological origin, particularly long linear

Geophysical Survey of land east of Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire

features in the direction of the traverses. To take account of this the data has been analysed in a number of different formats and at each stage of processing.

4.1.4 Not all anomalies have been included in the results and discussion. Discrete, widely dispersed, anomalies with no pattern to their distribution are common on most sites and almost certainly relate to bedrock fragments and miscellaneous ferrous litter in the topsoil.

4.1.5 The data analysis is presented graphically in Figures 3 to 6. A greyscale shade plot of the processed gradiometer data is presented in Figure 3 and an interpretative plan in Figure 4. Trace plots of the processed gradiometer data is presented in Figures 5 and 6.

4.2 Anomalies

4.2.1 An extremely weak and discontinuous linear anomaly (1) was recorded in the north- east corner and also in the south of field 1. The anomaly corresponds to a former field boundary which was recorded on the Tithe Award map of 1841 (Sidebottom 2016). A perpendicular linear anomaly 2 is most likely to be a further field boundary of the same field system but as there is no cartographic evidence to support this interpretation must remain speculative at this stage. An extremely weak linear anomaly (3) recorded in the south-east of field 2 appears to be on the same, or very similar alignment, to anomaly 1 and is most likely to indicate the remains of another fossilised field boundary of the same field system.

4.2.2 A number of weak linear anomalies (groups 4 to 9) which are all aligned with respect to the aforementioned former field boundary (anomaly 1) are most likely to represent agricultural remains: possibly ridge and furrow cultivation and/ or land drainage. A weak linear anomaly which comprises a slightly erratic line of dipolar responses (10) suggests the presence of a buried pipe: probably a land drain. It is worthy of note that the anomaly also respects the alignment of anomaly 2, and not the alignment of the modern field boundaries, and could also possibly indicate the remains of a destroyed field boundary.

4.2.3 In the south-west corner of field 1 a weak and discontinuous anomaly (11) was recorded on an entirely different alignment to the anomalies recorded elsewhere and also the alignment of the modern field boundaries. This anomaly is most likely to be archaeological in origin.

4.2.4 Another linear anomaly (12), which in this case is difficult to delimit with any certainty but appears to respect the alignment of the southern field boundary, also comprises an erratic line of dipolar responses and is most likely to indicate the presence of land drainage.

Geophysical Survey of land east of Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire

4.2.5 A number of weak linear anomalies of varying forms which all seem to start and terminate abruptly (13 to 24) may indicate anthropogenic activity but the status of any of these anomalies can only be confirmed by invasive investigation.

4.2.6 Very weak east-west aligned anomalies in field 2 reveal a subtle hint of possible ridge and furrow cultivation. Two modern services were detected (25 and 26). Anomaly 25 is of unknown origin but can be identified from utility plans once these are available, whilst anomaly 26 relates to a sewer identified from the Severn Trent Water sewer record plan.

5.0 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1 The results of the geophysical survey, in terms of the quality and integrity of the data, are considered to be accurate and reliable. The results have not revealed any definite evidence of previously unrecorded archaeological remains within the PDA but have revealed a number of anomalies of possible archaeological origin in addition to the probable remains of a post-Medieval field boundary and agriculture. As the PDA is located on the Magnesian Limestone Ridge, a region which provides evidence for settlement from most periods yet has been subjected to continual agricultural practices (Sidebottom 2016), the anomalies which cannot be interpreted with any certainty may indicate the presence of truncated archaeological remains.

6.0 ARCHIVE DEPOSITION

6.1 One bound copy of the final report with an attached digital PDF/A copy on disc will be deposited with the Nottingham Historic Environment Record (HER). The disc will also include a digital archive, consisting of relevant ESRI shape files or CAD files, for use of updating the HER database.

6.2 Archaeological Research Services Ltd will retain the copyright of all documentary and photographic material under the Copyright, Designs and Patent Act (1988).

7.0 PUBLICITY, CONFIDENTIALITY AND COPYRIGHT

7.1 Any publicity will be handled by the client.

7.2 Archaeological Research Services Ltd will retain the copyright of all documentary and photographic material under the Copyright, Designs and Patent Act (1988).

8.0 STATEMENT OF INDEMNITY

8.1 All statements and opinions contained within this report arising from the works undertaken are offered in good faith and compiled according to professional standards. No responsibility can be accepted by the author/s of the report for any errors of fact or opinion resulting from data supplied by any third party, or for loss

Geophysical Survey of land east of Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire

or other consequence arising from decisions or actions made upon the basis of facts or opinions expressed in any such report(s), howsoever such facts and opinions may have been derived.

9.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

9.1 Archaeological Research Services Ltd would like to thank all those involved in the project for their help and assistance. In particular we would like to thank JVH Town Planning Consultants for commissioning this work on behalf of Mrs Neave and for arranging access to carry out the survey and Ursilla Spence, County Archaeologist at Nottingham County Council, for her help and advice, including approving the WSI.

10.0 REFERENCES

British Geological Survey 2017. Geology of Britain viewer [online] Available from [accessed 5th August 2017].

Chartered Institute of Field Archaeologists. 2014a. Code of Conduct. Institute for Archaeologists, Reading.

Chartered Institute of Field Archaeologists. 2014b. Standard and Guidance for archaeological geophysical survey. Institute for Archaeologists, Reading.

Gaffney, C., Gater, J. and Ovenden, S. 2008. Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field Evaluation. London: English Heritage.

Google Earth 2017. Aerial imagery various dates [online] available from [accessed 5th September 2017].

Sidebottom, P. 2016. An Archaeological Desktop Assessment of Land off Doncaster Road, Langold. Phil Sidebottom Archaeological Consultancy Report May 2016.

Geophysical Survey of land east of Doncaster Road, Langold, Nottinghamshire

Appendix 1: Figures

Field 1

Field 2

Archaeological Research Services Ltd Copyright/Licencing: Angel House Figure 1 Portland Square Bakewell Site Location This drawing Derbyshire $56/WG DE45 1HB Key: Proposed development area (PDA) Ordnance Survey Site Code: Langold Crown Copyright Date: September 2017 2014. All rights Drawn:RD Bassetlaw District reserved. Licence No. Scale: As shown Site location 100022432. N 14 15 34 44 54 63 13 16 33 43 53 62 12 17 32 42 52 61 11 18 31 41 51 60 10 19 30 40 50 59 9 20 29 39 49 58 8 21 28 38 48 57 7 22 27 37 47 56 3 6 23 26 36 46 55 45 64 24 25 2 5 88 77 76 65 4 89 1 98 90 87 78 75 66 97 91 86 79 74 67 96 92 85 80 73 68 95 93 84 81 72 69 94 83 82 71 70

Archaeological Research Services Ltd Copyright/Licencing: Angel House Figure 2 Portland Square Location of survey grids Bakewell This drawing Derbyshire Key: $56/WG PDA DE45 1HB Ordnance Survey Ξ Site Code: Langold 1 30m x 30m survey grid Crown Copyright Date: September 2017 2014. All rights Drawn:RD Scale: As shown reserved. Licence No. 100022432. N

0 10 20 40 60 80 100m

Archaeological Research Services Ltd Angel House Figure 3 Portland Square Bakewell Greyscale shade plot of processed gradiometer data Derbyshire DE45 1HB Key: Copyright/Licencing: This drawing Site Code: Langold PDA Plotting parameters A.R.S. Ltd Drawing Ref: Figure 3 Ordnance Survey data if applicable Date: September 2017 Crown Copyright, all rights reserved Drawn: RD reproduced with permission. Licence Scale: As shown No. 100022432 N

23 24 4 5 22 1 2

6 21 10 20 18 19 12

12 8

16 15

1 7 11

14 13

0 10 20 40 60 80 100m

Archaeological Research Services Ltd Angel House Figure 4 Portland Square Interpretative Plan Bakewell Derbyshire DE45 1HB Key: Probable archaeology Copyright/Licencing: Possible archaeology This drawing Site Code: Langold A.R.S. Ltd Drawing Ref: Figure 4 Probable agriculture Ordnance Survey data if applicable Date: September 2017 Probable agriculture (land drainage/ field boundary) Crown Copyright, all rights reserved Drawn: RD reproduced with permission. Licence Agriculture (e-w aligned possible ridge and furrow) No. 100022432 Scale: As shown Modern service N

20nT

Archaeological Research Services Ltd Angel House Figure 5 Portland Square Bakewell Trace plot of processed gradiometer data (field 1) Derbyshire DE45 1HB Key: Copyright/Licencing: This drawing Site Code: Langold PDA A.R.S. Ltd Drawing Ref: Figure 5 Ordnance Survey data if applicable Date: September 2017 Crown Copyright, all rights reserved Drawn: RD reproduced with permission. Licence Scale: As shown No. 100022432 N Archaeological Research Services Ltd. Angel House Portland Square Bakewell Derbyshire DE45 1HB

Site Code: Dowlow Quarry Drawing Ref. Figure 6 Date: September 2017 Drawn: RD Scale: N/A 20nT Figure 6 Trace plot of processed gradiometer data

Key: PDA

EUROPEAN OFFICES

United Kingdom .

AYLESBURY LEEDS T: +44 (0)1844 337380 T: +44 (0)113 258 0650

BELFAST LONDON T: +44 (0)28 9073 2493 T: +44 (0)203 691 5810

BRADFORD-ON-AVON MAIDSTONE T: +44 (0)1225 309400 T: +44 (0)1622 609242

BRISTOL MANCHESTER T: +44 (0)117 906 4280 T: +44 (0)161 872 7564

CAMBRIDGE NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE T: + 44 (0)1223 813805 T: +44 (0)191 261 1966

CARDIFF NOTTINGHAM T: +44 (0)29 2049 1010 T: +44 (0)115 964 7280

CHELMSFORD SHEFFIELD T: +44 (0)1245 392170 T: +44 (0)114 245 5153

EDINBURGH SHREWSBURY T: +44 (0)131 335 6830 T: +44 (0)1743 23 9250

EXETER STAFFORD T: + 44 (0)1392 490152 T: +44 (0)1785 241755

GLASGOW STIRLING T: +44 (0)141 353 5037 T: +44 (0)1786 239900

GUILDFORD WORCESTER T: +44 (0)1483 889800 T: +44 (0)1905 751310

Ireland France

DUBLIN GRENOBLE T: + 353 (0)1 296 4667 T: +33 (0)4 76 70 93 41