Denny St Francis New Settlement, Waterbeach

Home , Car Dyke, Cottenham, Denny Abbey, Landbeach, RAF Waterbeach, Waterbeach

WDSF12

DENNY ST FRANCIS NEW SETTLEMENT, WATERBEACH

Cultural Heritage Appraisal of the New Settlement Site

for LDA Design

September 2012

DENNY ST FRANCIS NEW SETTLEMENT, WATERBEACH

Cultural Heritage Appraisal of the New Settlement Site

for LDA Design

September 2012

HA Job no.: WDSF12 NGR: 549865, 267263 Council: South Cambridgeshire

Author Dr Stephen Carter Graphics Caroline Norrman & Jennifer Richards

Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd © Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd 2012

North East

Headland Archaeology 13 Jane Street Edinburgh EH6 5HE 0131 467 7705 [email protected]

www.headlandarchaeology.com

Denny St Francis New Settlement, Waterbeach WDSF12 Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd

Contents

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. APPROACH TO THE APPRAISAL 1 2.1 Scope of the study 1 2.2 Methods 2

3. RELEVANT LEGISLATION, PLANNING POLICY AND GUIDANCE 2 3.1 Legislation 2 3.2 National planning policy 2 3.3 Local Planning Policy 2 3.4 Guidance 5

4. THE HERITAGE RESOURCE OF THE STUDY AREA 5 4.1 Designated Assets 5 4.1.1 Scheduled Monuments 5 4.1.2 Listed Buildings 6 4.1.3 Conservation Areas 6 4.2 Un-designated Assets 6 4.2.1 Chronological overview 6 4.2.2 The archaeological potential of the new settlement site 9 4.2.3 The archaeological potential of additional land controlled by RLW Estates. 9 5. HERITAGE CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE MASTERPLAN 9 5.1 Iron Age and Roman landscape archaeology 10 5.2 Car Dyke 10 5.3 Soldier’s Hill 10 5.4 Denny Abbey 10 5.5 Waterbeach Barracks (former RAF Waterbeach) 12

6. APPENDIX 14 Heritage Assets and archaeological ‘events’ within the cultural heritage study area 14 © Headland Archaeology (UK)© Headland Archaeology 2012 Ltd

Denny St Francis New Settlement, Waterbeach WDSF12 Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd

List of illustrations

Figure 1 3 Site Location Plan and Extent of Cultural Heritage Study Area Figure 2 7 The Cultural Heritage Resource Figure 3 11 Denny St Francis, Waterbeach. Cultural Heritage constraints and opportunities © Headland Archaeology (UK)© Headland Archaeology 2012 Ltd

Denny St Francis New Settlement, Waterbeach WDSF12 Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd

DENNY ST FRANCIS NEW SETTLEMENT, WATERBEACH

Cultural Heritage Appraisal of the New Settlement Site

1. INTRODUCTION • To advise LDA Design on how heritage assets may constrain the Masterplan and how potential constraints can be overcome. The proposed site for Waterbeach new settlement, referred to as Denny St Francis, lies entirely within South Cambridgeshire District, This present report provides an initial appraisal of the cultural approximately 6 km north of the urban edge of Cambridge and heritage resource and will be used to inform the promotional is positioned between the A10 and the Cambridge to Ely railway report, noted above. The appraisal will be re-visited as the line. The site lies north of the existing village of Waterbeach Masterplan for the settlement evolves and the need for more (Figure 1). detailed information on specific topics or areas becomes clear.

The site available for Denny St Francis new settlement extends It is also known that relevant new heritage information will to approximately 577 hectares, which includes generous space become available in the near future and this will also inform for green infrastructure provision, employment, retail, education, revision of the appraisal. Key reports on the heritage assets in 1 community, open space and park & ride uses, in addition to Waterbeach Barracks and the former airfield are currently (August residential development. An area of undeveloped land will be 2012) being prepared by English Heritage and an independent included to safeguard the setting of Denny Abbey. researcher, Aldon Ferguson. It is anticipated that these will be made available later in the summer. The new settlement site comprises land in a mixture of current uses. The western part of the site contains Waterbeach Barracks and former airfield, in addition to further uses controlled by the 2. APPROACH TO THE APPRAISAL Ministry of Defence such as a golf course. The eastern portion of the site comprises largely agricultural land, with an existing sewage works towards the southern end. In the north-western 2.1 Scope of the study corner lies Denny Abbey, surrounded by further farmland. The purpose of the appraisal is to identify those heritage assets on land both within and surrounding the proposed settlement It is proposed that Denny St Francis would ultimately where this development could affect their significance. accommodate in the order of 10,500 units, in addition to Recommendations can then be made for the Masterplan, employment opportunities and a range of associated facilities promoting both the avoidance of harm and, where possible, the and land uses. enhancement of significance.

In addition to the site available for the new settlement there are also The study area for the appraisal takes in all land up to 1km five parcels of land controlled by RLW Estates which may be required from the new settlement site boundary and includes the five for mitigation (offsetting) of ecological and other adverse effects on additional land parcels (Figure 1). This study area is considered to the new settlement site. These five land parcels are all immediately be sufficiently large to detect all affected heritage assets, given to the east and north of the proposed new settlement site. the general type and scale of development proposed. Within the study area, all designated heritage assets have been included Headland Archaeology has been commissioned by LDA Design in the appraisal. This includes examples of Listed Buildings, to undertake an appraisal of the cultural heritage resource of Scheduled Monuments and Conservation Areas. There are no Denny St Francis with two purposes: examples of World Heritage Sites, Registered Parks and Gardens • To underpin and support a promotional report to the or Battlefields within the study area. Consideration has also given South Cambridgeshire LDF; and to non-designated heritage assets recorded within the study © Headland Archaeology (UK)© Headland Archaeology 2012 Ltd area although it is understood that an archaeological appraisal has already been undertaken for the site. This was not available they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of this at the time of writing the present draft text. and future generations” (NPPF para. 17)

The glossary to the NPPF (Annex 2) provides definitions of key 2.2 Methods terms relevant to the setting of heritage assets: The appraisal was carried out in the following stages: • Desk-based study to identify known heritage assets Heritage asset: A building, monument, site, place, area or within the study area, using data from National Heritage landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting List and Cambridgeshire HER; review of relevant national consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage and local policy and guidance; interest. Heritage asset includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the local planning authority (including local • Site visit to Denny Abbey to examine the setting of this asset; and listing).

• Consultation with English Heritage (Wayne Cocroft) and Setting of a heritage asset: The surroundings in which a Aldon Ferguson regarding their current research work at heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may Waterbeach Barracks. change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that 3. RELEVANT LEGISLATION, significance or may be neutral. PLANNING POLICY AND GUIDANCE Significance (for heritage policy): The value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic 3.1 Legislation or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s Legislation regarding Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas physical presence, but also from its setting. is contained in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Buildings listed under the provisions of this Act Policy of specific relevance to the historic environment is set out are protected for their special architectural or historic interest in Section 12 of the NPPF. and specific authorisation is required for any works that might 2 affect their character. This protection extends to the setting of a In determining applications, “local planning authorities should Listed Building where a decision maker “shall have special regard require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting” (s.66). assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting” (NPPF para. 128). Areas of land can also be designated by planning authorities for their special architectural or historic interest (Conservation The NPPF then goes on to differentiate between the treatment Areas). In the case of development within a Conservation Area of designated and non-designated heritage assets concerning “special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or the weight that should be given to the conservation of affected enhancing the character or appearance of that area.” (s.72). The assets: setting of Conservation Areas is not protected in statute. “When considering the impact of a proposed development on the Legislation relating to archaeological monuments is contained significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be in the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the This Act provides for the inclusion of ancient monuments on greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost a schedule which affords them protection from unauthorised through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development works. Causing damage to a Scheduled Monument is a criminal within its setting”(NPPF para. 132). offence. The setting of Scheduled Monuments is not protected in statute. “The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the No other types of heritage asset relevant to this appraisal are application. In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly protected or controlled by statute. non designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset”(NPPF para. 135). 3.2 National planning policy National planning policy for the historic environment is set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2012). 3.3 Local Planning Policy Relevant policy on the cultural heritage is found in the The NPPF is based on twelve core planning principles; the relevant Development Control Policies of the Local Development principle for this assessment is that planning should “conserve Framework for South Cambridgeshire (adopted 2007). heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that ± 3 6 2 0

! ! ! 7 ! ! ! ! !

2 ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

3 ! !

6 !

! ! 2

! 9

! ! 6

! 2

! !

! ! 3

! 6

2 ! ! 8

6 ! 2

! !

3 ! 6

2 ! 7

6 ! 2

! !

3 !

6 ! !

2 !

6 !

! !

! ! !

2 ! !

! !

! ! !

! !

Reproduced using digital 1:10000 data supplied by LDA with the permission of the Controller of HMSO. © Crown copyright. Licence no

546856 547856 548856 549856 550856 551856

Waterbeach, Metres 0 250 500 Denny St Francis

Key! ! !

! ! Extent of Cultural Heritage Study Area ! Figure 1 Additional land controlled by RLW Estates The Site Site Location Plan and Extent of Cultural Heritage Study Area Denny St Francis New Settlement, Waterbeach WDSF12 Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd

There are five cultural heritage policy objectives, all of which are 3.4 Guidance relevant to the present appraisal: English Heritage has recently issued detailed guidance on the • CH/a To protect historic landscapes and public rights of Setting of Heritage Assets (2011), which is of particular relevance way. to the present appraisal where change in setting is the means by which heritage assets are affected. • CH/b To protect, preserve and enhance the archaeological heritage. This guidance is based on the policies set out in PPS5 (now • CH/c To maintain the character of villages including withdrawn) but remains equally relevant under the NPPF. It also important builds on principles and guidance already issued by English • open areas. Heritage in the Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide (2010) and Conservation Principles: Policies and Guidance for the • CH/d To protect and enhance Conservation Areas and Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment” (2008). their settings. • CH/e To protect Listed Buildings and their settings. 4. THE HERITAGE RESOURCE OF THE Specific policies relevant to this appraisal are: STUDY AREA • CH/1 Historic Landscapes A complete list of known heritage assets in the study area (both • CH/2 Archaeological Sites designated and undesignated) is provided in an appendix to this • CH/3 Listed Buildings report along with records of any archaeological investigations (‘event’ records). These records from the National Heritage List • CH/4 Development within the Curtilage or Setting of a and Cambridgeshire HER are the evidence base for this section Listed Building of the report. • CH/5 Conservation Areas Policy CH/1 states that “Planning permission will not be granted No attempt is made here to provide an exhaustive account of for development which would adversely affect or lead to the loss of all heritage assets as this is neither necessary nor desirable at important areas and features of the historic landscape whether or this stage of the project. Instead, the text below describes the not they are statutorily protected.” Historic landscape features in nature and general character of the local heritage resource this context explicitly include Car Dyke and could also cover the with reference to selected assets and an emphasis on the more area of earthworks around Denny Abbey. important, designated assets. 5 Policy CH/2 aligns local policy with national for archaeological All assets that are individually referenced are plotted on Figure 2. sites (currently found in the NPPG and described above). Reference numbers for Cambridgeshire HER records are prefixed ‘MCB’ for ‘monument’ records (ie actual heritage assets) and Policy CH/3 similarly aligns local policy with legislation and ‘ECB’ for ‘event’ records (archaeological investigations). Figure national policy for Listed Buildings as well as stating a presumption 2 also shows the location and extent of known archaeological in favour of the retention of Listed Buildings. cropmarks which are an important source of evidence for the nature of the later prehistoric landscape in this area. Policy CH/4 states, in part, that “Planning permission will not be granted for development which would adversely affect the curtilage or wider setting of a Listed Building.” Taken at face value, no adverse 4.1 Designated Assets effect on setting will be acceptable according to this policy. This is contrary to national policy (specifically endorsed in CH/3) which seeks to balance harm against benefits. NPPF states that “Where 4.1.1 Scheduled Monuments a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to There are four Scheduled Monuments within the study area of the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should which only one is within the new settlement site boundary: be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including • 1012770 Denny Abbey securing its optimum viable use.” (para. 134) The scheduled area covers the surviving standing remains of this Policy CH/5 aligns local policy with legislation and national policy medieval monastic site and an area of earthworks that surround for Conservation Areas. it. The surviving medieval buildings are actually all outside the new settlement site boundary, within a small area at Denny Abbey In addition to the Development Control Policies noted above, excluded from the site. This establishment was successively controlled there are also two Supplementary Planning Documents relevant by the Benedictine order, the Knights Templar, Knights Hospitaller, to this appraisal: and the Franciscan order. Its buildings were largely demolished after • Listed Buildings: Works to or affecting the setting of(adopted suppression in 1539 but medieval structures have survived where they 2009) were re-used as part of more recent farm buildings. The earthworks include a possible causeway, platforms, ditches and ponds which

© Headland Archaeology (UK)© Headland Archaeology 2012 Ltd • Development Affecting Conservation Areas (adopted 2009) appear to be part of the monastic site but could have earlier origins. The three other Scheduled Monuments are: Finally there are two 17th century rural vernacular buildings that • 1006813 Car Dyke have been Listed Grade II: the farmhouse at Causeway End Farm, north of Denny Abbey (1267187) and a barn at Lock Farm, east of • 1006888 Waterbeach Abbey (site of) Waterbeach (1179436). • 1006930 Car Dyke

The Car Dyke is the traditional name for a feature currently 4.1.3 Conservation Areas interpreted as a Roman canal of early 2nd Century date that may There is one Conservation Area within the study area; this is the have originally run between the Rivers Cam and Trent. Two of the historic core of Waterbeach village. The designated area extends better preserved sections of the canal within the study area are for c.1km north to south and covers properties fronting onto the scheduled, one to the west of the A10 and the other to the south High Street, Green, Chapel Street and Station Road. of Waterbeach. The original route of the canal between these two sections runs along the edge of the former airfield, parallel to the A10, and therefore lies just within the new settlement site 4.2 Un-designated Assets boundary. The current condition of this section of the Car Dyke is The Cambridgeshire HER holds 172 monument records for uncertain; records state that it was dredged and backfilled with undesignated heritage assets in the study area. These span all rubble in 1955 by the RAF (HER Record MCB6521). It is not clear periods of human occupation from the Palaeolithic up to Cold how this record relates to the substantial wet ditch that currently War era military structures. exists here beside the A10 but backfilling may have been limited to the section at the south-west end of the main runway as a safety measure. 4.2.1 Chronological overview The earliest prehistoric occupation of the study area is represented The scheduled site of Waterbeach Abbey, south of the village of only by occasional stray finds of Palaeolithic flint axes (500,000 to Waterbeach, just extends into the study area. Waterbeach Abbey 10,000BC) and rare records of flint tools of Mesolithic date (10,000 was the original home of the Franciscan Nuns that subsequently to 4,000BC). The succeeding Neolithic period (4,000 to 2500BC) is occupied Denny Abbey from 1327. better represented but still primarily by stone tools. Most records are for casual finds of the distinctive polished stone axe heads but isolated sub-surface features of probable Neolithic date have 4.1.2 Listed Buildings also been encountered in some archaeological investigations. 6 There are 24 Listed Buildings in the study area but none of these are within the new settlement site boundary. It should be noted The earliest reported archaeological structures are rare cropmark that English Heritage is currently making recommendations barrows of Bronze Age date (2500 to 800BC). Sub-surface features regarding the listing of 20th century military structures in of probable Bronze Age date with pottery and flint artefacts have Waterbeach Barracks (within the new settlement site boundary) also been recorded in some archaeological investigations. so the position should be kept under review. The archaeological record expands considerably in the Iron The three Listed Buildings at Denny Abbey are all within the small Age (800BC to AD43) and succeeding Roman period (AD43 to area excluded from the new settlement site: AD409). Extensive archaeological cropmarks record an enclosed • 1127360 Denny Abbey church (Grade I) agricultural landscape of fields and settlements on areas of land above c.3 mOD (see Figure 2 for extent of recorded cropmarks). • 1179549 Barn to north of Denny Abbey (Grade II) Archaeological excavations have demonstrated that this • 1331328 Denny Abbey refectory (Grade I) landscape may have its origins in the Middle Iron Age (400 BC). It continued to evolve into the Roman period when land divisions The church and refectory are part of the medieval monastic articulated with the road running north from Cambridge towards use of the site. The barn is a 17th century building, part of the present-day Ely (now followed in part by the A10). One other key successor farm on the site. archaeological feature of the Roman period has already been mentioned as a Scheduled Monument: the Car Dyke canal. The 19th century entrance gate piers to the driveway up to Denny Abbey, just outside the new settlement site boundary on The absence of evidence for this enclosed later prehistoric the A10, are also listed (1127361 Grade II). There are also three late landscape in areas of land below 3 mOD reflects the contemporary 18th century milestones on the verge of the A10, just outside the position of the fen edge in this area. Present-day areas of drained new settlement site boundary (1127381, 1302189 and 1302199, all fen along the eastern side of the study area were permanently Grade II). wet peat fen at that time.

Waterbeach contains fifteen Listed Buildings, all Grade II houses This division between dry land and fen persisted into the except for a telephone box (Grade II) and the medieval parish medieval and post-medieval periods (AD410 to AD1700) after church of St John at the south end of the High Street, which is which large-scale drainage operations led to the progressive loss Grade II*. of peat to desiccation and oxidation. The medieval settlement pattern of nucleated villages, which probably originated in the ± 270258 Key

ECB448 Legend E Grade I Listed Building

1267187 E Grade II* Listed Building

E 1302199 Grade II Listed Building Cropmark Areas ECB448 269258 ECB447 Scheduled Monument Conservation Area Cropmarks 1127361 1179549 !( Non-Designated Asset 1331328 Archaeological Event

1006813 !! !

1012770 1127360 ! ! ! Extent of Study Area !

268258 Additional land controlled by MCB6735 RLW Estates 1127381 The Site 267258 Metres 0 1,000

MCB6521 1302189 !(

Scheduled Monument, Registered Park and Garden and Listed Building information derived from English Heritage data dated March 2012 266258 © Crown Copyright (EH)

Historic Environment Record data provided 1179436 by Cambridgeshire HER © Cambridgeshire CC

Listed Buildings in Waterbeach 1127366 1179660 1127362 1331327 1127363 1127365 1179559 1301879 265258 1179567 1179631 1006888 1267188 Waterbeach, Denny St Francis 1006930 1301960 1331289 1127364 Figure 2: The Cultural 1179612 Heritage Resource

545770 546770 547770 548770 549770 550770 551770 552770 Denny St Francis New Settlement, Waterbeach WDSF12 Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd

early medieval (Saxon) period, was even more restricted than in the later prehistoric agricultural landscape, evidenced elsewhere the preceding Roman period, with permanent settlement only in the study area, is present throughout the higher parts of the on land above 5 mOD. The only medieval village in the study new settlement site subject only to any losses caused by airfield area is Waterbeach with the medieval monastic settlement of and barracks construction works. Denny Abbey isolated on a small island of dry ground at the fen edge. 4.2.3 The archaeological potential of additional Heritage assets post-dating AD1700 include most of the land controlled by RLW Estates. standing vernacular buildings in Waterbeach and farms that The five additional land parcels to the north and east of the new were established as drainage made new areas of land available settlement site are all currently arable fields site. They can be for agriculture. Wind pumps are also a distinctive component divided into two groups with strongly contrasting archaeological of this period, reflecting the continuous need to pump water potential, closely related to their altitude. from the wasting peat fen. Most recently the WWII airfield RAF Waterbeach, now Waterbeach Barracks, is recognised as a The three eastern parcels are low-lying areas of former peat fen, heritage asset. now drained with the peat cover lost (ground level currently c.2 mOD). Archaeological potential is limited here to relatively early prehistoric occupation, pre-dating the regional rise in sea level 4.2.2 The archaeological potential of the new and accumulation of peat. In line with this potential, the only settlement site HER records are for stray finds of Neolithic axe heads and one The chronological overview of the heritage resource for the whole example of a Bronze Age palstave (a type of axe head). study area is considered to be relevant to the new settlement site itself but the precise location of the site and its recent land- The remaining two parcels, to the north of the new settlement site, use history do affect the nature and quality of records for the are on slightly higher ground (c.4 m OD) and contain existing records area. This in turn affects our ability to predict the archaeological for cropmarks and sub-surface features of prehistoric to medieval potential of the area. date. The most northerly land parcel, between Bannold Lodge and Causeway End Farm, contains dense and extensive cropmarks of Little can be said about early human activity in the new settlement settlement and enclosures. These form part of a more extensive area site as records of Palaeolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic date are of sub-surface features (confirmed by archaeological excavation, very rare, in common with the remainder of the study area. There HER records ECB447 and ECB448) that extends southwards into the is at least one record of a Palaeolithic flint axe head. next land parcel south of Bannold Lodge. 9 Iron Age and Roman period records are not well represented in most of the new settlement site, unlike the remainder of the 5. HERITAGE CONSTRAINTS study area. In part this reflects the altitude of the eastern edge AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE of the new settlement site which is below 3 mOD and therefore too low and wet for agriculture and settlement by this time. MASTERPLAN The remainder should be suitable for human occupation but The purpose of this final section of the report is to identify those the presence of the airfield since 1939 has greatly reduced the elements of the heritage resource, described above, that constrain visibility of archaeological features over most of this area relative the Masterplan or, alternatively, offer positive opportunities to to other parts of the study area. This is for two reasons: firstly the add value to the Masterplan. absence of annual cereal crops within the airfield has resulted in no records of archaeological cropmark (common elsewhere in the Both national and local policy promotes the preservation of study area, see Figure 2); secondly an absence of development- heritage assets and their significance. That significance may lie in related archaeological investigations means that there have been the asset itself or in the setting of the asset. The degree to which no discoveries of sub-surface features of Iron Age or Roman date any particular asset merits protection reflects an assessment of (again, common elsewhere in the study area). the balance between the importance of the asset and the level of harm to its significance on the one hand and the benefits of The only recorded archaeological site within the airfield that the development proposal on the other. should probably be assigned to this period is a small area of earthworks on Soldier’s Hill, just to the south of Denny Abbey (HER The constraints identified below are those assets where the Record MCB6735). This site was damaged by airfield construction importance of the asset and the potential level of harm are works but probably owes its continued survival to restriction of sufficient to materially diminish the acceptability of the Masterplan agricultural activity within the airfield perimeter. in terms of cultural heritage policy. Recommendations are made about how the potential harm can be mitigated, primarily In the area outside the airfield at the north end of the new settlement through avoidance measures in the design of the Masterplan. site, around Denny Abbey, there is the expected presence of Iron Age and Roman records including some cropmarks and sub- In some of the cases, the asset that constrains the Masterplan also surface features detected through archaeological evaluation and has potential to add value to the development. These positive

© Headland Archaeology (UK)© Headland Archaeology 2012 Ltd excavation (HER Records ECB447 and ECB448). It seems clear that opportunities are raised where they appear to exist. It should be noted that all five areas of constraint identified 2. The Car Dyke should be protected by an undeveloped below relate to heritage assets within the boundary of the new strip of land running along the boundary of the new settlement site (Figure 3). No material constraints have been settlement. It is recognised that access across the strip recognised in the 1km buffer zone outside the site boundary; may be required from the A10 and care should be taken specifically there appears to be no reason to anticipate to minimise any disturbance to the surviving remains. significantly harmful impacts on the setting of designated heritage assets in this zone. 3. Consideration should also be given to the enhancement of this strip with possible measures including removal of the airfield perimeter bund and re-excavation of any 5.1 Iron Age and Roman landscape 1950s backfill to reinstate a continuous open ditch. archaeology It is clear from the Cambridgeshire HER that the new settlement site has high potential for extensive sub-surface archaeological 5.3 Soldier’s Hill features of Iron Age and Roman date. Only land below c.3 mOD A small area of archaeological earthworks on Soldier’s Hill (c.130 x is likely to be entirely free of these features as it was peat fen 90 m), just to the south of Denny Abbey, appears to be the only at that time. The approximate position of the 3 mOD contour is surviving above-ground fragment of the Iron Age and Roman shown in Figure 3. period landscape discussed above. Ditches and a possible barrow were mapped in this patch of un-cultivated ground before WWII The key issue for this element of the heritage resource is that our but the area was disturbed by the construction of bomb stores current level of knowledge is very low. Therefore, whilst there is for the airfield and at least some of the recorded archaeological no reason, currently, to predict that any part of this archaeological features will have been lost. landscape will be of sufficient importance to merit preservation, this is an assumption with a considerable degree of risk attached. The Assuming that their continued survival can be confirmed, these need for preservation cannot be ruled out entirely but the risk to the earthworks merit preservation as a rare extant fragment of the project is primarily financial. Some areas may contain more complex early landscape. and important remains than others and the cost of archaeological excavation to sterilise the ground in these areas could be prohibitively Recommendations: high. As we do not know their location, they cannot be avoided. 1. 1The site should be surveyed to confirm the nature and condition of any surviving archaeological earthworks. 10 Recommendation: 1. The likely range of costs associated with the excavation 2. Assuming their survival is confirmed, this area should be of this archaeological landscape should be estimated, retained in an undisturbed condition with suitable non- based on results of recent excavations in adjacent sites. woody vegetation cover. In view of the location just to This should allow the client to decide whether the level the south of Denny Abbey, it is likely that Soldier’s Hill can of financial risk is acceptable. If concerns remain over be incorporated into the southern edge of the land area cost, evaluation will be required to test actual quality and retained as the setting for the abbey (see below). density of archaeological features.

5.4 Denny Abbey 5.2 Car Dyke The complex of medieval monastic buildings, earthworks and The Car Dyke, one well-known component of the Roman-period below-ground deposits at Denny together form a heritage asset landscape, is known to run through the new settlement site. that is both highly important and relatively well understood. The western edge of the new settlement site from Waterbeach up to Goosehall, follows the line of this 2nd century AD canal The core historic buildings of Denny Abbey (Listed Grades I and (plotted in Figure 3). This is a nationally important heritage asset, II) are outside the new settlement site. They are open to the protected in part as a Scheduled Monument (although not the public, managed by the Farmland Museum on behalf of English section in the new settlement site). Heritage. The pasture fields that immediately surround Denny Abbey, including the surviving historic earthworks, are protected The condition of the Car Dyke where it passes through the new as a Scheduled Monument. There is therefore no question settlement is not clear and it may have been damaged during of physical harm to the heritage asset resulting from the new the period when the airfield was in use. However, it merits settlement. The key issues for the Masterplan are: protection as part of a nationally important asset and there is an • The need to preserve the significance of this asset opportunity here to both protect what remains of the canal and through appropriate treatment of its setting; and to make it a strong and attractive wet ditch boundary feature to the new settlement. • The opportunity to improve access and interpretation. The positive contribution that setting makes to the significance Recommendations: of Denny Abbey reflects our understanding of the relationship 1. Further work should be carried out to establish the precise between the medieval history of the site and the current position and condition of this section of the Car Dyke. landscape setting. When the original Benedictine abbey was Denny St Francis New Settlement, Waterbeach WDSF12 Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd

Limit of dry land in Iron Age / Roman Period open view to fens

open view to fens

Denny Abbey surviving buildings and earthworks open view to fens

Denny Abbey protected setting

Soldiers Hill Earthworks

Waterbeach Barracks (RAF Waterbeach) Former Air eld (now training area) 11

Route of the Car Dyke Waterbeach Barracks (Roman canal) (RAF Waterbeach) Air eld technical area (now barracks)

0 30m

1:7,500 @ A4

Figure 3 Denny St Francis, Waterbeach. Cultural Heritage constraints and opportunities

founded on the site in the 12th century, Denny was a small This isolated setting persisted throughout the religious use of the island of dry land on the fen edge, accessible from the south abbey site up to the suppression of the Franciscan Nunnery in the by a short causeway at Soldier’s Hill. There was a second small 16th century. The subsequent draining of the fens has radically ‘island’ beyond Denny to the north-east at Chittering, linked by changed the landscape setting of Denny: the site is no longer an a causeway to Denny (hence Causeway End Farm in Chittering). isolated island of dry ground and it is surrounded by arable fields The choice of an isolated site at the fen edge conforms to our with an airfield to the south and spreading industrial/commercial understanding of a detached and contemplative monastic development to the west, over the A10.

© Headland Archaeology (UK)© Headland Archaeology 2012 Ltd community. • Re-location of visitor parking away from its existing Despite the encroachment of development from the south and location close the abbey buildings to a less-intrusive west, Denny Abbey still exists in an essentially rural landscape, position; detached from other settlements. This is what the present-day visitor experiences approaching and viewing the remains of the • Public access to the earthworks surrounding the Abbey buildings; medieval buildings and the views out from the abbey buildings are still largely to agricultural land. The subtle ‘island’ topography • On-site interpretation of the earthworks; also survives even through drainage and changing land-use • Use of arable fields outside the scheduled area to make it difficult to appreciate. It is this present-day landscape, demonstrate traditional farming methods (as part of the with its links back to the medieval fen island, that contributes to Farmland Museum) the significance of Denny Abbey. Recommendation: Looking forward, Denny Abbey should be retained in an 1. Start discussions with English Heritage and the Farmland essentially rural setting where it can be experienced as a separate, Museum regarding the implications of a new large local self-contained cluster of buildings. In terms of the Masterplan population for the presentation and management of for the new settlement, it seems clear that there is no scope for Denny Abbey and the museum. development to the north and west of Denny Abbey as the site boundary is already very close here. The key question is therefore how far the new settlement should be allowed to encroach on 5.5 Waterbeach Barracks (former RAF the setting from the south and east? Waterbeach) Waterbeach Barracks, soon to be de-commissioned, have their It is inevitable that any development proposal will require some origins as a WWII airfield, operational from 1941. The station degree of visual change in views to the south from Denny Abbey: contains evidence for 70 years of military history that reflects the either new buildings or screening vegetation that will hide the changing needs of the air force and then the army through WWII, buildings but still limit what are currently more open views. The the Cold War and more recent changes in defence policy. boundary line between development and protected setting proposed in Figure 3 has been selected because it allows the The need to recognise the heritage significance of our recent ‘island’ to be retained unchanged along with a clear buffer of the military past has been a clear theme of English Heritage policy surrounding lower ground. It has the added advantage of taking in the past two decades but understanding of this significance in and protecting the small area of archaeological earthworks on remains a poorly developed topic. There is little published research 12 Soldier’s Hill. A projection of this line to the east will also ensure for RAF Waterbeach and Waterbeach Barracks on which to base that the new settlement does not begin to wrap around the an analysis of heritage significance. A short illustrated history of east of Denny Abbey. The result is that Denny Abbey remains the site was published in 2011 (Hamlin, J F and Merrington, O the focus of attention on its own ‘island’ with open views to the J, At the ‘Beach. The Story of Royal Air Force Waterbeach and north and east out into the fens. Waterbeach Barracks). Oliver Merrington is also the honorary curator of a small Barracks Museum which holds photos and Recommendations: artefacts from the station’s history. This museum is expected to 1. No development is proposed north of the line shown in close when the Royal Engineers leave but the collection will be Figure 3, including any land to the east of Denny Abbey. placed in storage locally (Aldon Ferguson, pers. comm.).

2. Careful consideration is given to the treatment of this Our knowledge of the station is about to change substantially northern boundary of the built-up area, including heights when research work currently in progress is completed. of buildings and use of vegetation along the boundary English Heritage has undertaken a review of the site as part to minimise the visual impact of the settlement at this of its programme of research on military sites currently being point. decommissioned by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation. A report on this work should be available soon and will include 3. Early discussions with English Heritage to establish recommendations for Listing. Independent of English Heritage, agreement in principle regarding the extent of the a private researcher Aldon Ferguson has completed a detailed protected setting photographic survey of the station before it is closed. This includes descriptions and external photography of all structures The creation of a major new settlement immediately to the and internal records of buildings where historic interior detail south of Denny Abbey presents a clear opportunity to make the survives. His work will also be available soon. monument an asset for the new community. Greatly increased visitor numbers could also create problems for management of It will not be possible to reach any detailed and specific the site. The masterplan should address how this can be managed conclusions regarding the heritage significance of the station as a positive opportunity through appropriate access for local and therefore the degree to which it presents constraints to residents and enhanced interpretation. Possible enhancements development. At this early stage, a distinction may be drawn include: between the former airfield, a large relatively undeveloped area • Pedestrian/cycle access to Denny Abbey from the south containing the runways, and the former technical area for the along the historic causeway from Soldier’s Hill; airfield (now the barracks) that contains a dense collection of Denny St Francis New Settlement, Waterbeach WDSF12 Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd

buildings (see Figure 3 for the location of these two areas). value, whether or not they are recommended for listing by English Heritage. Between 1941 and 1966 the station functioned as an RAF airfield but since the hand over to the Royal Engineers it has seen Whilst it is necessary to consider the barracks/airfield in the progressively less use by aircraft. One of three original runways context of heritage significance and protection, it is also has been retained but the other two have been progressively important to recognise the potential for the station to endow the damaged by the Royal Engineers in ‘destroy and repair’ training new settlement with a distinctive character, rooted in its recent exercises. Much of the associated infrastructure for the runways history. Retention of the road layout and individual buildings (dispersal areas for planes and bomb stores) has been lost as land within the technical area offer the opportunity to create both a has been returned to agriculture, quarried for gravel and even distinctive character for this part of the new settlement and find converted into a golf course. The current assumption is that the sustainable new uses for significant historic buildings. heritage significance of this area is now relatively low, although isolated features of interest may still survive. Recommendations: 1. The results of research by English Heritage and Aldon In contrast, the technical area retains much of the layout and Ferguson should be obtained as soon as they are made many buildings from WWII despite conversion for army use over available. These should form the basis of proposals for the the last 40 years. In part this reflects the fact that the airfield was demolition or retention and re-use of military structures. planned before WWII to pre-war standards with construction beginning in 1939, resulting in buildings that have remained 2. This should be followed by early discussions with English serviceable for 70 years. Analysis of the heritage significance of Heritage to agree a strategy for the treatment of the individual structures must await the completion of the research barracks. work noted above but it is assumed at this stage that at least some of the structures will merit retention for their heritage

13 © Headland Archaeology (UK)© Headland Archaeology 2012 Ltd 6. APPENDIX List entry Name Grade 1331289 THE GABLES II Heritage Assets and archaeological ‘events’ 1331327 31, BURGESS ROAD II within the cultural heritage study area 1331328 DENNY ABBEY REFECTORY I This appendix contains lists of all heritage assets within the study area recorded in the National Heritage List (Designated Assets) 1302189 MILESTONE HALF MILE SOUTH OF GREEN END II JUNCTION AND GOOSE HALL AT NGR 484 664 and Cambridgeshire Historic Environment Record (Undesignated Assets). All records of archaeological investigations held in the HER (‘event’ records) are also listed below. Undesignated assets NB: the is also one example of a Conservation Area within the Monu id Name study area (Waterbeach) but this has not been listed separately below. MCB10070 Iron Age settlement, Cottenham

MCB10071 Roman settlement site, Cottenham Scheduled Monuments MCB10073 D-shaped enclosure, Landbeach List entry Name MCB10074 Rectilinear enclosures, Landbeach 1006930 Car Dyke MCB10304 Roman settlement site, Landbeach 1006888 Waterbeach Abbey (site of) MCB10305 Roman settlement site, Landbeach 1006813 Length of Car Dyke between Green End and Top Moor MCB10306 Possible Iron Age pottery, Landbeach 1012770 Denny Abbey MCB10307 Roman settlement site, Landbeach

MCB10608 Roman cropmark complex, Landbeach Listed buildings MCB10609 Romano-British settlement, Car Dyke Farm List entry Name Grade MCB10612 Trackway, Landbeach 1127360 DENNY ABBEY I MCB10613 Semi-rectangular enclosures, Landbeach 14 1127361 GATE PIERS II MCB10617 Linear features, Cottenham 1127362 SMALL BARN TO SOUTH OF DENNY HOUSE II MCB10618 Roman remains, Landbeach 1127363 BERRY HOUSE II MCB10619 Trackways, Landbeach 1127364 THE HALL II MCB10620 Trackways, Landbeach 1127365 ORCHARD HOUSE II MCB10621 Roman settlement site, Landbeach 1127366 CHURCH OF ST JOHN II* MCB10622 Enclosures and trackways, Landbeach 1127381 MILESTONE HALF MILE NORTH OF GOOSE HALL AT II NGR 485 679 MCB10623 Enclosures, Cottenham

1179436 BARN TO NORTH OF LOCK FARM II MCB10624 Cropmarks, Waterbeach

1179549 BARN TO NORTH OF DENNY ABBEY II MCB10626 Possible watercourses, Denny Abbey

1179559 5, GREEN SIDE II MCB10627 The Lots

1179567 DENNY HOUSE II MCB10687 Subrectangular enclosures, Landbeach

1179612 BARN TO NORTH WEST OF THE HALL II MCB11060 Linear features, Lode

1179631 BARN TO SOUTH WEST OF NUMBER 2 (ORCHARD II MCB11480 Bronze Age barrow, Denny Farm, Waterbeach HOUSE) MCB11481 Prehistoric settlement site, Waterbeach 1179660 BOX TREE COTTAGE II MCB11482 Medieval midden, Waterbeach 1267187 CAUSEWAY FARMHOUSE II MCB11483 Medieval midden, Waterbeach 1267188 K6 TELEPHONE BOX II MCB11484 Roman settlement, Waterbeach 1301879 WILES COTTAGE II MCB11528 C2nd disc brooch, Waterbeach 1301960 10, CAMBRIDGE ROAD II MCB11671 Car Dyke (Roman canal), Landbeach 1302199 MILESTONE ONE AND ONE HALF MILES NORTH OF II GOOSE HALL AT NGR 492 693 MCB11757 Bannold Lodge Roman settlement Denny St Francis New Settlement, Waterbeach WDSF12 Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd

MCB11757 Bannold Lodge Roman settlement MCB16776 Route of Car Dyke canal, Waterbeach

MCB11784 Barrow, Waterbeach MCB16782 Roman remains, Landbeach

MCB12441 Roman coin, Cottenham MCB16782 Roman remains, Landbeach

MCB13028 Enclosure, Landbeach MCB17201 Waterbeach Baptist Chapel, Chapel Street

MCB13037 Rectangular ditched enclosure, Cottenham MCB17241 ? Roman gullies, Bannold Road, Waterbeach

MCB13067 Ditch, Landbeach MCB17340 Barn, Station Road, Waterbeach

MCB13068 Parallel ditches, Car Dyke MCB17348 Prehistoric, Medieval and Post-Medieval features, High Street, Waterbeach MCB13069 Enclosure, Landbeach MCB18330 Milestone, A10, Landbeach MCB13131 Earthworks - possible lazybeds, Waterbeach MCB18331 Milestone, A10, Landbeach MCB13132 Romano-British earthwork, Waterbeach MCB18333 Milestone, A10, Landbeach MCB13330 Roman finds, Waterbeach MCB18419 Prehistoric features, Waste Management Park, MCB13604 Roman pottery, Waterbeach Waterbeach

MCB13605 Medieval remains, Waterbeach MCB18420 Post-medieval features, Waste Management Park, Waterbeach MCB13606 Post-medieval occupation debris, Waterbeach MCB19281 Well south of Soldiers’ Hill, Waterbeach MCB13613 Iron Age settlement, Cottenham MCB19545 Medieval and 19th century walls and rubble, Denny MCB13614 Roman settlement site, Cottenham Abbey

MCB13799 Unknown observations, Denny Abbey MCB19548 –

MCB13958 Medieval and Post-Medieval pottery finds, Denny MCB19562 Features at 12 Pieces Lane, Waterbeach, Cambridgeshire Abbey MCB2601 Quern find, Denny Abbey MCB14352 Denny Abbey Park MCB2711 Elongated polished axe, Waterbeach MCB14353 “The Rookery”, Denny End MCB2905 Roman coin, Waterbeach MCB14354 Denny Lodge, Waterbeach (park) 15 MCB450 Neolithic axeheads, Waterbeach MCB14355 Earthworks west of Vicarage Cottages, Waterbeach MCB6358 Roman brooch, Landbeach MCB14602 Saxon features, Denny End MCB6360 Roman brooch, Beach Road, Landbeach MCB14626 Prehistoric remains, Bannold Lodge, Chittering MCB6361 Roman hand mill, Cottenham MCB14627 Medieval remains and causeway, Bannold Lodge, Chittering MCB6415 Cropmarks and Roman pottery, Cottenham

MCB14679 Roman remains, Graves’ Field MCB6471 Waterbeach Abbey

MCB14681 Romano-British occupation activity, Waste MCB6472 Roman pottery finds, Waterbeach Abbey Management Park, Waterbeach MCB6476 Saxon settlement remains, The Lodge, Waterbeach MCB1505 Moated site, Landbeach MCB6477 Roman pottery finds, Waterbeach Lodge MCB15155 RAF Waterbeach MCB6480 Roman pottery, Landbeach MCB15518 ? Roman ditch, Gravel Digger’s Farm, Cottenham MCB6490 Roman settlement, Landbeach MCB15519 Post-Medieval bush drains, Gravel Digger’s Farm, Cottenham MCB6493 Roman remains, Denny Lodge, Waterbeach

MCB15520 Roman remains, Gravel Digger’s Farm, Cottenham MCB6506 Roman ditch system, Cottenham

MCB15650 Axe finds, Waterbeach MCB6515 Roman ditch, Landbeach

MCB15737 Roman road and later features, Green End, Landbeach MCB6517 Benson’s Mill, Waterbeach

MCB15753 Denny Abbey MCB6518 Section through Akeman Street Roman road, Landbeach MCB16281 Possible midden, The Farmland Museum, Denny Abbey, Waterbeach MCB6519 Polished Neolithic axe, Landbeach

MCB16405 Pillbox, Waterbeach rail crossing MCB6520 Roman ditch containing pottery, Landbeach

MCB16406 Pillbox, Joist Fen, Waterbeach MCB6521 Roman pottery, Waterbeach © Headland Archaeology (UK)© Headland Archaeology 2012 Ltd MCB6522 Roman pottery, Landbeach MCB7496 Roman pottery and cropmarks, Cottenham

MCB6526 Roman pottery, Landbeach MCB7695 Bronze Age handled beaker, Bottisham Locks

MCB6527 Roman pottery, Landbeach MCB7701 Site of wind pump, Horningsea

MCB6528 Roman pottery, Landbeach MCB7717 Bronze Age flint dagger, Horningsea

MCB6529 Saxon brooch, Landbeach MCB7718 Polished stone axe, Waterbeach

MCB6530 Fossilized bison horn and Palaeolithic axe, Waterbeach MCB7719 Polished axe, Waterbeach

MCB6531 Roman pottery, Landbeach MCB7720 Windmill/windpump, Waterbeach

MCB6532 Cropmarks, Cottenham MCB7755 Neolithic axe, Hinge Farm Cottages

MCB6533 Roman pottery, Cottenham MCB7881 Neolithic axe hammer, Waterbeach

MCB6534 Roman roadway and ditches, Cottenham Green End, MCB7882 Roman pottery finds, Waterbeach Landbeach MCB7883 Medieval pottery finds, Waterbeach MCB6538 Roman ditch, Landbeach MCB7884 Flint chisel, Joist Fen, Waterbeach MCB6539 Ditches and Roman pottery, Cottenham MCB8056 Causeway End Farm/Denny Lodge Roman settlement MCB6540 Top Moor MCB8057 Human remains, Waterbeach MCB6541 Roman ditch system, Landbeach MCB8121 Polished flint and hornstone axes, Waterbeach MCB6542 Roman pottery and quern, Cottenham MCB8222 Bottisham Lode MCB6572 Earthworks around Denny Abbey MCB8254 Neolithic axe, Waterbeach Fen MCB6573 Denny Abbey refectory

MCB6574 Flint implement, Cottenham Event Records MCB6575 Roman enclosure and finds, Cottenham Evu id Name Organisation MCB6576 Roman pottery, Landbeach ECB1165 Assessment at Gravel Digger’s Cambridge Archaeological 16 MCB6584 Car Dyke Roman canal Farm, The Lots, Cottenham, Unit 1992 MCB6584 Car Dyke Roman canal ECB1166 Archaeological investigations Cambridge Archaeological MCB6585 Belgic pottery from Car Dyke at Gravel Digger’s Farm, Unit Cottenham, 1992 MCB6653 Dug-out canoe, Waterbeach ECB1184 Evaluation at Bank Farm, Cambridgeshire County MCB6680 Probable Palaeolithic axe, Waterbeach Waterbeach, 2003 Council Archaeological Field MCB6681 Roman rotary quern, Waterbeach Unit

MCB6682 Roman pottery finds, Denny Lodge, Waterbeach ECB1418 Evaluation at New Farm, Cambridgeshire County Landbeach, 2003 Council Archaeological Field MCB6683 Denny Point, Cottenham Unit

MCB6684 Village at Causeway End Farm/Chittering End Farm ECB1644 AP assessment, Cambridge Air Photo Services Rowing Lake, 1994 (Cambridge) MCB6735 Roman earthwork, Soldiers Hill, Waterbeach ECB1699 Excavations in The Nuns’ – MCB6737 Roman site, Cottenham Refectory, Denny Abbey, 1984-85 MCB6738 Roman remains, Cottenham ECB1761 Earthwork survey, Manorial London University Extra-Mural MCB6739 Roman remains, Cottenham Earthworks, Landbeach Department

MCB6740 Roman oven or kiln, Cottenham ECB1794 Evaluation at the Travellers Cambridgeshire County Rest public house, Chittering, Council Archaeological Field MCB6750 Roman pottery, Denny Abbey 2004 Unit MCB6783 Saint John the Evangelist’s Church, Waterbeach ECB1811 Monitoring at The Farmland Cambridgeshire County MCB6816 Human remains, Cottenham Museum, Denny Abbey, Council Archaeological Field Waterbeach, 2004 Unit MCB6863 Roman pottery, Cottenham ECB2064 Watching brief along Cambridge Archaeological MCB6970 Roman road (course of), Cottenham the Histon - Waterbeach Unit electricity cable, 2003 MCB7015 Cropmarks of Akeman Street Roman Road and associated linear features, Landbeach Denny St Francis New Settlement, Waterbeach WDSF12 Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd

Evu id Name Organisation Evu id Name Organisation

ECB2066 Watching brief at the Cambridgeshire County ECB447 Excavations at Bannold Lodge, Cambridge Archaeological Parkersteel Site, Denny Council Archaeological Field Chittering, Waterbeach, 1997 Unit Industrial Centre, 2001 Unit ECB448 Evaluation at Denny, Tempus Reparatum ECB2210 Evaluation to the rear of 30 Cambridgeshire County Waterbeach, 1990 High Street, Waterbeach, 2006 Council Archaeological Field Unit ECB525 Evaluation along the Cambridge Archaeological Anglian Water Cottenham Unit ECB222 Evaluation at Car Dyke Farm, Cambridgeshire County to Landbeach Sewage Main, Landbeach, 1997 Council Archaeological Field 1999 Unit ECB533 Evaluation of the Cambridge Cambridgeshire County ECB2231 Magnetometer survey at Ancient Monuments Rowing Lake site, 1995 Council Archaeological Field Cottenham, 1980 Laboratory Unit

ECB2267 Geophysical survey, Gravel Oxford Archaeotechnics ECB537 Evaluation at the Cambridge Cambridge Archaeological Diggers Farm, Cottenham, Centre for Recycling, 2000 Unit 1992 ECB537 Evaluation at the Cambridge Cambridge Archaeological ECB2325 Evaluation of land N of Albion Archaeology Centre for Recycling, 2000 Unit Bannold Lodge, Waterbeach, 2004 ECB537 Evaluation at the Cambridge Cambridge Archaeological Centre for Recycling, 2000 Unit ECB2396 Excavation and evaluation at Cambridge Archaeological IWM Park, Waterbeach, 2002 Unit ECB537 Evaluation at the Cambridge Cambridge Archaeological Centre for Recycling, 2000 Unit ECB2462 AP assessment, Limes Farm, Air Photo Services Landbeach, 1999 (Cambridge) ECB547 MAFF County Farms Estate Cambridgeshire County Agricultural Impact Study, Council Archaeological Field ECB2640 Excavation at Ely Road, Waste Cambridge Archaeological 2001 Unit Management, Waterbeach, Unit 2007 ECB825 Excavations at Waterbeach Cambridge Antiquarian Lodge, 1926-1927 Society ECB2872 Monitoring of land NW of Lug The Heritage Network Fen Droveway, Lode, 2007 ECB95 Recording brief at Denny Cambridgeshire County Abbey, 1997/8 Council Archaeological Field ECB2951 Evaluation at Goose Hall Farm, Cambridge Archaeological Unit Waterbeach, 1993 Unit 17 ECB3062 Further excavations at Ely Cambridge Archaeological Road, Waterbeach, 2008 Unit

ECB3347 Evaluation and excavation at Archaeological Solutions 12 Pieces Lane, Waterbeach, 2010

ECB336 Investigations at Saint John’s Northamptonshire Church, Waterbeach, 2000 Archaeology

ECB339 Evaluation at Denny Industrial Cambridgeshire County Centre, Waterbeach, 2000 Council Archaeological Field Unit

ECB340 Watching brief at 64 Cambridgeshire County Cambridge Road, Council Archaeological Field Waterbeach, 1998 Unit

ECB349 Excavations at Waterbeach Abbey, 1963

ECB3622 Test pit evaluation, Farmland Oxford Archaeology East Museum, 2011

ECB3688 Evaluation at Denny Lodge Archaeological Project Business Park Wind Turbines, Services Chittering, 2011

ECB402 Evaluation at Denny End, Cambridge Archaeological Waterbeach, 1995 Unit

ECB404 Recording brief at Denny Cambridgeshire County Abbey, Farmland Museum, Council Archaeological Field 1996 Unit © Headland Archaeology (UK)© Headland Archaeology 2012 Ltd

North East North West South & East Midlands & West

Headland Archaeology Headland Archaeology Headland Archaeology Headland Archaeology 13 Jane Street 10 Payne Street Technology Centre, Stanbridge Road Unit 1, Premier Business Park, Faraday Road Edinburgh EH6 5HE Glasgow G4 0LF Leighton Buzzard LU7 4QH Hereford HR4 9NZ 0131 467 7705 0141 354 8100 01525 850878 01432 364 901 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]