ASE Front Cover.Ai

Archaeology South-East ASE

Archaeological and Geo-archaeological Evaluation Leigh UTC, Brunel Way Dartford, Kent

NGR: TQ 54717 75787

Planning Ref: 16/01540/FUL ASE Project No: 161116 Site Code: UTC17 ASE Report No: 2017035 OASIS id: archaeol6-275224

By Kate Clover and Dr Edward Blinkhorn

Archaeological and Geoarchaeological Evaluation Leigh UTC, Brunel Way Dartford, Kent

NGR: TQ 54717 75787

Planning Ref: 16/01540/FUL

ASE Project No: 161116 Site Code: UTC17

ASE Report No: 2017035 OASIS id: archaeol6-275224

Kate Clover and Edward Prepared by: Archaeologists Blinkhorn

Reviewed and Dan Swift Project Manager approved by:

Date of Issue: March 2017

Revision: 1

Archaeology South-East Units 1 & 2 2 Chapel Place Portslade East Sussex BN41 1DR

Tel: 01273 426830 Fax: 01273 420866 Email: [email protected] Archaeology South-East Leigh UTC, Dartford, Kent ASE Report No: 2017035

Abstract

This report presents the results of an archaeological and geoarchaeological evaluation carried out by Archaeology South-East at Leigh UTC, Brunel Way, Dartford in January 2017. The site was formerly partially occupied by the early 20th century Joyce Green Hospital. The fieldwork was commissioned by RSK ADAS Ltd on behalf of in BAM Construction Ltd in advance of construction of a new school.

Modern deposits and features, all probably associated with the former hospital, were recorded in five out of eight of the evaluation trenches, all within the northern half of the site. These included drains, water pipes, cables, grubbed out foundations, a soakaway and demolition debris and broadly correspond to where hospital buildings are marked on the OS 20th century maps. The southern half of the site was devoid of archaeological remains apart from one pit that has been interpreted as modern in date. No remains that definitely pre-dated the hospital were revealed. The geoarchaeological test-pits have demonstrated low preservational value.

CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Background

3.0 Methodology

4.0 Results

5.0 The Finds

6.0 Discussion and Conclusions

Bibliography Acknowledgements

HER Summary OASIS Form

Appendix 1: Archaeologically blank trenches - recorded contexts Appendix 2: Geoarchaeological test-pit logs

TABLES

Table 1: Quantification of site paper archive Table 2: Quantification of artefact and environmental samples Table 3: Trench 1 list of recorded contexts Table 4: Trench 2 list of recorded contexts Table 5: Trench 3 list of recorded contexts Table 6: Trench 7 list of recorded contexts Table 7: Trench 8 list of recorded contexts

FIGURES

Front Cover Image: Trench 7 with Trench 3 in the background, view east

Figure 1: Site Location Figure 2: Trench Locations Figure 3: Trench 1 plan and photographs Figure 4: Trench 2 plan and photographs Figure 5: Trench 3 plan and photographs Figure 6: Trench 7 plan and photographs Figure 7: Trench 8 plan, section and photographs Figure 8: Trenches 4, 5 and 6 photographs Figure 9: Site location with1938-39 Ordnance Survey Figure 10: Trench locations with1938-39 Ordnance Survey

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Site Background

1.1.1 Archaeology South-East (ASE) was commissioned by RSK ADAS Ltd to undertake an evaluation consisting of archaeological trial trenching and geoarchaeological pits on land adjacent to the existing Leigh University Technical College (UTC), Brunel Way, Dartford (Figure 1). The evaluation was carried out in relation to a planning permission for a new school and associated infrastructure.

1.1.2 The development site, hereafter 'the site', is centred at National Grid Reference TQ 54717 75787 and located on the northern edge of Dartford, between the A206 road (Bob Dunn Way/University Way) and Brunel Way. The site was accessed via Brunel Way.

1.1.3 The single field covers an area of 0.51 ha. It is adjacent to the carpark of the new Leigh UTC, located within ‘The Bridge’ – a new development of commercial residential and educational buildings. Ground cover was rough grass with a belt of trees and scrub in the north-eastern corner and eastern boundary and a line of trees along the southern boundary, between the site and the A206. A hedgerow bisecting the site from east to west had been recently removed.

1.2 Geology and Topography

1.2.1 The geology of the site is described by British Geological Survey 1:50,000 mapping as Seaford Chalk Formation and Newhaven Chalk Formation (undifferentiated) overlain by superficial deposits comprising sands and gravels of the Taplow Gravel Formation (BGS 2016) of the Thames Group. Borehole logs adjacent to the site (TQ57NW447; TQ57NW448; TQ57NW449; TQ57NW451), available through the BGS (2016), describe a sequence of deposition comprising shallow topsoil overlying a shallow silty sand. River terrace deposits underlying these superficial units comprise stiff sands and gravels. In TQ57NW451, a clear division is made between gravel dominant upper, and sand dominant lower units.

1.2.2 Geotechnical information (REC 2016) supplied by the client describe a similar sequence comprising made ground of topsoil overlying fine probable Pleistocene sediment, which in turn caps gravels and sands of the Taplow Gravel Formation.

1.2.3 The WSI (RSK ADAS 2016) for archaeological investigations at the site notes that previous archaeological interventions in the Dartford area have yielded Palaeolithic remains from the Taplow Formation. Bridgland (1994) assigns the Taplow/Mucking gravels to Marine Isotope Stages 8-6, and supported by amino acid racemization ration dating on Bithynia (Bowen et al 1989). Nearby, at the pits in Crayford and Erith, brickearths assigned to the same date as Taplow terrace have yielded large numbers of Levallois artefacts (see references in Pettitt and White 2012, 235).

1.2.4 Pettitt and White (2012, 274-77) describe, with caveats, Ashton and Lewis’s (2002) interpretation of population crisis during MIS7 and add changing © Archaeology South-East UCL 1 Archaeology South-East Leigh UTC, Dartford, Kent ASE Report No: 2017035

palaeogeography at this time as an explanation for the clear decline in artefact numbers from respective Thames terraces (Pettitt and White 2012, 276), notable in the Taplow terrace. Despite comparatively poorer return from the later terraces of the Thames, the complex situation of Pleistocene deposits at different un-tested locations necessitates specialist investigation to determine each site’s potential.

1.3 Planning Background

1.3.1 The evaluation was carried out to address the archaeological conditions attached to the planning permission granted for the development (Planning Ref: 16/01540/FUL) by Kent County Council under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The archaeological conditions are as follows:

Section 1 Prior to the commencement of development the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, will secure and implement:

i archaeological field evaluation works in accordance with a specification and written timetable which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority; and

ii further archaeological investigation, recording and reporting, determined by the results of the evaluation, in accordance with a specification and timetable which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason- To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded.

Section 2 No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of geoarchaeological work in accordance with a written specification and timetable which has been submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason – To ensure that features of geoarchaeological interest are properly examined and recorded in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.

1.3.2 A historic environment desk based assessment (ADAS 2016) indicated that the site has a high potential to contain archaeological deposits dating to the modern period, in particular relating to the Joyce Green Hospital. Following consultation with the Local Authority the scope of archaeological work was agreed with Ms Wendy Rogers, Archaeologist, Heritage Conservation Group, Kent County Council.

1.3.3 Accordingly, a Written Scheme of Investigation for archaeological trial trenching and geoarchaeological test pitting was prepared (RSK ADAS 2016) in accordance with the advice given by Ms Rogers and was approved by KCC prior to the commencement of fieldwork. This specified that a sample of the site would be evaluated equating to eight trenches of varying lengths and that

deeper geoarchaeological pits would be machined at the end of each evaluation trench.

1.4 Scope of Report

1.4.1 This report presents the results of the archaeological evaluation. It describes and interprets the results and assesses the potential for the survival of archaeological and geoarchaeological remains on the site.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 Introduction

2.1.1 The following is taken from the historic environment desk-based assessment (ADAS 2016). The Kent HER contains twenty-eight records for heritage assets within 600m of the site. The most pertinent to the site are summarised below and are referred to by their Kent HER number.

2.2 Palaeolithic

2.2.1 The underlying geology of the site is Taplow Terrace Gravel. Previous archaeological evaluations carried out in the Dartford Area indicate that these gravels have potential for Palaeolithic remains. For example in Crayford Brickearth and gravel sequence deposits (which overlie the surface of Taplow Terrace Gravels) abundant undisturbed flint knapping scatters were preserved in association with faunal remains such as woolly rhinoceros (Archaeology South-East 2008). Geotechnical pits dug in 1996 along University Way (EKE8379) did not reveal any archaeological remains.

2.3 Bronze Age

2.3.1 The Kent HER contains two records that may relate to Bronze Age activity in the landscape around the site. These two records relate to flint scatter and possible earthwork (MKE16764), which are located 189m to the south-west of the site and a possible ring ditch (MKE16765), which was found during trial trenching evaluations carried out in 1997 on Joyce Green Lane 209m to the south of the site. Only the south-western quadrant of the possible ring ditch was excavated. Early flints were found at the bottom of the fill and two possible waste flakes were also found. Also in the fill was a shoulder-neck pottery sherd, from a courseware vessel, possibly dated to the early Saxon period. The excavators considered that, even with this evidence, the ring ditch is still believed to be of prehistoric date.

2.4 Roman

2.4.1 The Kent HER contains two entries relating to the Romano-British period in the vicinity of the site. One of these records relate to a Roman cremation cemetery (MKE766) which was discovered 423m to the north-west of the site during gravel extraction works at Joyce Green Farm in the late 19th century. The other record is a finds spot of three Roman coins (MKE767) which were unearthed in a garden on Temple Hill over 69m to the south of the site (Kent HER 2016).

2.5 Anglo-Saxon

2.5.1 Historic Environment Records for this period in the landscape around the site include an Anglo-Saxon cemetery at the site of the Littlebrook Power Station (EKE4780), which was excavated in c.1969 and is located 295m to the north- east of the site.

2.6 Medieval

2.6.1 Joyce’s Farm (MKE16097) which is located 579m to the west of the site was first recorded in 1254 AD and is marked on a map dating from 1769 (Kent HER 2016). It was possibly demolished in the early 20th century when gravel extraction began immediately to its west (ibid 2016).

2.7 Post-Medieval

2.7.1 There are four post-medieval farmsteads (MKE16096, MKE83782, MKE83783, MKE83784 and MKE83891) recorded in the vicinity of the site. The closest of these to the site is Temple Farm (MKE16093/MKE83784), which is located 314m to the south-west.

2.8 Modern

2.8.1 The site is located on the site of the former Joyce Green Hospital (MKE15326). One of three hospitals, collectively known as the River Hospitals, built in the area of Joyce Green and the River Thames. It was originally built in 1903 as a smallpox hospital it later became a general fever hospital until the outbreak of the Second World War when it became a general hospital under the Emergency Medical Scheme. It was transferred to the NHS in 1948 and closed in 2000.

2.8.2 Historic mapping and Google Earth show hospital buildings in the north and eastern parts of the site. Specifically, three parallel rectangular ward buildings on a north-south alignment are shown within the site boundary, at the northern and western end of the site. An access road leads from the south of these buildings eastwards. This access road corresponds with an east-west hedged boundary showing on aerial photographs that has recently been removed (Section 1.1.3). The east-west access road joins is marked as leading to another access road which runs along the eastern boundary of the site and leads to a building marked as ‘Lodge’. This building lies within the south- eastern corner of the site and probably was located at an entrance to the hospital. The main hospital complex extends to the north and east of the site and was served by a tramway. Aerial photography analysis demonstrates that these buildings were all demolished following the closure of the hospital in 2000. Foundations, access tracks and buried services relating to the use of these buildings in the hospital grounds are likely to be present within the site boundary.

2.9 Project Aims and Objectives

2.9.1 The general aim of the trial trenching and geoarchaeological test-pitting was to determine the location, extent, date, character, condition and significance of any surviving archaeological and geoarchaeological remains, and to record and report them in sufficient detail to allow Kent County Council’s archaeological representative to decide on an appropriate mitigation policy.

2.9.2 The specific aim of the trial trenches as specified in the WSI (RSK ADAS 2016) was to identify and record any buried archaeological remains or artefacts associated with the Joyce Green Hospital and the ‘Lodge’ building marked the 1909 OS map. © Archaeology South-East UCL 5 Archaeology South-East Leigh UTC, Dartford, Kent ASE Report No: 2017035

2.9.3 The specific aim of the geoarchaeological test pits was, considering the proximity to significant Palaeolithic locales at Crayford, to investigate any brickearth overlying the river terrace sequence for flint knapping scatters or faunal remains.

2.9.4 The fieldwork took place within, and will contribute to, the goals of the regional frameworks set out in South East Research Framework (SERF) for Kent County Council (SERF 2016).

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 General Fieldwork Methodology

3.1.1 The archaeological evaluation and geoarchaeological test-pitting took place between the 23rd and 26th January 2017 and was conducted in accordance with the Written Scheme of Investigation (RSK ADAS 2016) and the appropriate CIfA guidance and standards (CIfA 2014a; 2014b) as well as Kent County Council’s Specification for archaeological trial trenching. Archaeological evaluation trenches were located to investigate areas where former hospital buildings were located as well as testing other, presumably blank, areas. Trenches 5 and 6 had to be moved as their original position was outside the fenced site area. Trench 1 was moved south-west of its original position for the same reason and also due to the presence of dense undergrowth. Trench 6 was shortened due to the presence of tree roots.

3.2 Archaeological evaluation trenches

3.2.1 Eight archaeological evaluation trenches of varying lengths were excavated (Figure 2). All trenches were 1.8m wide. Trenches were stripped, under archaeological supervision, of overburden and subsoil deposits using a tracked 14 ton 360° mechanical excavator fitted with a toothless bucket.

3.2.2 The archaeological evaluation trenches were machine-excavated to depths of between 0.35m and 1.23m. Mechanical excavation continued to the top surface of archaeological deposits or else to the top of the undisturbed natural geological deposit.

3.2.3 Archaeological features were excavated by hand including some modern features and disturbances. 20% (or at least a 1m-long segment) of non- structural linear features were excavated. Some machine excavation of modern features took place where depths of trenches made it unsafe for hand excavation to continue.

3.2.4 At one end of each of the eight evaluation trenches, geoarchaeological test- pits were dug further with the mechanical excavator under the constant supervision of a geoarchaeologist. These test-pits were 2m x 1.8m and up to 2.5m deep.

3.2.5 Archaeological features, soil horizons and the natural strata were recorded using a unique sequence of context numbers for each trench. They were drawn in section (at a scale of 1:10). Trench extents and features were plotted using a GPS. Written records (trench and context descriptions) were made on pro forma trench recording sheets and context sheets.

3.2.6 A digital photographic record was made, consisting of high-resolution .jpg images. The photographic record aimed to provide an overview of the evaluation and the surrounding area. Individual shots of features in section were taken, in addition to working. The photographic register included: shot number, location of shot, direction of shot and a brief description of the subject photographed.

3.2.7 Finds from all investigated features were collected and bagged according to © Archaeology South-East UCL 7 Archaeology South-East Leigh UTC, Dartford, Kent ASE Report No: 2017035

context number and retained for identification and study. All finds were properly processed according to ASE guidelines and the CIfA Standard and guidance for the collection, documentation, conservation and research of archaeological materials (2014c). All pottery and other finds, where appropriate, was marked with the site code and context number.

3.2.8 All spoil heaps and bases of trenches were scanned visually for finds recovery.

3.3 Geoarchaeological test-pits

3.3.1 The geoarchaeological test-pitting was carried out in accordance with Kent County Council’s specification for geoarchaeological test-pitting. Seven geoarchaeological test-pits (GTP) each measuring approximately 2.0m x 1.8m, were excavated at the ends of all trenches (excepting Trench 5) using a mechanical excavator fitted with a toothless ditching bucket (Figure 2). Each GTP was excavated under close geoarchaeological supervision in spits not exceeding 50mm and, where encountered, following the interface between sedimentary units. The spoil from each bucket was visually scanned for artefacts.

3.3.2 GTP 8 part-collapsed during excavation due to the presence of a feature immediately adjacent to the test-pit. Excavation of GTP1 ceased in the upper river terrace deposits as cementation of the deposits precluded safe excavation. Due to the close proximity to other test-pits, no GTP was excavated in Trench 5.

3.3.3 In accordance with the KCC specification cited in the WSI (RSK ADAS 2016), samples of sedimentary units were sieved through a 10mm mesh for artefact recovery.

3.3.4 Following excavation, each pit was recorded and immediately backfilled.

3.3.5 All deposits were recorded using standard ASE paperwork and all trenches were surveyed using digital survey equipment.

3.4 Archive

3.4.1 The site archive is currently held at the offices of ASE and will be deposited at Dartford Museum in due course. We have contacted Dartford Museum regarding storage of the site archive and await their reply.

Context sheets 0 Section sheets 1 Plans sheets 0 Colour photographs 0 B&W photos 0 Digital photos 68 Context register 0 Drawing register 0 Watching brief forms 0 Trench Record forms 8

Table 1: Quantification of site paper archive

Bulk finds 1 bag

Registered finds (number of) 0 Flots and environmental remains from bulk 0 samples Palaeoenvironmental specialists sample 0 samples (e.g. columns, prepared slides) Waterlogged wood 0 Wet sieved environmental remains from bulk 0 samples

Table 2: Quantification of artefact and environmental samples

4.0 RESULTS

4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 Modern deposits and features, all probably associated with the former hospital, were recorded in five out of eight of the evaluation trenches (Trenches 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8). These are described in Sections 4.3 to 4.7. The results from the archaeologically negative evaluation trenches are summarised in Section 4.8 and their details tabulated in Appendix 1. Geoarchaeological test pits are summarised in section 4.9 and the logs for each GTP can be found in Appendix 2.

4.2 General soil descriptions

4.2.1 Across the site turf and topsoil varied in thickness from less than 0.2m in the areas that had been recently disturbed to between 0.23 and 0.54m in undisturbed areas. This was a dark greyish brown silty clay. Topsoil overlaid subsoil of light orangey brown silt between 0.05m and 0.57m thick, where it survived at all. Natural geology was orange sand and gravel apart from in Trench 1 where the natural changed to a light yellow sand at the south-western end of the trench.

4.2.2 All recorded archaeological features were modern and were cut into the subsoil and natural geology and were sealed by turf and topsoil unless otherwise stated.

4.3 Trench 1 (Figure 3)

Length: 20m Depth: 0.7-0.8m Ground level: 6.47-6.75m AODm

Context Type Interpretation Thickness m Height m AOD 1/001 Layer Topsoil 0.08-0.45 6.47-6.75 1/002 Layer Subsoil 0.22-0.61 1/003 Deposit Modern material 0.61 6.39 1/004 Layer Natural 0.02 6.00-6.19

Table 3: Trench 1 list of recorded contexts

4.3.1 Trench 1 was positioned in the north-eastern corner of the site. Dense scrub and small trees had to be cleared by the mechanical excavator prior the excavation of the trench. Rooting was evident along the length of the trench and the north-eastern end of the trench displayed evidence of modern buildings, probably relating to the former hospital.

4.3.2 In the north-eastern end of the trench disturbance down to at least 0.69m was recorded [1/003]. There was no subsoil here and all that could be seen was a 5m long area of rubble, bricks, concrete, and broken ceramic piping which is likely to represent a grubbed out foundation to a demolished building. .Just to the south-west of this was a concrete base showing in the south-east facing section. Comparison with the OS 1938-39 edition (Figures 9 and 10) shows © Archaeology South-East UCL 10 Archaeology South-East Leigh UTC, Dartford, Kent ASE Report No: 2017035

this area of disturbance to correlate with an access route for the hospital. No buildings are shown in this exact area on these maps or on later maps. It is not clear therefore where the brick and concrete rubble in the north-eastern end of the trench derives from.

4.3.3 A disused electric cable and a plastic water pipe were also present.

4.4 Trench 2 (Figure 4)

Length: 20m Depth: 0.85-1.23m Ground level: 6.7m AODm

Context Type Interpretation Thickness m Height m AOD 2/001 Layer Topsoil 0.12-0.13 6.7 2/002 Layer Modern made 0.10-1.02 6.58 ground 2/003 Layer Natural 0.01-0.02 5.55-5.87

Table 4: Trench 2 list of recorded contexts

4.4.1 Trench 2 was positioned in the northern part of the site. It contained mostly modern ‘features’ and made ground representing demolition debris of hospital buildings.

4.4.2 Between 0.71m and 1.1m thickness of modern made ground [2/002] was recorded along almost the entire length of the trench consisting of dark brown silty clay mixed with modern bricks and concrete. There was no evidence of any subsoil.

4.4.3 In the south-western half of the trench the made ground was particularly deep at more than 1.1m thickness and appeared to be filling a wide linear cut. This feature is thought to be a soakaway and was not hand excavated as it was clearly modern. Adjacent to this feature and probably associated with it was a ceramic drain capped off with concrete. The probable soakaway corresponds with a rectangular protrusion on the western side of one of the north-south ward buildings (Figure 10).

4.4.4 To the north-east of this drain were two pits with dark grey mixed fills. These were not hand excavated as they were demonstrably modern, having fragments of brick and coal on the surface. The two pits appear to be within the footprint of the ward building described in 4.4.3 (Figure 10)..

4.5 Trench 3 (Figure 5)

Length: 20m Depth: 0.7-1.2m Ground Level: 6.57-6.67m AOD

Context Type Interpretation Thickness m Height Parent m AOD 3/001 Layer Topsoil 0.14-0.17 6.57-6.67 3/002 Layer Subsoil 0.47-0.57 6.5 3/003 Fill Modern material 3/003 3/004 Layer Natural 0.02-0.06 5.48-5.90 3/005 Cut Modern ditch At least 0.9m deep 6.5

Table 5: Trench 3 list of recorded contexts

4.5.1 Trench 3 was located in the centre of the site. The soil profile was a thin layer of turf and topsoil overlying a thick layer of subsoil which sealed natural gravel. Cut into this were a series of modern services and features relating to the hospital buildings.

4.5.2 The trench was crossed by two plastic water pipes, a broken ceramic drain and an electricity cable. In the centre of the trench one edge of a brick and concrete plinth was observed at 0.7m below ground level, the rest lying under the northern baulk. This was thought to the edge of deep foundation, however it does not correspond with any hospital buildings showing on OS maps (Figure 10).

4.5.3 At the western end of the trench a 1m wide and 10m long ditch was recorded [3/005] on an east-west alignment. Ditch [3/005] extended for 8.2m to the east where it ran under the southern baulk of the trench and it did not join with the brick and concrete plinth in the centre of the trench. The ditch was cut into subsoil and natural gravel. Its single fill was dark grey in colour and contained asphalt, grey gravel, yellow brick fragments and concrete. The feature was machined down to 1.2m below ground level. The western extent of it was then machined down further and was bottomed at 2.1m below ground level. Modern material was present within the fill all the way to its base. This ditch appears to be extending from the eastern side of one of the north-south ward buildings as shown on OS maps (Figure 10) and is likely to be a drain.

4.6 Trench 7 (Figure 6)

Length: 10m Depth: 0.73-1.3m Ground Level: 6.70-6.80m AOD

Context Type Interpretation Thickness m Height m AOD 7/001 Layer Topsoil 0.01-0.14 6.70-6.80 7/002 Layer Modern made 0.47-1.17 6.66-6.68 ground 7/003 Layer Natural 0.01-0.21 5.63-5.76

Table 6: Trench 7 list of recorded contexts

4.6 Trench 7 was located in the western side of the site. Between 0.47m and 1.17m of modern made ground [7/002] was encountered along the whole length of the trench. This loose sandy deposit contained modern red bricks, asphalt and banded grey and yellow sandy gravel. The made ground represented demolished hospital building foundations. All subsoil had been removed by the modern activity.

4.7 This made ground broadly corresponds with the footprint of one of the north- south ward buildings showing on OS maps (Figure 10).

4.7 Trench 8 (Figure 7)

Length: 20m Depth: 0.39-0.56m Ground Level: 6.74-6.82m AOD

Context Type Interpretation Length Width Depth Height 8/001 Layer Topsoil trench trench 0.15-0.24 6.74-6.82 8/002 Layer Subsoil trench trench 0.09-0.20 6.6 8/003 Layer Natural trench trench 0.06-0.15 6.28 8/004 Fill Fill, single 8/005 Cut 6.28

Table 7: Trench 8 list of recorded contexts

4.7.1 Trench 8 was located towards the south-eastern part of the site. It traversed the recently removed east-west hedgerow.

4.7.2 The trench was crossed by several services, all on an east-west alignment: three electric cables; one ceramic pipe containing cables and one rusted metal pipe, possibly for water.

4.7.3 Where the hedgerow had formerly crossed the trench a 0.7m wide ditch was revealed which had a loose fill containing fragments of coal. Dense rooting was in evidence and it is considered likely to be part of the former hedgerow ditch.

4.7.4 At the southern end of the trench a pit was seen in the east-facing section [8/005]. This 0.9m deep and 2.4m long feature was filled with loose sand and gravel which collapsed quickly and did not contain any artefactual material. This feature was not seen until the geoarchaeological test-pit was later excavated at this end of the trench. Consequently the feature could not be hand excavated or the section cleaned as the trench was too deep by that point. The lack of finds from the feature renders it undated however it appeared to be cut through the topsoil which indicates a recent date. It lies to the south of the former east-west hedgerow (Section 2.8.2) which corresponded with a former access road to the hospital.

4.7.5 A flint tool was recovered from the surface of the natural gravel at the southern end of the trench which probably derives from subsoil [8/002] above. This is likely to be a broken knife blade of broadly Mesolithic to Early Bronze Age date range (Section 5). The flint was not associated with any features and showed evidence of post-depositional movement. It is likely to have arrived in its location through the process of historic ploughing.

4.8 Archaeologically negative trenches: Trenches 4, 5 and 6 (Figure 8)

4.8.1 Trenches 4, 5, and 6 were located in the southern part of the site to the south of the recently removed hedgerow. This is an area that historic mapping shows as being within the hospital grounds but not built upon (Figures 9 and 10). The archaeological evidence corresponds with the map evidence as all three trenches were completely devoid of any features related to the hospital, neither did they contain any service trenches. The topsoil varied in thickness from 0.45m to 0.65m. This overlaid a thin layer of subsoil which sealed natural gravel. Tree roots were in evidence in Trenches 5 and 6 but there was no other disturbance in any of the trenches.

4.9 Geoarchaeological test-pits

4.9.1 In GTPs 1 and 3, a very shallow (max 0.25 m) possible remnant brickearth silt capped the Taplow Formation. However, this deposit was of low preservational potential and yielded no archaeological remains.

4.9.2 The surface of the River Terrace deposits were, in general, sandy gravels across the whole site. Two broad units could be discerned in the River Terrace deposits at the site, the contact between the two being sharp in all GTPs, suggesting an erosional interface and perhaps a hiatus in aggradation.

4.9.3 The upper unit tended to be stiff coarsely bedded sandy gravels, in places alternating in colour and composition. The lower unit comprised coarse sands, in places with a gravel component. Sizeable flint clasts were identified throughout the sequence, as were tertiary pebbles. The contrast between the two units is suggestive of a change in the regime of the river’s depositional system, perhaps with a temporal hiatus between the finer lower deposits and the higher energy upper gravels.

4.9.4 No artefacts or ecofacts were recovered from the investigation, nor were samples retrieved due to their low potential to preserve palaeoenvironmental remains.

5.0 THE FINDS

5.1 Summary

5.1.1 A single piece of worked flint was recovered during the evaluation. It was washed, air dried, quantified by count and weight and bagged by material and context. The flint has been packed and stored following CIfA guidelines (2014c).

5.2 The Flintwork by Karine Le Hégarat

A retouched flake weighing 20g was recovered from the surface of the natural gravel in Trench 8 which probably derived from the subsoil context [8/002]. It is made on a mid-brown flint with a stained thin (<1mm) outer surface. The artefact shows evidence of post-depositional movement. It is also broken with the proximal end being absent. It displays direct abrupt and semi-abrupt retouch on the right edge and alternating low and semi-abrupt retouch on the left edge. The tool is too fragmented to confirm what it was used for, but could represent a broken knife. It is likely to predate the Middle Bronze Age and can be allocated to a broad Mesolithic to Early Bronze Age date range.

6.0 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

6.1 Overview of stratigraphic sequence

6.1.1 Across the site turf and topsoil varied in thickness from less than 0.2m in the areas that had been recently disturbed to between 0.23 and 0.54m in undisturbed areas. Topsoil overlaid subsoil which varied in thickness between 0.05m and 0.57m, where it survived at all. Natural geology was orange sand and gravel apart from in the south-western end of Trench 1 where the natural changed to a light yellow sand. This natural strata was reached at a depth of between 0.3m and 0.69m below ground level in Trenches 4, 5, 6 and 8 and was deeper in Trenches 1-3 and Trench 7 at between 0.71m and 1.23m below ground level.

6.1.2 Modern deposits and features, all probably associated with the former Joyce Green hospital, were recorded in five out of eight of the evaluation trenches (Trenches 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8). These included drains, water pipes, cables, grubbed out foundations, a soakaway and demolition debris. The features were located to the north of the recently removed east-west hedgerow (apart from one pit in Trench 8) and correspond to where hospital buildings are marked on the OS 20th century maps (Figure 9).

6.1.3 No features definitely pre-dating the hospital were recorded.

6.1.4 All the geoarchaeological test-pits followed the same broad sequence, with modern soil/made ground overlying the river terrace sands and gravels. Deposits exposed during test-pitting did not deviate from that illustrated by the geotechnical data and BGS borehole logs The terrace gravels are clearly high energy deposits, and two broad units identified within these – upper coarse gravel and lower sand dominant units.

6.1.5 The evaluation methodology, which combined trial trenches with geoarchaeological test-pitting was effective in its aim of assessing the survival and character of archaeological and geoarchaeological remains on the site.

6.2 Deposit survival and existing impacts

6.2.1 The lack of features definitely pre-dating the hospital may be due to an actual absence of past archaeological activity or, in the case of Trenches 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8, it is likely to be the result of destruction caused by the construction of the hospital.

6.2.2 Features were cut from high up, either cut through the topsoil or were sealed by a thin layer of topsoil and turf.

6.3 Discussion of archaeological remains by period

6.3.1 One find of a flint artefact was retrieved from the subsoil at in the southern end of Trench 8 – an area that had not been subject to disturbance from hospital buildings. This probable knife of likely Mesolithic to Early Bronze Age date is an isolated find that was not associated with any archaeological feature. Its presence in the subsoil is likely to have resulted from historic ploughing and its original provenance is not known. As a single prehistoric find it cannot be taken © Archaeology South-East UCL 18 Archaeology South-East Leigh UTC, Dartford, Kent ASE Report No: 2017035

as definite evidence of the presence of prehistoric features on the site. That said, it could indicate prehistoric activity in the area, perhaps associated with Bronze Age activity to the south (Section 2.3.1).

6.3.2 The features exposed within the evaluation trenches are all likely related to the 20th century use of the site as a hospital. What remained were pits, grubbed out foundations, part of an in situ probable foundation, a soakaway, demolition debris and services. Most of these features correspond with two of the four north-south ward buildings shown on 20th century OS maps in the northern half of the site (Figure 10). The exception to this is the made ground consisting of demolished building debris in the north-eastern part of Trench 1 which must have derived from a demolished building not shown on any historic maps. Similarly, in Trench 3, the in situ brick and concrete plinth in the middle of the trench is likely to be part of a foundation to a modern building that was perhaps too small to have been surveyed and therefore does not show on the historic maps.

6.3.3 The majority of the hospital remains consisted of demolition debris, some of which was filling grubbed out foundations. Preservation is therefore low and the remains found are not able to inform our understanding of the hospital – its design, use and development - in any meaningful way except confirming what was already know from 20th century photographs and OS historic maps. As such the features are not considered to be of high archaeological significance.

6.4 Discussion of the geoarchaeological remains

6.4.1 No artefacts or palaeoenvironmental remains were identified from the investigation.

6.5 Potential impact on archaeological remains

6.5.1 The modern hospital features occur close the ground surface and will therefore be impacted by the groundworks associated with the proposed development.

6.6 Consideration of research aims

6.6.1 The general aim of the trial trenching and geoarchaeological test-pitting was to determine the location, extent, date, character, condition and significance of any surviving archaeological and geoarchaeological remains, and to record and report them has been addressed.

6.6.2 The specific aim to identify and record any buried archaeological remains or artefacts associated with the Joyce Green Hospital marked the 1909 OS map has been addressed although the information gained from the features is low. No evidence of the building marked as ‘Lodge’ on the 20th century maps was located as this is just outside the evaluated area.

6.6.3 The specific aim of the geoarchaeological test pits was, considering the proximity to significant Palaeolithic locales at Crayford, to investigate any brickearths overlying the river terrace sequence for flint knapping scatters or faunal remains. No brickearths were observed apart from a layer of subsoil in GTP1 and GTP3 that may be remnant brickearth but is considered to be of low preservational value. © Archaeology South-East UCL 19 Archaeology South-East Leigh UTC, Dartford, Kent ASE Report No: 2017035

6.7 Conclusions

6.7.1 Modern deposits and features, all probably associated with the former hospital, were recorded in five out of eight of the evaluation trenches, all within the northern half of the site. These included drains, water pipes, cables, grubbed out foundations, a soakaway and demolition debris and correspond to where hospital buildings are marked on the OS 20th century maps. The southern half of the site was devoid of archaeological remains apart from one pit of probable modern date. No remains that definitely pre-dated the hospital were revealed. The presence of one flint artefact found in the subsoil suggests prehistoric activity in the area but is not indicative of contemporary activity on the site itself. The geoarchaeological test-pits have demonstrated low preservational value for the deposits on the site.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ADAS 2016. Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment: The Inspiration Centre at Leigh UTC, Dartford, Kent.

Archaeology South-East 2008. An Archaeological Evaluation at Spring Vale, Dartford, Kent. ASE project no 3226

Ashton, N.M and Lewis, S. 2002. Deserted Britain: declining populations in the British Late Middle Pleistocene. Antiquity 76: 791-798.

Bowen, D.Q, Hughes, S.A. et al. 1989. Land-sea correlations in the Pleistocene based on isoleucine epimerization in non-marine molluscs. Nature 340: 49-51.

Bridgland, D.R. 1994. Quaternary of the Thames. London: Chapman & Hall.

CIfA. 2014a. Standard and Guidance for archaeological field evaluation (revised). Chartered Institute for Archaeologists

CIfA. 2014b. Code of Conduct (revised). Chartered Institute for Archaeologists

CIfA. 2014c. Standard and guidance for the collection, documentation, conservation and research of archaeological materials. Chartered Institute for Archaeologists

Kent County Council, Specification for geoarchaeological test-pitting

Kent County Council, Evaluation-Trial Trenching requirements

Pettitt, P. and White, M. 2012. The British Palaeolithic: Human Societies at the Edge of the Pleistocene World. London: Routledge.

REC 2016. Phase II Geo-environmental assessment: Inspiration Academy, Dartford. Rec reference: 1CO102305P2R1. Manchester: REC

RSK ADAS 2016. Written Scheme of Investigation for Trial Trenching Evaluation and Geoarchaeological Assessment, Leigh UTC, Dartford, Kent

SERF, 2016. South East Research Framework

Online Sources – accessed February 2017

BGS - British Geological Survey Geology of Britain Viewer - http://www.bgs.ac.uk/discoveringGeology/geologyOfBritain/viewer.html Google Earth

Digimaps - https://digimap.edina.ac.uk/

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ASE would like to thank RSK ADAS for commissioning the work and BAM Construction Ltd for funding it. Diarmuid O’Seaneachain from RSK ADAS provided assistance throughout the project. Wendy Rogers from Kent County Council monitored the project. The evaluation was directed by Kate Clover and Edward Blinkhorn with assistance from Lorna Webb. The site was surveyed by Kate Clover and the figures for this report were produced by Andrew Lewsey. Jon Sygrave managed the excavations, Jim Stevenson and Dan Swift the post-excavation process.

HER Summary

Site Name: Leigh UTC, Dartford

Site Address: Brunel Way, Dartford Summary: 8 trench evaluation with geoarchaeological test-pits at the end of each evaluation trench (apart from Trench 5)

District/Unitary: Dartford Parish: Dartford Period: Modern

NGR TQ 5471 7578

Type of archaeological work: Evaluation and Geoarchaeological investigation

Date of recording: 23rd-26th January 2017 Unit undertaking recording: ASE Geology: Chalk of the Seaford and Newhaven Chalk Formations with superficial deposits consisting of sand and gravel from the Taplow Gravel formation

Title and author of accompanying report:

An archaeological evaluation and geoarchaeological test-pitting at Leigh UTC, Dartford, by Kate Clover and Edward Blinkhorn

Summary of fieldwork results

Modern deposits and features, all probably associated with the former hospital, were recorded in five out of eight of the evaluation trenches, all within the northern half of the site. These included drains, water pipes, cables, grubbed out foundations, a soakaway and demolition debris and correspond to where hospital buildings are marked on the OS 20th century maps. The southern half of the site was devoid of archaeological remains apart from one probably modern pit. No remains that definitely pre-dated the hospital were revealed. The geoarchaeological test-pits have demonstrated low preservational value.

Location of archive/finds: ASE and then Dartford Museum

Contact at Unit: Kate Clover, Ed Blinkhorn, Date: February 2017

Jon Sygrave

Finds summary

Find type Material Period Quantity ?Knife Flint Neo/Early Bronze 1 Age

OASIS Form

OASIS ID: archaeol6-275224

Project details Project name An Archaeological Evaluation and Geoarchaeological Test-pitting at Leigh UTC, Brunel Way, Dartford, Kent Short description of Modern deposits and features, all probably associated with the the project former hospital, were recorded in five out of eight of the evaluation trenches, all within the northern half of the site. These included drains, water pipes, cables, grubbed out foundations, a soakaway and demolition debris and correspond to where hospital buildings are marked on the OS 20th century maps. The southern half of the site was devoid of archaeological remains apart from one probably modern pit. No remains that definitely pre-dated the hospital were revealed. The geoarchaeological test-pits have demonstrated low preservational value. Project dates Start: 23-01-2017 End: 26-01-2017 Previous/future work No / Not known Any associated UTC17 - Sitecode project reference codes Any associated 161116 - Contracting Unit No. project reference codes Type of project Field evaluation Site status None Current Land use Grassland Heathland 3 - Disturbed Monument type HOSPITAL Modern Monument type PIT Modern Significant Finds FLINT Early Bronze Age Methods & ''Sample Trenches'' techniques Development type School Prompt Direction from Local Planning Authority - PPS Position in the After full determination (eg. As a condition) planning process

Project location Country England Site location KENT DARTFORD DARTFORD Leigh UTC, Brunel Way, Dartford, Kent Postcode DA1 5FL Study area 0.51 Hectares Site coordinates TQ 5471 7578 51.459306696802 0.227200013482 51 27 33 N 000 13 37 E Point Height OD / Depth Min: 5.8m Max: 6.2m

Project creators Name of Archaeology South-East Organisation

Project brief no brief originator

Project design RSK ADAS originator

Project JON SYGRAVE director/manager Project supervisor Kate Clover Project supervisor Ed Blinkhorn

Type of commissioned by RSK ADAS sponsor/funding body Type of Developer sponsor/funding body Name of BAM Construction sponsor/funding body

Project archives Physical Archive Dartford Museum recipient Physical Contents ''Worked stone/lithics'' Digital Archive Dartford Museum recipient Digital Contents ''other'' Digital Media ''Images raster / digital photography'',''Text'' available Paper Archive Dartford Museum recipient Paper Contents ''other'' Paper Media ''Context sheet'',''Photograph'',''Section'' available

Project bibliography 1 Grey literature (unpublished document/manuscript) Publication type Title An Archaeological Evaluation and Geoarchaeological Test-pitting at Leigh UTC, Brunel Way, Dartford, Kent Author(s)/Editor(s) Clover, K and Blinkhorn, E Other bibliographic ASE report no 2017035 details Date 2017 Issuer or publisher ASE Place of issue or Witham, Essex publication Description pdf

Entered by Kate Clover ([email protected]) Entered on 3 February 2017

Appendix 1: Archaeologically negative evaluation trenches: list of recorded contexts

Thickness m Height Trench Context Type Interpretation m AOD

T4 4/001 Layer Topsoil 0.21-0.25 6.67-6.74 T4 4/002 Layer Subsoil 0.05-0.11 6.46-6.50 T4 4/003 Layer Natural 0.02-0.12 6.35-6.44

T5 5/001 Layer Topsoil 0.33-0.42 6.8 T5 5/002 Layer Subsoil 0.09-0.11 6.34-6.38 T5 5/003 Layer Natural 0.05-0.11 6.24-6.30

T6 6/001 Layer Topsoil 0.51-0.54 7.08 T6 6/002 Layer Subsoil 0.15-0.20 6.54 T6 6/003 Layer Natural 0.10-0.20 6.35-6.42

Appendix 2: Geoarchaeological test-pit logs

GTP1

Unit Sediment description Depth Deposit Height (m) interpretation m AOD 1 Black and dark greyish-brown humic 0.00- Topsoil + 6.75 silt with some stones. Deriving from 0.50 Subsoil local trees. Diffuse 2 Cemented light greyish-brown silt 0.50- Remnant 6.25 with 10% subrounded to angular 0.75 Brickearth? <50mm flints. Structureless. Sharp 3 Reddish-brown coarse sandy 0.75- River Terrace 6.0 gravel. <50mm tertiary pebbles and 0.95 Gravels flints. Sharp 4 Cemented yellowish brown medium 0.95- River Terrace 5.8 to coarse sands. Test pit ceased 1.20+ Gravels excavation due to cementation.

GTP2

Unit Sediment description Depth Deposit Height (m) interpretation m AOD 1 Tarmac / brick rubble / redeposited 0.00- Made Ground 6.77 river terrace gravels / concrete; 1.05 Overlain by c. 100mm of topsoil. Levelling deposit? Sharp 2 Horizontally bedded coarse greyish- 1.05- River Terrace 5.72 yellow and brownish-red sandy gravel. 2.90 Gravels Brownish red units part-cemented = increased iron concretions? Below 220 mostly brownish red sands and gravel. Subangular-rounded tertiary pebbles, flints and quartzite. 5mm bands of calcareous? Light blueish-grey silty fine sand @ 1.40 and 2.10. Sharp 3 Horizontally bedded finer grained stiff 2.90- River Terrace 3.87 reddish-brown sand than [2] + 3.40+ Gravels <250mm flint nodules.

GTP3

Unit Sediment description Depth Deposit Height (m) interpretation m AOD 1 Dark greyish-brown silt with some 0.00- Topsoil and 6.57 stones. 0.55 Subsoil

Diffuse 2 Cemented light greyish-brown silt 0.55- Remnant 6.02 with 10% subrounded to angular 0.75 Brickearth? <50mm flints. Structureless. Sharp 3 Reddish-brown coarse sandy gravel. 0.75- River Terrace 5.82 <50mm tertiary pebbles and flints. 2.45 Gravels Orangey-brown to 1.55m. Reddish brown to 2.45m. Sharp 4 Cemented yellowish grey medium to 2.45- River Terrace 4.12 coarse sand with large <250mm flint 3.50+ Gravels nodules. Gravel subrounded to angular.

GTP4

Unit Sediment description Depth Deposit Height (m) interpretation m AOD 1 Dark greyish-brown sandy silt with 0.00- Topsoil 6.75 some stones. 0.15 Diffuse 2 Orangey-brown sandy silt with 30% 0.15- Subsoil 6.6 <50mm mostly rounded, to 0.45 subangular, tertiary pebbles and flints. Sharp 3 Banded yellowish-grey and reddish- 0.45- River Terrace 6.3 brown sandy gravels. Frequent large 1.95 Gravels <200mm flints nodules and tertiary pebbles. Partly cemented. Sharp 4 Yellow and orangey-brown medium- 1.95- River Terrace 4.8 coarse sand. Massive. 2% <5mm 2.50+ Gravels rounded and subrounded flints. Moderately loose when worked. Cohesive in places.

GTP6

Unit Sediment description Depth Deposit Height (m) interpretation m AOD 1 Dark greyish-brown sandy silt with 0.00- Topsoil 7.09 some stones. 0.30 Diffuse 2 Orangey-brown sandy silt with 30% 0.30- Subsoil 6.79 <50mm mostly rounded, to 0.70 subangular, tertiary pebbles and flints. Diffuse 3 Light yellow/brown/grey coarse sandy 0.70- River Terrace 6.39 gravel. Stiff. Gravel = 5% <150mm 1.95 Gravels flint nodules. Mostly <50mm flints, and red and cream cherts and tertiary pebbles. Coarsening to base. Sharp 4 Stiff reddish-brown gravel and coarse 1.95- River Terrace 5.14 sands. Dark single at upper contact. 2.70+ Gravels <200mm flint nodules increasing to base Majority ~5mm tertiary pebbles. Rare light grey silty-sand cohesive trails.

GTP7

Unit Sediment description Depth Deposit Height (m) interpretation m AOD 1 Tarmac / brick rubble / redeposited 0.00- Made Ground 6.7 river terrace gravels / concrete; 1.00 Overlain by c. 100mm of topsoil. Levelling deposit? Sharp 2 Coarsely bedded brownish-grey 1.00- River Terrace 5.7 coarse sandy gravel. Majority 2.00 Gravels rounded/subrounded <100mm Tertiary pebbles and flints. Sharp 3 Coarsely bedded red / brown / grey 2.00- River Terrace 4.7 sandy gravel and yellowish-grey 3.30+ Gravels coarse sand. Alternating in 200mm bands.

Increasingly stiff at depth, sands weakly bedded. Base of deposit includes <250mm flint nodule. Could not excavate further.

© Archaeology South-East UCL 29 177000 174500 175000 175500 176000 176500 0 Crown copyright and database right 2015 right database and copyright Crown Contains Ordnance Survey data Survey Ordnance Contains

554000 Project161116 Ref: Report 2017035 No: © Archaeology South-East Archaeology 400 m Drawn by: APL Feb2017 The Site The

554500 Leigh UTC17, Dartford UTC17, Leigh Site Site location

555000

555500 Fig. 1 Fig. N

Sussex Office Essex Office London Office Units 1 & 2 27 Eastways Centre for Applied Archaeology 2 Chapel Place Witham UCL Institute of Archaeology Portslade Essex 31-34 Gordon Square East Sussex BN41 1DR CM8 3YQ London WC1H 0PY tel: +44(0)1273 426830 tel: +44(0)1376 331470 tel: +44(0)20 7679 4778 email: [email protected] email: [email protected] email: [email protected] www.archaeologyse.co.uk www.archaeologyse.co.uk www.ucl.ac.uk/caa