Archaeological

Desk Based

Assessment

______

185 Tower Bridge Road, London Borough of Southwark SE1 2UF

February 2020 | Project Ref AC01282A Archaeological Desk Based Assessment |

Author with date Reviewer code, with date

AJ, 18.02.2020 RD-0021, 18.02.2020

Project Number: 01282A

File Origin: M:\Archaeology Collective\Projects\Projects 1001-1500\Projects 1201- 1300\01282 - 185 Tower Bridge Rd\01282A\Reports\1282-185 Tower Bridge Road DBA v.2.docx

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 2

Contents

Non-Technical Summary

1. Introduction ...... 6 2. Methodology ...... 11 3. Relevant Policy Framework ...... 16 4. Archaeological Background ...... 23 5. Proposed Development and Potential Effects...... 38 6. Conclusions ...... 42 Sources consulted……………………………………………………………………..43 Figures

Proposed Development

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 3

Non-Technical Summary

This archaeological desk-based assessment has been prepared by Archaeology Collective, on behalf of Nanda Construction Limited to inform proposals to redevelop a vacant plot of land situated on the west side of Tower Bridge Road, Bermondsey, in the London Borough of Southwark.

The Site lies immediately adjacent to (north of) a standing building, a bespoke bank building constructed in c.1900, which is a grade II listed building. The proposed development involves the comprehensive refurbishment and extension of the existing building and the construction of a new building (with basement) on the adjacent vacant plot. This report focuses on the archaeological potential of this plot.

This report has confirmed that the Site does not contain any designated archaeological assets such as world heritage sites, scheduled monuments, protected wrecks, registered battlefields or registered parks & gardens where there would be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation in situ and against development.

The Greater London Historic Environment Record (GLHER) does not record any non-designated archaeological assets within the Site.

The Site lies within a Tier 1 London Borough of Southwark Archaeological Priority Area (APA) within which there is potential for the preservation of complex multi-phase deeply stratified archaeology.

Based on the information within the GLHER, supplemented by historic mapping from the mid- late 16th century onwards together with documentary research, the Site has been shown to have a medium potential for encountering deeply buried archaeological remains of prehistoric date, sealed by later phases of flood deposits. The potential for encountering the foundations of the post-medieval terraced houses and public house which formerly occupied the land is considered to be high, although any such remains are likely to have low local significance. The potential for encountering archaeological remains of Roman, early medieval or medieval date are considered to be low.

The construction of a basement within the new building will remove sub-surface deposits. If archaeological remains are present, then they may be impacted.

The conclusions of this assessment are in accordance with both national and local planning policy.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 4

1.0

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 5

1. Introduction

Background

1.1 This archaeological desk-based assessment has been prepared by Archaeology Collective on behalf of Nanda Construction Limited. Documentary and cartographic research was carried out by Dr. Anne Johnson BA (Hons) PhD FSA MCIfA.

1.2 The subject of this assessment, 185 Tower Bridge Road, comprises an open plot of land (hereafter known as the Site), situated c.200m south of Tower Bridge. The Site occupies the northeastern end of a triangular block of land, bounded by Tower Bridge Road to the east, Tooley Street to the south and Queen Elizabeth Street to the north, centred at NGR 533529,179952, within the London Borough of Southwark. A narrow lane running along the western boundary separates the Site from the neighbouring restaurant premises, ‘Restaurant Story’. The location is shown on Figures 1 & 2. The Site occupies an area of c.166 m2.

1.3 The adjacent four-storey purpose-built bank building (with basement) is a listed grade II building.1

1.4 The proposed development involves the comprehensive refurbishment and extension of the existing building and the construction of a new building (with basement) on the adjacent vacant plot.

1.5 The purpose of this assessment is to determine and assess the archaeological potential of the Site and to assess the significance of any relevant heritage assets identified. The report is informed by site inspection, historical information, and by data relating to archaeological assets. It seeks to provide sufficient information to allow an informed understanding of the potential impact of the proposed development on the significance of those assets, and to consider the need for solutions (design, engineering etc.) where necessary. This assessment will not address designated or non-designated built heritage assets such as listed buildings, locally listed buildings or conservation areas, which have been addressed in a separate heritage assessment.

1.6 The report considers heritage assets of archaeological interest, including finds/findspots of artefactual and ecofactual material (e.g. stone tools, bone), and locations, features or objects referenced from historic documents. Where appropriate, it refers to archaeological and palaeo-environmental deposits, including sub-surface archaeological remains of features, buildings and structures.

1 Historic England List Entry No. 1385972 (Former London & County Bank).

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 6

1.7 This assessment has been prepared in accordance with Standards and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-Based Assessment2 published by the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA). It takes into account the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and other local planning policy and guidance where relevant.

1.8 This desk-based assessment comprises an examination of digital data held by the Historic England Greater London Historic Environment Record (GLHER) together with documentary research. It incorporates a map regression indicating the impact of change over time.

1.9 This data has been collected for an area comprising a 250m radius of the Site boundary, which is referred to as the ‘study area’. This radius has been selected on the basis of professional judgment as being sufficient to determine the archaeological potential of the Site, taking into account its location, topography, and character. Geology

1.10 The British Geological Survey identifies the underlying solid geology across the Site as London Clay Formation (clay & silt). Situated c.200m south of the present river bank of the River Thames, the Site stands upon a small ’island’ of superficial sand and gravel deposits of the Kempton Park Gravel Member (Figure 3).3 This part of the Thames floodplain was characterised in the past by low sand and gravel islands (eyots) raised slightly above the Thames floodplain separated by braided watercourses, marshes and tidal mudflats, which were favoured for settlement and agriculture from prehistoric times (see 4.34 below).

1.11 The soils are recorded as loamy and clayey soils of coastal flats with naturally high groundwater.4

1.12 There is no site-specific geotechnical information currently available. However, archaeological monitoring in 2012 on the adjacent land to the west, on the site of the current restaurant, recorded an intact stratigraphic sequence at a single location along the north side which had not been truncated by a basement.5 The ground surface was recorded at 4.58m AOD. The sequence comprised a 1.5m thick deposit of made ground to 3.08m AOD overlying a 0.8m thick soil layer to a depth of 2.28m AOD above two naturally deposited silt and sand layers, each up to 0.5m in thickness: the upper a friable mid yellowish-brown silty sand to 1.78m AOD and the lower a friable layer of mid orange-yellow silty sand to the top of the natural gravels, which were recorded at 1.28m AOD.

2 CIfA. Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-based Assessment 2017 3 British Geological Society online viewer: https://www.bgs.ac.uk/discoveringGeology/geologyOfBritain/viewer.html 4 http://www.landis.org.uk/soilscapes/ 5 Barrowman 2012.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 7

1.13 The depositional sequence on this land indicated a generally dry environment on the higher ground in the centre of the gravel island, which had been subject to (undated) flooding episodes and the subsequent deposition of alluvial silts. There was no evidence for local peat formation, which would be anticipated on the lower fringes of the island. Topography

1.14 The Site stands upon level ground on the top of the ridge of the Horselydown Eyot, at c.5m AOD.

Site Photographs

Plate 1. Looking north towards Tower Bridge, showing the bank building on the left.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 8

Plate 2. Looking south, showing the vacant plot on the north side of the bank.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 9

2.0

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 10

2. Methodology

Sources

2.1 In preparing this assessment we have compiled readily available archaeological and historical information from documentary and cartographic sources, primarily:

 Information held by the Greater London Historic Environment Record on known archaeological sites, monuments and findspots within 250m of the Site (i.e. the study area);

 Maps and documents held by London Metropolitan Archives and online;  Southwark Council Local History Library & Archive;

 The Bodleian Library, Oxford;  The National Archives; and

 The National Heritage List for England curated by Historic England.

Assessment

2.2 The assessment seeks to understand and define the significance of heritage assets identified from the sources above, taking into account the categories of special interest defined in the NPPF, primarily archaeological interest, historic interest, architectural interest and artistic interest.

2.3 The importance of a heritage asset is the overall value assigned to it based on its heritage significance, reflecting its statutory designation or, in the case of undesignated assets, the professional judgement of the assessor (Table 1).

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 11

Table 1: Criteria for Assessing the Importance of Heritage Assets

Importance Criteria of the

asset

Very high World Heritage Sites and other assets of equal international importance

High Grade I and II* Registered Parks and Gardens, Scheduled Monuments, Protected Wreck Sites, Registered Battlefields, Grade I and II* Listed Buildings, and undesignated heritage assets of equal importance

Medium Conservation Areas, Grade II Registered Parks and Gardens, Grade II Listed Buildings, heritage assets on local lists and undesignated assets of equal importance

Low Undesignated heritage assets of lesser importance

2.4 The assessment also considers change to the setting and significance of heritage assets, where appropriate. Potential for unknown heritage assets

2.5 Archaeological features are often impossible to identify through desk-based assessment. The likelihood that significant undiscovered heritage assets may be present within the application site is referred to as archaeological potential. Overall levels of potential can be assigned to different landscape zones, following the criteria in Table 2, while recognising that the archaeological potential of any zone will relate to particular historical periods and types of evidence. The following factors are considered in assessing archaeological potential:

 The distribution and character of known archaeological remains in the vicinity, based principally on an appraisal of data in the [HER];

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 12

 The history of archaeological fieldwork and research in the surrounding area, which may give an indication of the reliability and completeness of existing records;

 Environmental factors such as geology, topography and soil quality, which would have influenced land-use in the past and can therefore be used to predict the distribution of archaeological remains;

 Land-use factors affecting the survival of archaeological remains, such as ploughing or commercial forestry planting; and

 Factors affecting the visibility of archaeological remains, which may relate to both environment and land-use, such as soils and geology (which may be more or less conducive to formation of cropmarks), arable cultivation (which has potential to show cropmarks and create surface artefact scatters), vegetation, which can conceal upstanding features, and superficial deposits such as peat and alluvium which can mask archaeological features.

2.6 In light of the above, the assessment of significant heritage within Sections 2 and 3 of this report has been prepared in a robust manner, employing current best practice professional guidance and giving due regard to the methodology detailed above. Archaeological Potential

2.7 The report concludes with (1) an assessment of the archaeological potential of the Site, (2) an assessment of the significance of any archaeological remains that may be present, and (3) an assessment of the likely effects of the proposed development on heritage assets, both in terms of physical impact and (where relevant) change to setting.

Table 2: Archaeological potential

Potential Definition

High Undiscovered heritage assets of high or medium importance are likely to be present.

Medium Undiscovered heritage assets of low importance are likely to be present; and it is possible, though unlikely, that assets of high or

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 13

medium importance may also be present.

Low The study area may contain undiscovered heritage assets, but these

are unlikely to be numerous and are highly unlikely to include assets

of high or medium importance.

Negligible The study area is highly unlikely to contain undiscovered heritage assets of any level of importance.

Nil There is no possibility of undiscovered heritage assets existing within the study area.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 14

3.0

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 15

3. Relevant Policy Framework

National Planning Policy Framework

3.1 The significance of a heritage asset is defined in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2019 as being made up of four main constituents, architectural interest, historical interest, archaeological interest and artistic interest. The setting of the heritage asset can also contribute to its significance. Setting is defined in the NPPF as follows [Delete this last sentence, and the quotation below, if setting is not an issue in this case]:

“The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may 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 significance or may be neutral.”

3.2 The assessments of setting and significance (and the assessments of impact) are normally made with primary reference to the four main elements of special significance identified in the NPPF.

3.3 Paragraph 197 of the NPPF describes the approach to be taken towards non- designated heritage assets, as follows:

“The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that directly or indirectly affect 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.”

3.4 Footnote 63 of the NPPF, which is attached to paragraph 197, states that “Non- designated heritage assets of archaeological interest, which are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled monuments, should be considered subject to the policies for designated heritage assets.” Further guidance on non-designated heritage assets is contained in National Planning Practice Guidance, as revised in July 2019, notably paragraph 040 which states that “Irrespective of how they are identified, it is important that the decisions to identify them as non-designated heritage assets are based on sound evidence”, and paragraph 041 which in full reads as follows:

“What are non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest and how important are they?

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 16

The National Planning Policy Framework identifies two categories of non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest:

(1) Those that are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled monuments and are therefore considered subject to the same policies as those for designated heritage assets (National Planning Policy Framework footnote 63). They are of 3 types:

those that have yet to be formally assessed for designation.

those that have been assessed as being nationally important and therefore, capable of designation, but which the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport has exercised his/her discretion not to designate.

those that are incapable of being designated by virtue of being outside the scope of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 because of their physical nature.

The reason why many nationally important monuments are not scheduled is set out in the document Scheduled Monuments, published by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. Information on location and significance of such assets is found in the same way as for all heritage assets. Judging whether sites fall into this category may be assisted by reference to the criteria for scheduling monuments. Further information on scheduled monuments can be found on the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport’s website.

(2) Other non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest. By comparison this is a much larger category of lesser heritage significance, although still subject to the conservation objective. On occasion the understanding of a site may change following assessment and evaluation prior to a planning decision and move it from this category to the first.

Where an asset is thought to have archaeological interest, the potential knowledge which may be unlocked by investigation may be harmed even by minor disturbance, because the context in which archaeological evidence is found is crucial to furthering understanding.

Decision-making regarding such assets requires a proportionate response by local planning authorities. Where an initial assessment indicates that the site on which development is proposed includes or has potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, applicants should be required to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation. However, it is estimated that following the initial assessment of archaeological interest only a small proportion – around 3% – of all planning applications justify a requirement for detailed assessment.”

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 17

3.5 Paragraph 199 of the NPPF also makes provision for the recording of heritage assets that are likely to be demolished or destroyed by development. Relevant Local Policies

3.6 The following local policies are relevant to the historic environment and this assessment.

The London Plan

Consolidated with Alterations since 2011 (including REMA 2013 and FALP 2015)

3.7 The London Plan, the spatial development strategy for London, was formally adopted in 2011 and replaced the earlier London Plan (2008). In October 2013 the Mayor published the Revised Early Minor Alterations to the London Plan (REMA), which now also form part of the Plan. Further Alterations to the London Plan (FALP) were adopted in March 2015. Subsequently Minor Alterations to the London Plan (MALP) were published in March 2016. REMA included updates to paragraph 7.31 supporting Policy 7.8 which refers to heritage assets and archaeology. The Draft New London Plan has been published for consultation, but has not yet been adopted.

3.8 The following current policies are relevant to this assessment:

POLICY 7.8 HERITAGE ASSETS AND ARCHAEOLOGY

Strategic

 London’s heritage assets and historic environment, including listed buildings, registered historic parks and gardens and other natural and historic landscapes, conservation areas, world heritage sites, registered battlefields, scheduled monuments, archaeological remains and memorials should be identified, so that the desirability of sustaining and enhancing their significance and of utilising their positive role in place shaping can be taken into account.

 Development should incorporate measures that identify, record, interpret, protect and, where appropriate, present the site’s archaeology.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 18

Planning decisions

 Development should identify, value, conserve, restore, re-use and incorporate heritage assets, where appropriate.

 Development affecting heritage assets and their settings should conserve their significance, by being sympathetic to their form, scale, materials and architectural detail.

 New development should make provision for the protection of archaeological resources, landscapes and significant memorials. The physical assets should, where possible, be made available to the public on-site. Where the archaeological asset or memorial cannot be preserved or managed on-site, provision must be made for the investigation, understanding, recording, dissemination and archiving of that asset.

LDF preparation

 Boroughs should, in LDF policies, seek to maintain and enhance the contribution of built, landscaped and buried heritage to London’s environmental quality, cultural identity and economy as part of managing London’s ability to accommodate change and regeneration.

 Boroughs, in consultation with English Heritage, Natural England and other relevant statutory organisations, should include appropriate policies in their LDFs for identifying, protecting, enhancing and improving access to the historic environment and heritage assets and their settings where appropriate, and to archaeological assets, memorials and historic and natural landscape character within their area.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 19

The New Southwark Plan

3.9 The New Southwark Plan has not yet been adopted. Until its adoption, the following documents remain in force.

Southwark Council Core Strategy (adopted April 2011)

3.10 The Southwark Council Core Strategy, adopted in April 2011, sets out the long- term vision, spatial strategy and strategic policies of the Borough up to the year 2026. The Core Strategy contains policies to conserve and enhance the Borough’s heritage assets and the wider historic environment. The following policy is relevant to this assessment:

Strategic Policy 12 – Design and Conservation

Our approach is Development will achieve the highest possible standards of design for buildings and public spaces which are safe, easy to get around and a pleasure to be in.

We will do this by Expecting development to conserve or enhance the significance of Southwark’s heritage assets, their settings and wider historic environment, including conservation areas, archaeological priority zones and sites, listed and locally listed buildings, registered parks and gardens, world heritage sites and scheduled monuments.

London Borough of Southwark Unitary Development Plan (UDP), 2007.

3.11 A single ‘saved’ policy from the 2007 London Borough of Southwark Unitary Development Plan (UDP) relates to the archaeological heritage of the Borough: mmm

Policy 3.19 – Archaeology

Planning applications affecting sites within Archaeological Priority Zones (APZs), as identified in Appendix 8, shall be accompanied by an archaeological assessment and evaluation of the site, including the impact of the proposed development. There is a presumption in favour of preservation in situ, to protect and safeguard archaeological remains of national importance, including scheduled monuments and their settings. The in situ preservation of archaeological remains of local importance will also be sought, unless the importance of the development outweighs the local value of the remains. If planning permission is granted to develop any site where there are archaeological remains or there is good reason to believe that such remains exist, conditions will be attached to secure the excavation and recording or preservation in whole or in part, if justified, before development begins.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 20

Reasons

Southwark has an immensely important archaeological resource. Increasing evidence of those peoples living in Southwark before the Roman and medieval period is being found in the north of the borough and along the Old Kent Road. The suburb of the Roman provincial capital (Londinium) was located around the southern bridgehead of the only river crossing over the Thames at the time and remains of Roman buildings, industry, roads and cemeteries have been discovered over the last 30 years. The importance of the area during the medieval period is equally well attested both archaeologically and historically. Elsewhere in Southwark, the routes of Roman roads (along the Old Kent Road and Kennington Road) and the historic village cores of Peckham, Camberwell, Walworth and Dulwich also have the potential for the survival of archaeological remains.

3.12 The above Acts, Regulations, plans and policies have been taken into account in the preparation of this assessment.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 21

4.0

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 22

4. Archaeological Background

Introduction

4.1 This assessment considers the archaeological potential of the proposed development. It does not consider built heritage aspects (listed buildings, locally listed buildings and conservation areas) or their settings.

4.2 The Site does not lie within the boundary of a designated archaeological asset, such as a scheduled monument or registered battlefield where there would be a presumption in favour of preservation in situ and against development proceeding. The standing building adjacent to the southern edge of the Site is a designated heritage asset as it is a grade II listed building.

4.3 The Site lies within a Tier 1 London Borough of Southwark Archaeological Priority Area (‘North Southwark and Roman Roads’), which has the potential for the survival of deeply stratified multi-period archaeological deposits dating from the prehistoric to modern periods.

4.4 The Greater London HER records 92 non-designated archaeological assets within the wider (250m radius) study area (Figure 4): 18 prehistoric, eight Roman, 11 medieval, 49 post-medieval & modern, and six undated.

Previous archaeological work

4.5 Fifty three archaeological investigations have been recorded by the HER within the 250m study area: 14 open area excavations, 17 trial trench evaluations, 21 watching briefs (archaeological monitoring during development works), and one geotechnical survey (Figure 5).

4.6 The closest to the Site was a watching brief (archaeological monitoring) carried out during the development of the adjacent site to the west (No. 201 Tooley Street) (ELO15708). The majority of this site was occupied by the infilled basement of a former (mid-2oth century) public lavatory block, which had completely truncated the archaeological sequence, cutting up to 1.1m into the natural terrace gravels. However, an undisturbed section on the very northern edge of the site provided a depositional sequence (see 1.13 above). A depth of 1.5m of made ground was recorded above a soil level and two distinct deposits of alluvial silts indicative of

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 23

flooding episodes. No archaeological features were identified, and no evidence was found to date the sequence of deposits observed.6

4.7 Archaeological monitoring on the site of the former Lambeth College (Tower Bridge Centre) buildings on the opposite (north) side of Queen Elizabeth Street from the Site, at the junction with Tower Bridge Road in 1999 located a water channel or drainage ditch which had been cut into alluvial deposits, and overlain by post- medieval (mid-17th century) made ground (ELO993).7

4.8 Further northwest, trial trenching in 2016 on the site of The Lalit Hotel, on the north side of Tooley Street, recorded evidence for mid-late 17th century quarrying and pitting, together with an early-late 17th century brick building; no archaeological evidence was found for activity prior to c.1400 (ELO20085).8

4.9 Archaeological investigations at several locations north of Tooley Street, on the east side of Potters Fields, and closer to the river, revealed post-medieval activity overlying extensive flood deposits (ELO7206, ELO7207, ELO15303, ELO15308 & ELO14727). Archaeological investigations on the west side of Potters Fields include ELO15680, for which the HER holds no information, and ELO7208 an excavation at Mark Brown Wharf, which recorded post-medieval activity overlying alluvial and peat deposits thought to relate to later prehistoric and Roman river transgression along the northern edge of Horselydown Eyot.

4.10 Trial trenching and monitoring on the north side of Tooley Street c.200m northwest of the Site revealed natural sand deposits at c.1.3m AOD (ELO8067 & ELO14759), whilst excavation on Bethel Estate, Vine Lane close to the northwestern edge of the study area, and closer to the river revealed Roman, late medieval and post- medieval features together with watercourses and timber remains (ELO2899).

4.11 On the opposite (south) side of the street, on land bounded by Tooley, Shand and Barnham Streets, the natural sands & gravels (at -0.3 to 0.84m AOD) were overlain by thick deposits of sandy silts and clays indicative of river transgression and cut by 17th and 18th century ditches and pits (ELO14576, ELO14627 & ELO15724).9

4.12 Archaeological monitoring within St John’s Churchyard, on the south side of Tooley Street, established that the groundworks were too shallow to disturb any archaeological remains (ELO2314 & ELO15401).

4.13 Archaeological monitoring in 1995 at Nos. 2-16 Boss Street, on the north side of Tooley Street c.100 southeast of the Site, recorded no archaeological deposits or remains; the natural gravel was observed at c.1.6m AOD.

6 Barrowman 2012. 7 PCA 1999. 8 L-PA 2016. 9 The GLHER holds no details for ELO15694, which is mapped in the same general location.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 24

4.14 Archaeological investigations at several locations between Tooley Street and Queen Elizabeth Street, extending 150-250m southeast of the Site, along the highest part of Horselydown Eyot, recorded the natural brickearth at c.0.3m AOD at 255Tooley Street (ELO4769 & ELO10661). The adjacent site to the south east (1-4 Tudor Street yielded no archaeological deposits, and the natural gravel surface was not reached (ELO4736). Excavations on either side of Queen Elizabeth Street retrieved fragments of prehistoric flintwork and a recut Roman drainage ditch on the south side of the street (ELO4361), whilst excavation on the opposite (north) side of the street suggested that the land lay north of the eyot and was not reclaimed until the post-medieval period (ELO4360).

Non-Designated Heritage Assets

Archaeological Priority Area (APA)

4.15 The application site lies within a Tier 1 London Borough of Southwark Archaeological Priority Area ‘North Southwark and Roman Roads’.

4.16 An Archaeological Priority Area (APA) is a defined as “an area where, according to existing information, there is significant known archaeological interest or particular potential for new discoveries”. 10

4.17 The primary purpose of APAs in the planning system is described as follows11:

‘Up-to-date Archaeological Priority Areas provide a sound evidence based spatial framework for local plan making and decision taking. They map areas of known archaeological interest justified by a statement of significance which indicates the nature of the interest to be considered. Their primary purpose is to help highlight at an early stage where a development proposal may affect a heritage asset of archaeological interest and so trigger early consultation with the borough’s archaeological adviser on the need for site specific assessment and field evaluation. The results of such assessment and evaluation could raise or lower the archaeological significance of the site and its surrounding area either through entirely new discoveries or better understanding of previously known assets.

10 https://historicengland.org.uk/services-skills/our-planning-services/greater-london-archaeology-advisory- service/greater-london-archaeological-priority-areas/ 11 https://historicengland.org.uk/services-skills/our-planning-services/greater-london-archaeology-advisory- service/greater-london-archaeological-priority-areas/

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 25

Assessment can also indicate how a heritage interest could be better revealed and used to enhance the local area’.

4.18 APAs have been categorised into one of three tiers according to their sensitivity to development. The general scheme is shown in the table published by the Historic England/Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS) above.

4.19 The significance of this APA has been assessed as follows12:

‘The archaeological significance of Northern Southwark is closely allied to the wider heritage interests outlined above and resides in both the area’s built structures and its below ground archaeological deposits. Any ground disturbance within the APA is likely to come across archaeological remains. Foundations of former buildings and substantial structures, such as elements of the Roman town, have been uncovered while remains of earlier phases of Bermondsey Abbey, Southwark Cathedral, Suffolk Place and the Bishop of Winchester’s Palace may survive. Well-preserved timber structures also survive in deeper waterlogged deposits. Burials associated with Bermondsey Abbey and the Southwark workhouses would provide information on the medieval and post medieval ecclesiastical and secular populations of the

12 Kidd, Booth & King 2017.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 26

area. There is also still much to be learnt about the nature and extent of settlement along the river and in the APA area during the prehistoric, Roman and Saxon periods. The River, Bermondsey Lake and the whole flood plain area itself is of geoarchaeological interest and archaeological work here has the potential to add to our knowledge of the Holocene evolution of the London area and the rising level of the Thames’.

4.20 According to the table above, the current development of land less than 0.5ha in area within a Tier 1 APA categorises it as a high archaeological risk (i.e. the proposed development is a high risk to archaeology within the APA) in respect of the ‘North Southwark and Roman Roads’ APA.

Other Non-Designated Archaeological Assets

4.21 This section considers the archaeological finds and features from within the 250m study area, held within the GLHER, together with a map regression exercise charting the history of the application site from the mid- 18th century to the present day. Timescales

4.22 Timescales used in this assessment:

Prehistoric Palaeolithic 450,000 - 12,000 BC Mesolithic 12,000 - 4,000 BC Neolithic 4,000 - 1,800 BC Bronze Age 1,800 - 600 BC Iron Age 600 - AD 43 Historic Roman AD 43 - 410 Saxon/Early AD 410 - 1066 Medieval Medieval AD 1066 - 1485 Post-medieval AD 1486 - 1800 Modern AD 1800 - Present

4.23 The GLHER map and list showing the distribution of entries within the 250m radius study area is shown at Figure 4.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 27

Prehistoric

4.24 The GLHER holds records for 18 assets of prehistoric date. The Thames was much wider in the past, characterised in the Southwark and Bermondsey areas by low sand and gravel islands (eyots) raised slightly above the floodplain, and separated from each other by braided watercourses, marshes and tidal mudflats which were periodically flooded. These gravel islands were favoured for settlement and agriculture from prehistoric times. The Site lies towards the central crest of such an island, known today as Horselydown Eyot (see 4.34 below).

4.25 The Palaeolithic period (Old Stone Age) represents the earliest known period of human culture. This period was a time of significant environmental change in the British Isles, represented by alternating glacial and warmer phases. The hunter- gatherers of this period came to Britain during interglacial periods, and following the last Ice Age, at a time when Britain and the continent were still linked by a land bridge. Subsequent erosion has removed many of the land-surfaces on which Palaeolithic people lived and hunted and consequently very little evidence survives for their temporary camp sites, apart from characteristic large stone (mainly flint) handaxes, which are often found on river terraces during gravel extraction, usually as residual artefacts, having been re-deposited by later fluvial action.13 In this context, two finds of Lower Palaeolithic stone tools have been recorded during archaeological investigations within the study area: at 10-16 Lafone Street, c.140m southeast of the Site (MLO67229) and Druid Street, c.190m south of the Site (MLO105369).

4.26 During the Mesolithic period (c.12,000 BC) the climate warmed, transforming the landscape from a treeless steppe-tundra to dense birch and pine woodland, attracting hunter gatherer communities who moved between seasonal camps, following herds of animals, fishing, and making more sophisticated flint tools. By c.6000 BC, the ice sheets had finally melted, sea levels rose and Britain became an island. The majority of Mesolithic material found in Greater London consists of isolated flintwork from surface or riverine contexts, rather than in situ structural remains, suggesting transitory activities such as fishing and wild fowling on the mud flats.14 One of the best examples of activity of this period comes from flint scatters found along the edge of a former lake in Bermondsey.15 The GLHER records the findspots of Mesolithic flint tools in residual contexts amongst assemblages of later prehistoric flintwork during archaeological investigations in advance of development on land between Tooley Street and Queen Elizabeth Street, bounded by Lafone Street to the north and Three Oak Lane to the south, c.155m southeast of the Site (MLO65998, MLO75082 & MLO109061).

13 Juby 2011. 14 Lewis 2000. 15 Sidell et al. 2002.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 28

4.27 The Neolithic period (New Stone Age) is characterised by the first farming communities, who carried out large-scale woodland clearance to provide land for the cultivation of crops and animal rearing. Although the pace of woodland clearance varied regionally depending on a variety of climatic, topographic, social and other factors, the overall trend was one of gradually increasing forest clearance and settlement. These settled communities were the first to build large earth and stone-built monuments for burial, and probable ceremonial and ritual functions. Pottery vessels appeared for the first time alongside the continued refinement of flint tools and weapons. The Bronze Age is named from the introduction of bronze metalworking technology for the manufacture of both tools and weapons, which became increasingly widespread during the third-second millennium BC, although flint tools were still widely used. Evidence for Bronze Age activity in London and the southeast has been derived from a number of sources including the accidental discovery of funerary monuments and burials during quarrying and construction work and the discovery of metal hoards and weapons, a large number of which have been dredged from the Thames.

4.28 A bronze mount with embossed scrolls and three pyramidal bosses of Bronze Age date was found at the beginning of the 20th century in Tooley Street c.120m southeast of the Site (MLO11423).16

4.29 Archaeological investigations at 1-2 Three Oak Lane17, c.155m southeast of the Site, revealed several large and indistinct features within the top of the natural sand, containing Late Neolithic and Bronze Age flintwork, which were tentatively identified as tree throws. These features may represent early prehistoric clearance of the site prior to occupation. An interrupted ditch contained a Late Neolithic – early Bronze Age flint assemblage together with an oak ard (plough) tip (MLO75083). A large curvilinear ditch of a similar date was crossed the western part of the site (MLO75084). A fragment of a Neolithic Grooved Ware pot and fragment of a small grinding stone were also recovered. Bronze Age settlement on this site is indicated by a series of postholes associated with large quantities of daub (burnt clay), with possible withy impressions, indicating a timber building of wattle & daub construction, although it did not prove possible to determine its ground plan. Small postholes and stakeholes crossing the site from east-west suggested a former fenceline. Timber stakes were preserved in waterlogged conditions, one of which produced a date radiocarbon date of 1670-1439 Cal BC, confirming a Bronze Age date. The site was subject to severe flooding, indicated by the deposition of thick deposits of alluvium overlying peat (MLO75086), and the site was not re-occupied until the post-medieval period.

16 Fox 1958; Phillips 1967. 17 Proctor 1999; Proctor & Bishop 2002.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 29

4.30 Probable Bronze Age peat and flood deposits were also encountered at 54 Gainsford Street, north of Queen Elizabeth Street, c.170m eastsoutheast of the Site (MLO60103, MLO64293 & MLO64296), closer to the river, north of Tooley Street on the northwest edge of the 250m radius study area (MLO14270 & MLO23173), and on the southwest edge of the study area at White’s Grounds (MLO59498), close to the site of the discovery in 1987 of Neolithic flintwork and pottery found in sandy soil, thought to represent the southern edge of Horselydown Eyot (MLO17754).

4.31 Evidence for probable Bronze Age cultivation, represented by ard (plough) marks in the sandy subsoil have been located at Phoenix Wharf and Wolseley Street, close to St Saviour’s Dock on the southeastern side of the eyot, which were well preserved, having been buried by fluvial deposits.18

4.32 Later prehistoric (Iron Age) features such as ditches, postholes and pits have been found at several locations along Tooley Street just beyond the southeastern edge of the study area, adjacent to a natural creek (later St Saviour’s Dock): at Nos. 271, 283 and 285-291.19 The discovery of grain at the latter site may suggest that crops were grown on the island. There is a single record for this period within the study area, a possible Late Iron Age pit found in the course of archaeological evaluation at 255 Tooley Street, c.215m southeast of the Site (MLO75074).

4.33 Evidence from extensive archaeological investigations on Horselydown Eyot suggests a concentration of prehistoric activity from the Mesolithic period to the Iron Age upon the crest of the eyot along the course of Tooley Street. The identification of alluvial deposits and peat at Three Oak Lane c.155m southeast of the Site suggest that flooding precluded occupation there from the end of the Bronze Age until the post-medieval period. Situated upon the highest land on the eyot, the potential for encountering archaeological remains of very high, high or medium significance from this period within the Site is considered to be medium. Roman

4.34 The principal Roman road linking the city of London (Londinium) with the south bank of the river was Watling Street, which crossed the bridge and the North and South Islands of the Southwark eyots at the narrowest part of the river, before changing course southeastwards to link the city with the towns of Rochester, Canterbury and Dover.20 Watling Street intersected at Borough High Street, Southwark, with a second principal road running south-southwestwards to Chichester, known as Stane Street.21 The figure below shows the road layout and

18 Sidell, Cotton, Rayner & Scaife 2002. 19 Drummond-Murray, Saxby & Watson 1994; Leary 2004; Hingley 2019. 20 Margary 1973: Route 1c. 21 Margary 1973: Route 15.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 30

eyots on the south bank of the river in the Roman period (the orange shading indicates cemetery sites).

Gravel islands on the south side of the river in the Roman period.22 © Pre-Construct Archaeology. The approximate location of the Site is marked by a red triangle.

4.35 During the Roman period, the creeks separating the North and South islands from the southern bank of the river were revetted with timber and material was dumped to raise the ground levels, enabling the establishment an extensive Roman settlement along the roadside, focussing principally upon the current Borough High Street in Southwark.

4.36 The GLHER holds eight records of Roman date within the 250m radius study area.

4.37 The findspot of a stone hone of possible Roman date is recorded c.80m south of the Site; the circumstances of the discovery are not recorded (MLO4194).

22 https://iconicreligion.wordpress.com/2016/05/03/roman-southwarks-ritual-landscape-by-victoria-ridgeway/

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 31

4.38 Roman pottery was found in two pits during an archaeological evaluation at Long Walk, 140m south-southeast of the Site (MLO64003). A Roman ditch and flood levels were recorded from an evaluation at 22-28 White’s Grounds, c.210m southeast of the Site (MLO17755).

4.39 Four findspots of Roman material are recorded by the GLHER within the northwest part of the study area. The findspot of a Roman bronze object and bronze patera (shallow bowl with handle) is recorded at Potters Field, c.125m northwest of the Site; the circumstances of the discovery are unrecorded (MLO4363). Excavations at the Bethel Estate, east of Vine Street on the north side of Tooley Street in 1988 revealed a small ditch and other features, which contained fragments of abraded and probably residual Roman pottery (MLO17989). An antler pick attributed to the Roman period and a Roman coin of the emperor Trajan (AD 98-117) were found in 1918 on the south side of Tooley Street close to Barnham Street, c.180m northeast of the Site (MLO4231 & MLO4232). Close by, extensive excavations made in 1899 into the Thames alluvium on the south side of Tooley Street, just east of Shand Street, on the site of Nos. 156-164, dug to a consistent depth of 10½ feet [c.3.2m] below pavement level, and in some places up to 2m deeper, revealed grape, fig and other organic remains from a level thought to be of Roman date (MLO13614).23

4.40 The presence of alluvial deposits, observed in cross-section on land adjacent to (west of) the Site, albeit undated is testament to inundation of even the highest land on the eyot. The paucity of Roman material found within the study area, despite extensive archaeological investigations, implies that the land was not extensively occupied in the Roman period, and have been utilised for seasonal occupations such as summer grazing as a result of periodic flooding. Consequently, the potential for encountering archaeological remains of very high, high or medium significance from this period within the Site is considered to be low.

Medieval

4.41 There is no evidence for Saxon or early medieval occupation within the study area, and it is probable that the majority of the land was still subject to flooding at this period. The late Saxon church of St Olave, mentioned in the Domesday Book of 1086 stood at the northwestern end of Tooley Street, next to the old London Bridge.

4.42 The Cluniac Priory of St Saviour was established at Bermondsey in 1082. The Priory became a Benedictine abbey in 1399. The northern precinct of the abbey stood c.540m south-southeast of the Site.

23 Kennard & Warren 1903.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 32

4.43 The annals of the abbey document numerous instances of reclamation, drainage, and repair of the river defences on the abbey lands including the maintenance of an earth and timber river wall which continued until the middle of the 16th century. The monks were active in reclaiming the low lying mudflats separating the Bermondsey and Horselydown eyots, in embanking the riverside, in improving cultivation and in developing a dock on the River Neckinger, known as St. Saviour’s Dock, c.400m east of the Site. Significant flooding in Bermondsey was documented in 1416, 1448 and 1463-4.24

4.44 The place-name of Horselydown was documented in the 12th century as ‘Horseidune’, meaning ‘the hill by the horse marsh’.25

4.45 The HER holds 11 records of medieval date within the study area.

4.46 A medieval cross found in 1922 reused in an old wall close to 135 Tower Bridge Road, c.55m south of the Site, is presumed to have derived from the abbey (MLO14882).

4.47 The park situated on the north side of Tooley Street on the east side of Weavers Lane is the site of the former St Olave’s burial ground, which also served the parish of St John Horsleydown in the post-medieval period. It was converted into a recreation ground in 1888 (MLO13484).

4.48 The sites of the manor House (MLO13492) and mill (MLO13789) belonging to the Knights Hospitallers of St John of Jerusalem stood close to the river; the manor house at the northern end of Horselydown Lane, c.160m northeast of the Site, and the mill close to the river bank north of Shad Thames. A late medieval ‘Plan of Horseye Downe’, dated 1544, but more likely to post-date 158726, which was in the possession of the Governors of St Olave’s Grammar School, shows these buildings together with a handful of large detached houses with gardens along the river bank, extending as far east as St Saviour’s Dock (‘The Thames Docke’), and north of ‘Five Foot Lane’ (now Tanner Street).27 The centre of the island remained undeveloped ‘Horseye Downe’, crossed from northwest-southeast by a track which roughly approximates to the line which was to become Tooley Street (Figure 6).

4.49 Moving further northwest, a watching brief carried out in 2007 on the north side of Tooley Street (Nos.155-173) recorded clay deposits dating from the 12th century and later, possibly representing medieval reclamation. A flat-bottomed channel was recorded running across the site from northeast to southwest, and may have

24 Dawson 1979; Drummond-Murray, Saxby & Watson 1994. 25 Gover, Mawer & Stenton 1934. 26 Corner 1855 states: Although this plan bears the date of 1544, I think it must have been made, or added to, some years later; for it shows the churchyard, which was not made until the year 1587, and is now called "The Old Churchyard." 27 Corner 1855.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 33

joined another large channel or feature across the western edge of the site. It is uncertain as to whether they were natural palaeochannels or later medieval canals to supply fish ponds or mills. Areas of medieval ploughing disturbance were also recorded (MLO98744).

4.50 Excavations in 1988 on the Bethel Estate, east of Vine Lane, close to the northwest edge of the study area identified a section of the moat surrounding Fastolf Place, the manor house of Sir John Fastolf, built c.1443 (MLO19954). Timber was preserved within waterlogged deposits, including a drain, together with ships’ timbers and a late 13th century carved panel from a ‘Flanders Chest’, which had been reused in the earliest phase as part of the revetment of the entrance causeway (MLO46594 & MLO46595).

4.51 Archaeological excavations at Vine Lane, closer to the river, and c.240m northwest of the Site revealed that the site was wet and marshy with no evidence for occupation before the 16th century (MLO38662), when a brick building with chalk floor and cobbled yard was built (MLO7628).

4.52 GHLER Record No. 64004 relating to the structural remains of Bermondsey Abbey at Long Walk actually lies some 650m south of the Site.

4.53 It is probable that the Horselydown Eyot was still largely inundated at the beginning of the medieval period before being reclaimed for agricultural purposes by Bermondsey Abbey. Specific late medieval structures such as Fastolf Place and the Knights Hospitallers’ manor house and mill have been documented and mapped. Horselydown remained a large open space used for pasturing horses and cattle and for gatherings such as fairs until at least the end of the 16th century. Extensive archaeological investigations within the study area have yielded little evidence for medieval activity within the central part of the eyot apart from drainage ditches and evidence for agricultural practices and consequently, the potential for encountering archaeological remains of very high, high or medium significance from this period within the Site is considered to be low.

Post Medieval & Modern

4.54 The GLHER holds 49 post-medieval and modern records within the study area. They are mapped at Figure 4 and included in the HER list, but only those relevant to the application Site are discussed further in this document.

4.55 Tanning developed into a major industry in the Bermondsey area in the late 16th- early 17th century, utilising the river and tidal streams. Tanneries, together with

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 34

wharves and timber yards occupied much of the land north of Tooley Street, on the periphery of the urban settlement area to the south.

4.56 The earliest reasonably large scale mapping to show the Site, John Rocque’s Map of London, published in 1746, shows that the triangular plot of land on which the Site stands was built-up, bounded by Horsley Down to the north, Free School Lane to the south, and Cross Street to the east (Figure 7). Richard Horwood’s map of 1799 shows the detailed layout, with terraces of houses with small gardens at the rear fronting the three streets (the former Horsley Down had become Back Street by this date (Figure 8). This configuration appears largely unchanged when mapped by the Ordnance Survey in 1875, although small outbuildings, probably lavatories, had been added to the rear yards by this date. Back Lane had become the northern extension of Queen Elizabeth Street, named for Queen Elizabeth’s Grammar School which stood on the opposite side of the street close to the apex of the triangular land plot at its junction with Freeschool Street (Figure 9).

4.57 The Insurance Plan drawn up by Chas E. Goad Ltd in 1887 provides details of the terraces for the first time (Figure 10). All were brick or stone buildings (depicted in pink), three-stories in height, under tile roofs; no basements are recorded. The Site was occupied by two dwellings (Nos. 79 & 80) on the Queen Elizabeth Street frontage, with a public house on the corner with Cross Street and a dwelling on the south side with single-storey extensions at the rear (No. 652 Cross Street). There was a patchwork of small yards at the rear of these buildings. The public house had been recorded on censuses since 1851 as The Barley Mow.28 The land on which the bank building stands was occupied by three similar terraced dwellings with single-storey extensions at the rear and small yards with small outbuildings (Nos.654-658 Cross Street, terminating in a shop at the junction of Cross Street with Freeschool Street. The Freeschool Street frontage was also occupied by a terrace of shops, two of which (Nos. 8 & 9) lay within the site of the present bank building. The west side of the former Cross Street lies within the footprint of the current Site.

4.58 Tower Bridge was built in the period 1886–1894. An almost contemporary Ordnance Survey 1:1056 scale map of 1896 shows the layout of the new bridge access, Tower Bridge Road, which was constructed following the clearance of the former streets and buildings as far south as Tooley Street, including all the buildings which had previously occupied the Site and the whole of the triangular plot to the west. Comparison between Figures 9 & 11 shows that the line of the newly constructed road running southwestwards straight from the bridge ran slightly east of, and at a slightly different angle from, the former Cross Street.

4.59 The standing building, designed by William Campbell Jones, was built in 1900 for the London and County Bank (Figure 12).

28 https://pubwiki.co.uk/LondonPubs/SouthwarkStJohn/QueenElizabeth78.shtml

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 35

4.60 The Site has remained open from the late 1890s until the present day (Figures 11 & 14). It is considered that there is a high potential for encountering the foundations of post-medieval and modern (17th – 19th century) buildings, of low local significance, within this plot.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 36

5.0

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 37

5. Proposed Development and Potential Effects

Proposed Development

5.1 The proposed development involves the comprehensive refurbishment and extension of the existing former bank building and the construction of a new building (with basement) on the adjacent vacant plot to the north.

5.2 The new basement will occupy an area of 105 m2 (0.01ha).

Site Conditions

5.3 Formerly occupied by a public house and terraced houses, the Site has been undeveloped since Tower Bridge and Tower Bridge Road were built at the end of the 19th century.

Factors Affecting Archaeological Survival

5.4 Archaeological remains can survive as earthworks and as below ground archaeological features, finds and layers. Part of the assessment process is to consider what factors may have affected archaeological survival. That is to say, what conditions would have enhanced the chances of survival and what conditions would have reduced the chances of survival.

5.5 The subject of archaeological preservation has been covered comprehensively elsewhere30, and is subject to ongoing review as our understanding grows. The following addresses some familiar scenarios for assessment reports such as this, to allow the reader an insight into some ‘typical’ scenarios. Rural Locations

5.6 In rural locations, below ground remains are likely to be sealed by a relatively thin series of layers. Typically a topsoil of c.100-200mm and a subsoil of 100-300mm.

30 Historic England 2016.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 38

Therefore, they may be sealed by 200-500mm of deposits. There are variations to this including landscapes affected by colluvial or alluvial deposits. There are also Peat rich area where soil deposits can be significantly deeper. Earthworks are most common in areas not subject to modern, mechanised ploughing, although earthworks can be preserved in hedgerows, wooded areas and even as plough- reduced remnants within arable fields.

5.7 Hydrology has a significant role to play in the preservation of remains and proximity to watercourses and wetlands should be considered as it affects the variety and type of artefacts/ecofacts that could be present on a site.

Factors which enhance Factors which increase destruction preservation Pasture/grassland provides a Mechanised ploughing especially of deep relatively static condition for rooting crops (e.g. Sugar Beet) causes archaeological remains truncation of archaeological deposits.

Drainage for agricultural or mineral extraction reasons can affect hydrology and therefore remove the conditions in which waterlogged remains may survive.

Urban Locations

5.8 Certain long-lived urban centres (e.g. York, London) can have very deep layers of archaeological deposits. These can extend to several metres. It is worth noting that destructive activities (for archaeological remains) have frequently added their own phase of activity to such urban centres. Therefore, archaeological remains can be encountered directly below the modern surface (e.g. tarmac or concrete) often at a depth of 500-1000mm below the existing ground surface.

5.9 In the present case, archaeological monitoring on the adjacent land to the west of the Site revealed that although the majority of the land had been truncated by a basement, a significant depth of deposits (c.3.3m beneath pavement level) was recorded in cross-section, albeit with no archaeological remains identified.

5.10 The creation of cities inevitably involves the destruction of archaeological remains even as new phases of activity (archaeology) are created. Also, there are many instances of survival in what superficially seem to be destructive scenarios. For example, islands of archaeological deposits can survive within buildings constructed using piles and including a basement car park. Tall buildings do compact archaeological remains and their foundations do remove them; yet archaeological deposits can survive in between the foundations.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 39

Factors which enhance Factors which increase destruction preservation Preservation beneath buildings and Piling (can affect Hydrology) which can roads which once constructed alter the conditions in which waterlogged provide a relatively stable remains may survive. environment. Cutting of foundation trenches, utility trenches, lift pits and other ‘groundworks’. These activities can remove deposits (only where the specific groundworks are taking place of course – therefore deposits either side of a lift shaft will be relatively unchanged.

Archaeological Potential

5.11 There are no archaeological assets recorded within the Site.

5.12 There are no designated archaeological assets such as world heritage sites, scheduled monuments, protected wrecks, registered battlefields or registered parks & gardens within the 250m study area, whose fabric or setting would be adversely affected by the proposed development.

5.13 The Site lies within a Tier 1 London Borough of Southwark Archaeological Priority Area (APA) ‘North Southwark and Roman Roads’. This APA is extensive, covering an area of over 900 ha, including the river frontage, and the whole of Southwark and Bermondsey, with the potential for the preservation of archaeological evidence for complex multi-phase and deeply stratified urban development. A Tier 1 category APA implies a high risk to archaeology from development.

5.14 Extensive archaeological excavations and evaluations have been carried out prior to redevelopment on land within the 250m radius study area and on adjacent land to the west of the Site. Based upon the information contained within the GLHER and historic maps, the potential for encountering deeply buried archaeological remains of prehistoric date, sealed by later phases of flood deposits within the Site is considered to be medium. The potential for encountering the foundations of the post-medieval and modern terraced houses and public house which formerly occupied the Site is considered to be high, although the remains are likely to have low local significance.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 40

6.0

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 41

6. Conclusions

6.1 The proposed development involves the refurbishment of a standing building (with existing basement) in conjunction with a new building (with basement) on adjacent land to the north.

6.2 In line with the policies of the local planning authority and national government guidance as set out in the NPPF, an archaeological desk-based assessment has been undertaken to clarify the archaeological potential of the application Site and assess the level of impact the development proposals may have on any archaeology present.

6.3 This archaeological assessment concludes that the Site upon which the proposed new building and basement will be constructed does not contain any designated heritage assets of archaeological interest such as world heritage sites, scheduled monuments, protected wrecks, registered battlefields or registered parks & gardens where there would be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation in situ and against development.

6.4 The site lies within a Tier 1 London Borough of Southwark Archaeological Priority Area (APA) with the potential for the preservation of complex multi-phase deeply stratified archaeology.

6.5 Based on the information within the GLHER, supplemented by historic mapping from the mid-late 16th century onwards and documentary research, the Site has been assessed as having a medium potential for encountering archaeological remains of very high, high or medium significance of prehistoric date at depth. There is also a high potential for encountering the foundations of mapped post- medieval and modern terraced houses and a public house of low local significance.

6.6 On the basis of available evidence, it is considered that the proposed development accords with current legislation, the planning policies contained within the NPPF and those local policies which relate to archaeology.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 42

Sources Consulted

Bodleian Library, Oxford British Library Greater London Historic Environment Record London Metropolitan Archives The National Archives Southwark Local History Library

Primary Sources

Maps 1544. Plan of Horseye Downe. Dated 1544. In the possession of the Governors of St Olave’s Grammar School (Corner 1855). 1746 John Rocque. Map of London. 1779 Richard Horwood. Map of London. 1830 Christopher & John Greenwood. Map of London. 1875 Ordnance Survey 1:1056 scale. 1878 Ordnance Survey 1:2500 scale. 1887 Charles E. Goad Ltd. Insurance Plan of the City of London Vol. I: Sheet 84. 1896 Ordnance Survey 1:1056 scale. 1916 Ordnance Survey 1:2500 scale. 1950 Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale. 1954-9 Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale. 1963-4 Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale. 1966-8 Ordnance Survey 1:2500 scale. 1970-4 Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale. 1974-6 Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale. 1990-1 Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale. 1991-3 Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale. 1993-5 Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale. 1995 Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale. 2003 Ordnance Survey 1:1250 scale.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 43

Secondary Sources

Barrowman, S. 2012. 210 Tooley Street, London Borough of Southwark. Archaeological Investigation. Unpublished client report by Pre-Construct Archaeology. Report No. R11322; Site Code TLE12.

CIfA, 2017. Standard and Guidance for Historic Environment Desk-based Assessment. Chartered Institute for Archaeologists.

Corner, G.R. 1855. On the History of Horselydown. Surrey Archaeological Collections 1: 156- 179.

Cowan, C., Seeley, F., Wardle, A., Westman, A. & Wheeler, L. 2009. Roman Southwark settlement and economy: excavations in Southwark 1973-91. MOLA Monograph 42.

Cowie, R. & Corcoran, J. 2008. The prehistoric, Roman and later landscape between Watling Street and Bermondsey Eyot: investigations at Rephidim Street and Hartley’s Jam Factory, Bermondsey. Surrey Archaeological Collections 94: 159-179.

Dawson, G.J. 1979. Excavations at Guy’s Hospital 1967. Surrey Archaeological Society Research Volume 7.

Divers, D. 1999. An archaeological watching brief at Lambeth College on the corner of Queen Elizabeth Street and Tower Bridge Road, London Borough of Southwark, SE1. Unpublished client report by Pre-Construct Archaeology.

Drummond-Murray, J., Saxby, D. & Watson, B. 1994. Recent archaeological work in the Bermondsey district of Southwark. London Archaeologist 7 (10): 251-257.

Elsden, N. 1998. 36-40 Tanner Street and 159-161 Tower Bridge Road, Bermondsey, London SE1: A Post-Excavation Assessment. Unpublished client report by MoLAS.

Fox, C. 1958. Pattern and Purpose. A Survey of Early Celtic Art in Britain. National Museum of Wales: Cardiff.

Gibbard, P.L. 1994. Pleistocene History of the Lower Thames Valley. Cambridge University Press.

Gover, J.E.B., Mawer, A. & Stenton, F.M. 1934. The Place-names of Surrey. English Place- name Society Volume 11. Cambridge University Press.

Heard, K. 1996. The Hinterland of Roman Southwark. Part 1. London Archaeologist 8 (3): 76-82.

Hingley, R. 2019. Londinium: A Biography. Roman London from its origins to the fifth century. Bloomsbury Academic.

Historic England 2016. Preserving Archaeological Remains. Decision-taking for Sites under Development.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 44

Juby, C. 2011. London before London: Reconstructing a Palaeolithic Landscape. Doctoral thesis submitted to Department of Geography, Royal Holloway, University of London.

Kennard, A.S. & Warren, S.H. 1903. On a section of the Thames alluvium in Bermondsey. The Geological Magazine 10 (10): 456-460.

Kidd, S. Booth, P. & King, G. 2017. New Southwark Plan Evidence Base: Archaeological Priority Areas (APAs). Former Archaeological Priority Zones. Design & Conservation: Archaeology Southwark Council.

Killock, D., Shepherd, J., Hayward, K. & Rielly, K. 2015. Temples and Suburbs: Excavations at Tabard Square, Southwark. Pre-Construct Archaeology.

L-PA 2016. Archaeological Evaluation Report: GHI Lalit Hotel, London. Unpublished client report by L-P Archaeology. "An archaeological watching brief at Lambeth College"

Leary, J. 2004. 285-291 Tooley Street: Further evidence for late Iron Age/early Roman settlement in Bermondsey. London Archaeologist 10 (11): 283-288.

Lewis, J. 2000. The Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic periods. In: Museum of London 2000. The archaeology of Greater London An assessment of archaeological evidence for human presence in the area now covered by Greater London. pp. 45-62. Museum of London Archaeology Service: London.

Malden, H.E. 1912. The Victoria History of the County of Surrey. Volume 4. Constable & Company Limited: London. Margary, I.D. 1973. Roman Roads in Britain. 3rd Edition. John Baker: London. Mills, A.D. 2010. A Dictionary of London Place Names. 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press. Morris, J. (ed.) 1975. Domesday Book: Surrey. Phillimore & Co: Chichester. Museum of London 2000. The archaeology of Greater London. An assessment of archaeological evidence for human presence in the area now covered by Greater London. Museum of London Archaeology Service: London.

Nixon, T., McAdam, E., Tomber, R. & Swain, H. (eds). 2002. A Research Framework for London Archaeology. Museum of London.

PCA 1999. An archaeological watching brief at Lambeth College on the corner of Queen Elizabeth Street and Tower Bridge Road, SE1. Unpublished client report by Pre-Construct Archaeology.

Phillips, W.E. 1967. Bronze Age Metal Objects in Surrey. Surrey Archaeological Collections 64: 1-34.

Proctor, J. 1999. An Archaeological Evaluation of Land at 1-2 Three Oak Lane, London Borough of Southwark. Unpublished client report by Pre-Construct Archaeology.

Proctor, J. & Bishop, B. 2002. Prehistoric and Environmental Development on Horselydown: excavations at Three Oak Lane. Surrey Archaeological Collections 89: 1-26.

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 45

Rayner, L, Branch, N. & Leary, J. 2011. Prehistoric Southwark: Excavations in Bermondsey shed furher light on the prehistory of north Southwark. London Archaeologist 13(2): 31-35.

Ridgeway, V. 2003. Natural environment and human exploitation on the southern shores of Horselydown. London Archaeologist 10 (4): 103-111.

Sidell, J., Wilkinson, K., Scaife, R. & Cameron, N. 2000. The Holocene evolution of the London Thames. Archaeological Excavations (1991-1998) for the London Underground Limited Jubilee Line Extension Project. MoLAS Monograph 5.

Sidell, J., Cotton, J., Rayner, L. & Wheeler, L. 2002. The Topography and Prehistory of Southwark and Lambeth. MoLAS Monograph 14.

Walford, E. 1878. Bermondsey: Tooley Street. Old and New London. Volume 6:100- 117. London.

Weinreb, B., Hibbert C., Keay, J. & Keay, J. 2008. The London Encyclopaedia 3rd Edition. Macmillan: London.

Internet Sources

Archaeology Data Service: https://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/

British Geological Society online viewer: www.bgs.ac.uk/data/mapViewers/home.html

British History online: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/

Google Earth: www.googlearth.co.uk

Historic England Britain from above: https://britainfromabove.org.uk

Historic England Heritage Gateway: http://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/gateway/

Historic England Pastscape database: http://www.pastscape.org/

Historic England planning advice: https://historicengland.org.uk/advice/planning/planning- system/

Magic Map Application: http://magic.defra.gov.uk/home.htm

185 Tower Bridge Road: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment | 46

Figures

Archaeological Desk Based Assessment | . LAN1001544. ed. Licence no © Crown copyright 2017. All rights reserv . LAN1001544. ed. Licence no © Crown copyright 2017. All rights reserv Figure 1: Site location.

Archaeological Desk Based 185 Tower Bridge Road, London Borough of Southwark, SE1 2UF © February 2020 Assessment . LAN1001544. ed. Licence no © Crown copyright 2017. All rights reserv

Figure 2: Detailed site location.

Archaeological Desk Based 185 Tower Bridge Road, London Borough of Southwark, SE1 2UF © February 2020 Assessment

Greater London Historic Environment Record (GLHER ) List

Non-designated archaeological assets

London Borough of Southwark Archaeological Priority Area (APA)

Des UID Name Tier Area (ha) DLO38558 North Southwark & Roman Roads 1 936.68

Monuments

MonUID Record Name Monument Period Finds Summary Type Type Range Prehistoric MLO11423 FS TOOLEY ST FINDSPOT Bronze Age Mount (Late Neolithic to Late Bronze Age) MLO14270 MON Tooley Street, [Mark BURIED SOIL Late Bronze Peat layers were recorded during Browns Wharf], HORIZON Age excavations in 1973. These were thought to Southwark {Roman indicate that the area was under water period peat} during the prehistoric and Roman periods. MLO17754 FS WHITES GROUNDS FINDSPOT; Neolithic FIND UNCLASSIFIED FINDSPOT; (Neolithic); POT FINDSPOT (Neolithic); LITHIC IMPLEMENT (Neolithic) MLO23173 MON Vine Lane and BURIED SOIL Bronze Age Peat deposits, thought to date to the Morgans Lane, off HORIZON Bronze Age, were uncovered during Tooley Street, evaluations in 1986. Southwark {Bronze Age peat} MLO59498 MON Brunswick Court PEAT Middle Bronze BURNT FLINT (Middle A Bronze Age peat deposit was found

(Nos. 4-42)/White's Age Bronze Age) during an evaluation by Museum of London Grounds (Nos. 12- Archaeology Service at Brunswick Court 16), Bermondsey, and White's Grounds in December 1993. Southwark, SE1 {Peat Deposit} MLO60103 MON 54 GAINSFORD ST PEAT; PEAT Prehistoric MLO64293 MON 54 GAINSFORTH ST FLOOD DEPOSIT Prehistoric MLO64296 MON 54 GAINSFORTH ST PEAT Prehistoric MLO65998 FS Tooley Street (No FINDSPOT; Early LITHIC IMPLEMENT Several Prehistoric flint artefacts were 241-247)/Lafone FINDSPOT; Mesolithic to (Mesolithic); LITHIC found during excavations by the Museum Street, Southwark, FINDSPOT Roman IMPLEMENT (Neolithic); of London in 1995. Along with these, in the SE1 {Prehistoric flint POT (Roman) fill of a channel, were several Roman tools/Roman pottey} sherds. MLO67229 MON Lafone Street (Nos FINDSPOT; Lower BURNT FLINT Excavation of trial trenches by the Museum 10-16)/Queen BRIDGE; Palaeolithic to (Prehistoric) of London Archaeology Service in 1996 Elizabeth Street, REVETMENT; Post Medieval found a water channel and an associated Southwark, SE1 DITCH; WATER wooden structure, interpreted as a {13th Century CHANNEL; FLOOD revetment and dated to the 13th to 16th Bridge} {Middle DEPOSIT Centuries. Lower Palaeolithic tool and Bronze Age prehistoric burnt flint recovered. Agriculture} MLO75074 MON 255 TOOLEY ST SE1 PIT; PIT; PIT Early Iron Age to Roman MLO75082 MON Three Oak Lane (Nos FINDSPOT Late Mesolithic MICROLITH (Late 1-2), SE1 {Late Mesolithic); CORE (Late Mesolithic flints} Mesolithic); BLADE (Late Mesolithic) MLO75083 MON 1-2 THREE OAK LA WOOD Late Neolithic SE1 to Early Bronze Age MLO75084 MON 1-2 THREE OAK LA DITCH Late Neolithic

SE1 to Early Bronze Age MLO75085 MON 1-2 THREE OAK LA BUILDING Late Neolithic SE1 MATERIAL; FENCE; to Early Bronze POST HOLE; STAKE Age MLO75086 MON 1-2 THREE OAK LA PEAT Early Bronze SE1 Age to Roman MLO105369 MON Druid Street [Railway FLOOD DEPOSIT; Lower FLAKE (Prehistoric); An excavation by the Museum of London arches] PIT; POST HOLE; Palaeolithic to POTTERY (Late Bronze Archaeology Service in 1994 under railway Bermondsey, PLATFORM Post Medieval Age to Post Medieval); arches running parallel to Druid Street Southwark, SE1 KILN FURNITURE (Post revealed evidence of Post Medieval activity {Post Medieval Medieval); FLOWER and marked gardening. pits/market garden} POT (Post Medieval) MLO109061 MON Lafone Street (Nos ARD MARKS; Middle Bronze ADZE (Early Mesolithic Evidence for Prehistoric agriculture was 10-16)/Queen BOUNDARY DITCH; Age to Late Mesolithic); discovered in the form of ard marks and a Elizabeth Street, BURIED SOIL LEAF ARROWHEAD possible field boundary. The ploughsoil Southwark, SE1 HORIZON (Early Neolithic) horizon sealing and filling these features {Middle Bronze Age was radiocarbon dated to the Middle Agriculture} Bronze Age, 1520 BC to 1220 BC, but contained Mesolithic tools c. Roman MLO4194 FS BERMONDSEY ST FINDSPOT; Roman Hone (Roman); Hone FINDSPOT (Unknown) MLO4231 FS BARNHAM ST FINDSPOT Roman PICK (Roman) MLO4232 FS BARNHAM ST FINDSPOT Roman COIN (Roman) MLO4363 FS POTTERS FIELDS FINDSPOT Roman FIND UNCLASSIFIED (Roman) MLO13614 MON Tooley Street DUMP Roman ORGANIC MATERIAL Grape, fig and other organic remains from a (Nos.156-164), (Roman) reportedly Roman level found in 1899. Southwark {Roman Deposits}

MLO17755 MON WHITES GROUNDS DITCH; FLOOD Roman DEPOSIT MLO17989 MON Bethel Estate site, DITCH; PIT? Roman POTTERY (Roman) Early sands contained a small linear ditch East of Vine Lane, off and possible pits were recorded during an Tooley Street, excavation in 1988. These contained Southwark {Roman fragments of abraded Roman pottery. ditch and possible pits} MLO64003 FS LONG WALK FINDSPOT Roman POT (Roman) Medieval MLO7628 MON VINE LA OCCUPATION SITE; Medieval to OCCUPATION SITE Post Medieval MLO13484 MON TOOLEY ST CEMETERY; Medieval to CEMETERY Post Medieval MLO13492 MON HORSLEYDOWN LA MANOR HOUSE Medieval MLO13789 MON HORSLEYDOWN LA WATERMILL Medieval MLO14882 MON 135 TOWER BRIDGE CROSS Medieval RD MLO19954 MON Bethel Estate site, WATER CHANNEL; Medieval SHIPS TIMBER A section of the moat surrounding Fastolf East of Vine Lane, off MOAT (Medieval); CHEST Place was uncovered during excavations in Tooley Street, (Medieval) 1988. The moat appears to have been in Southwark {section use for some time, and in the early stage of Falstolf Place had a causeway allowing access to the moat} enclosure, though this was later cut through. MLO38662 MON VINE LA MARSH; MARSH Medieval to Post Medieval MLO46594 MON BETHEL ESTATE CAUSEWAY; Medieval SHIPS TIMBER REVETMENT (Medieval) MLO46595 MON BETHEL ESTATE MOAT; Medieval SHIPS TIMBER REVETMENT (Medieval)

MLO64004 MON LONG WALK RELIGIOUS HOUSE; Medieval MONASTERY MLO98744 MON Tooley Street, [Nos WATER CHANNEL?; Medieval to A late medieval palaeochannel or possible 155-173], PALAEOCHANNEL?; Post Medieval water course was recorded during a Southawrk, {late BURIED SOIL watching brief in 2007. In addition medieval to post HORIZON; QUARRY medieval ploughing was found to have medieval channel, disturbed the site, and a 16th chalk century quarrying, wall and wall was recorded. Post medieval quarrying ploughing} also. Post-medieval & Modern MLO5939 MON DRUID ST ARTILLERY Post Medieval GROUND MLO6537 MON Tooley Street, [Mark DUMP LAYER Post Medieval BUILDING MATERIAL 17th and 18th century building debris and Brown's Wharf], (Post Medieval); KILN evidence for pottery dumping associated Southwark {building WASTE (Post Medieval) with the delft-ware potteries was and pottery debris discovered here during excavations in from Delftware 1973. industry} MLO6537 MON Tooley Street, [Mark DUMP LAYER Post Medieval BUILDING MATERIAL 17th and 18th century building debris and Brown's Wharf], (Post Medieval); KILN evidence for pottery dumping associated Southwark {building WASTE (Post Medieval) with the delft-ware potteries was and pottery debris discovered here during excavations in from Delftware 1973. industry} MLO7630 MON MARK BROWNS BUILDING Post Medieval WHARF MLO8773 MON Vine Lane, off Tooley DUMP LAYER Post Medieval Extensive dumping activity on this site Street, Southwark could be related to the nearby Delftware {Delftware pottery industry of the 17th century. dumps} MLO8848 MON DRUID ST DRILL HALL Post Medieval

MLO11528 FS TOOLEY ST FINDSPOT Post Medieval KILN WASTE (Post Medieval) MLO13529 PK Fair Street, CHURCH; Post Medieval Southwark, {Site of CEMETERY; PUBLIC to Modern 18th century Church PARK of St. John the Evangelist} MLO16592 MON Druid Street/Fair CEMETERY Post Medieval Street {Butler's burial ground} MLO18076 MON Bethel Estate site, REVETMENT; Post Medieval A wooden revetted drain, constructed East of Vine Lane, off DRAIN around the 18th century, was recorded Tooley Street, during an excavation in 1988. This was Southwark {18th truncated by a later concrete and brick century timber drain. revetted drain} MLO19952 MON WHITES GROUNDS WELL; DRAIN Post Medieval MLO19955 MON Bethel Estate site, HORNCORE PIT; Post Medieval Brick-lined wells or soakaways and pits East of Vine Lane, off WELL; SOAKAWAY; lined with horncores were discovered Tooley Street, TANNING PIT?; during an excavation in 1988. They may Southwark {possible TANNERY represent the remains of tanning activity. post medieval tanning site} MLO23128 MON Potters Fields, POTTERY KILN; Post Medieval POT (Post Medieval) This is the possible site of a 17th century Southwark {possible POTTERY kiln, possibly the one known from site of 17th century MANUFACTURING documentary evidence to have been Delftware kiln or SITE established by Christian Wilhelm in 1618. kilns} Several dumps of kiln furniture and pottery fragments have been found in the area. MLO35086 MON VINE LA BUILDING Post Medieval MLO35087 MON VINE LA ROAD Post Medieval

MLO53665 FS VINE LA FINDSPOT; Post Medieval POT (Post Medieval); FINDSPOT KILN FURNITURE (Post Medieval) MLO58085 MON ROPER LA WAREHOUSE; Post Medieval VINEGAR BREWERY MLO59499 MON Brunswick Court GULLY; PIT; DITCH; Post Medieval BRICK (Post Medieval); A number of Post Medieval features were (Nos. 4-42)/White's FOUNDATION ROOF TILE (Post uncovered during an evaluation by Grounds (Nos. 12- Medieval); TOBACCO Museum of London Archaeology Service at 16), Bermondsey, PIPE (Post Medieval); Brunswick Court and White's Grounds in Southwark, SE1 {Post SHOE (Post Medieval); December 1993. Medieval features} BARREL (Post Medieval); ANIMAL REMAINS (Post Medieval); ASH (Post Medieval); SHERD (Post Medieval) MLO60104 MON 54 GAINSFORD ST WATER CHANNEL Post Medieval MLO60105 MON 54 GAINSFORD ST DUMP Post Medieval MLO60106 MON 54 GAINSFORD ST CELLAR Post Medieval MLO63652 MON ANCHOR REVETMENT Post Medieval BREWHOUSE, SHAD THAMES (MILL HOUSE ), SE1 MLO64298 MON 54 GAINSFORTH ST WATER CHANNEL Post Medieval MLO64299 MON 54 GAINSFORTH ST CELLAR Post Medieval MLO66000 MON Tooley Street (241- DUMP; PIT; WELL Post Medieval Large 17th century rubbish dumps were 247)/Lafone Street, found, along with a smaller rubbish pit, Southwark {Post during excavations by the Museum of Medieval rubbish London in 1995. dump}

MLO67514 MON Boss Street (No 2- DUMP LAYER Post Medieval BRICK (Post Medieval); 16), SE1 {Post TILE (Post Medieval); medieval dumped POTTERY (Post layer} Medieval); BOTTLE (Post Medieval) MLO73220 BLD Roper Lane, FACTORY; Post Medieval Bermondsey {Former VINEGAR 19th-20th Century BREWERY Vinegar Brewery and Associated Buildings} MLO74559 MON TOWER BRIDGE RD ROPERY Post Medieval MLO74560 MON ROPER LA Vinegar Factory Post Medieval MLO74565 MON WHITES GROUND E BREWERY Post Medieval STATE MLO74573 MON WHITES GROUND CURRIERY; Post Medieval TANNERY MLO74574 MON WHITES GROUND WAREHOUSE Post Medieval MLO74624 MON ROPER LA Vinegar Factory Post Medieval

MLO75075 MON 255 TOOLEY ST SE1 DITCH Post Medieval MLO75076 MON 255 TOOLEY ST SE1 PIT Post Medieval MLO75077 MON 255 TOOLEY ST SE1 DUMP Post Medieval MLO75078 MON 255 TOOLEY ST SE1 WELL; BUILDING; Post Medieval WELL MLO75080 MON 255 TOOLEY ST SE1 BEDDING TRENCH; Post Medieval GULLY MLO76469 MON Lambeth College MADE GROUND; Post Medieval KILN FURNITURE (Post PIT Medieval) MLO77339 MON Lambeth College CELLAR; PIT Post Medieval MLO77537 MON ST JOHN'S WALL Post Medieval HUMAN REMAINS (Post

CHURCHYARD, Medieval); TOWER BRIDGE GRAVESTONE (Post ROAD, SE1 Medieval) MLO98067 MON Tower Bridge Road PIT; MADE Post Medieval The evaluation was carried out by R Bull on and Druid Street GROUND behalf of MoLAS on 7th January 2005. The [Vacant Land, evaluation encountered several late post Northwest Corner medieval pits (late 19th -20th century) and Of], Southwark, SE1 foundation pads were observed. MLO98384 MON Potters Field Park, CEMETERY; Post Medieval The burial ground of the parish of St Southwark {St CHURCHYARD Olave's is shown on Rocques map of 1746. Olave's Churchyard} The parish was expanding during the sixteenth century and, in 1583, the parish bought a plot of land for a new burial ground on the south western corner of the eyot. MLO98385 MON Potters Fields, SITE; DUMP LAYER Post Medieval POTTERY (Post An archaeological watching brief was Southwark {Post Medieval) carried out on geotechnical pits at the site medieval dumps} of Potters Fields. Dark ashy deposits were identified as post medieval dumps were identified during an archaeological watching brief carried out on geotechnical pits . MLO98386 MON Potters Fields, TERRACED HOUSE; Post Medieval The rear of several terraced properties, Southwark {Post CELLAR; BUILDING including cellars, foundations, yard and medieval houses} garden areas and associated out-buildings were recorded during excavation work at Potters Fields, Southwark. MLO98387 MON Potters Fields, MARKET GARDEN Post Medieval . A large deposit of sandy, clayey silt was Southwark {Post recorded during excavation at Potters medieval market Fields, Southwark. The deposit represents garden} post medieval open land or market garden activity, as shown on William Morgan's

map of 1682 and Roque's map of 1746. MLO98388 MON Potters Fields, WAREHOUSE; Post Medieval Features associated with 19th century Southwark {19th INDUSTRIAL SITE warehouses or industrial activity were Century found through excavation at Potters Fields, Warehouses} Southwark. A brick yard surface was found overlying the remains of terraced houses along the west side of Freemans Lane. MLO98390 PK Tooley Street, CHURCHYARD; Post Medieval HUMAN REMAINS (Post A burial ground is marked on the 1st Potter's Fields Park CEMETERY; BURIAL Medieval) edition Ordnance Survey map between {St Olave's VAULT; BUILDING Weaver's Lane and Potter's Fields. It may Churchyard} have been an extension to an earlier cemetery shown on Rocques map of 1746 immediately to the west, the churchyard of St Olave. MLO98780 MON Bethel Estate site, FINDSPOT Post Medieval POTTERY (Post Pottery sherds, wasters, biscuit ware, and East of Vine Lane, off Medieval); WASTER kiln furniture associated with the nearby Tooley Street, (Post Medieval); KILN Delftware kiln of Christian Wilhelm were Southwark FURNITURE (Post recovered during an excavation in 1988. {Delftware Medieval) production debris} Undated MLO8774 MON Vine Lane, off Tooley WATERFRONT Unknown The remains of two undated waterfronts Street, Southwark were recorded running east-to-west in {remains of undated 1986. waterfronts} MLO63662 MON BUTLERS COURT PEAT Unknown MLO63998 FS LONG WALK FINDSPOT Unknown LITHIC IMPLEMENT (Unknown) MLO64002 MON LONG WALK PIT Unknown MLO75081 MON 255 TOOLEY ST SE1 CULTIVATION SOIL Unknown MLO77338 MON Lambeth College DITCH Unknown

Archaeological Investigations

EvUID Record Name Event Type Organisation Type ELO990 EVA Three Oak Lane (Nos 1-2), Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological Evaluation EXCAVATION Pre-Construct Archaeology ELO993 EVT Lambeth College, Queen Elizabeth Street/Tower Bridge Road (corner of), WATCHING BRIEF Pre-Construct Archaeology Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological watching brief ELO2314 EVT Tower Bridge Road [St John's Churchyard], Southwark, London, SE1: WATCHING BRIEF Pre-Construct Archaeology Archaeological Watching Brief ELO2635 EVT Anchor Brewhouse, Shad Thames, Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological WATCHING BRIEF Department of Greater Watching Brief London Archaeology (Southwark & Lambeth) ELO2864 EVA Brunswick Court (Nos. 4-42)/White's Grounds (Nos. 12-16), Bermondsey, TRIAL TRENCH Museum of London Southwark, SE1: Evaluation Archaeology Service ELO2892 EVA Boss Street (Nos 2-16), [Boss House], SE1: Evaluation TRIAL TRENCH Museum of London Archaeology Service ELO2899 EVT Bethel Estate, Vine Lane, Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological Excavation OPEN AREA Department of Greater EXCAVATION London Archaeology (Southwark & Lambeth) ELO2912 EVT Curlew Street [Butlers Court], Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological OPEN AREA Department of Greater Excavation EXCAVATION London Archaeology (Southwark & Lambeth) ELO3359 EVA Giansford Street (No 54), Bermondsey, London, SE1: Archaeological Evaluation TRIAL TRENCH Museum of London Archaeology Service ELO3973 EVT Tooley Street [Mark Brown's Wharf], Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological OPEN AREA Southwark Archaeological Excavation EXCAVATION Excavations Committee ELO4360 EVT Queen Elizabeth Street (north), Southwark, London, SE1: TRIAL TRENCH Department of Greater London Archaeology (Southwark & Lambeth) ELO4361 EVT Queen Elizabeth Street (south), Southwark, London, SE1: An archaeological TRIAL TRENCH Department of Greater excavation London Archaeology (Southwark & Lambeth)

ELO4736 EVT Tudor Street (Nos 1-4), City of London, EC4: Archaeological Watching Brief WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London Archaeology Service ELO4769 EVT Tooley Street (No 255), Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological watching brief WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London Archaeology Service ELO4779 EVT Tooley Street [Unicorn Passage], Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological OPEN AREA Department of Greater Excavation EXCAVATION London Archaeology (Southwark & Lambeth) ELO4820 EVT Vine Lane (No 3), Tooley Street, Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological WATCHING BRIEF Department of Greater watching brief London Archaeology (Southwark & Lambeth) ELO4822 EVA Vine Lane [Hay's Wharf], Tooley Street, Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological TRIAL TRENCH Department of Greater Evaluation London Archaeology (Southwark & Lambeth) ELO4824 EVT Vine Lane [Hay's Wharf], Tooley Street, Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological OPEN AREA Department of Greater excavation EXCAVATION London Archaeology (Southwark & Lambeth) ELO4879 EVT White's Grounds (22-28), Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological Excavation OPEN AREA Department of Greater EXCAVATION London Archaeology (Southwark & Lambeth) ELO6317 EVA Tower Bridge Road and Druid Street [Vacant Land, Northwest Corner Of], TRIAL TRENCH Museum of London Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological Evaluation Archaeology Service ELO7206 EVT Potters Fields, Southwark, London, SE1: An Archaeological Watching Brief WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London Archaeology Service ELO7207 EVA Potters Fields Park, Tooley Street, Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London Evaluation Archaeology Service ELO7208 EVT Potters Fields Park, Tooley Street, Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London Watching Brief Archaeology Service ELO8067 EVT Tooley Street, (Nos 155-173, More London Plot 10), Southwark, London, SE1: WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London Archaeological Watching Brief Archaeology Service ELO10551 EVA Druid Street [Railway arches], Bermondsey, Southwark, SE1: Archaeological TRIAL TRENCH Museum of London Evaluation Archaeology Service

ELO10612 EVT Boss Street (No 2-16)/Goat Street, London, SE1:Archaeological Watching Brief WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London Archaeology Service ELO10627 EVT Lafone Street (Nos 10-16)/Queen Elizabeth Street, Southwark, SE1: Evaluation TRIAL TRENCH Museum of London Archaeology Service ELO10634 EVA Tooley Street (Nos 241-247)/Lafone Street, Southwark, London, SE1: TRIAL TRENCH Museum of London Archaeological Evaluation Archaeology Service ELO10661 EVA Tooley Street (No 255), Southwark, London, SE1: Evaluation TRIAL TRENCH Museum of London Archaeology Service ELO11337 EVT Tower Bridge Road (No. 169), London, SE1 3NA: Archaeological investigations EXCAVATION; Pre-Construct Archaeology WATCHING BRIEF; TRIAL TRENCH ELO11338 EVA Tower Bridge Road ( No. 169), Southwark, London, SE1 3NA: Archaeological TRIAL TRENCH Pre-Construct Archaeology Evaluation ELO11339 EVT Tower Bridge Road (No. 169), London, SE1 3NA: Watching Brief WATCHING BRIEF Pre-Construct Archaeology ELO11340 EVT Tower Bridge Road (No. 169), Southwark, London, SE1 3NA: Archaeological EXCAVATION Pre-Construct Archaeology Excavation ELO11341 EVT Tower Bridge Road (No. 169), Southwark, London, SE1 3NA: Archaeological EXCAVATION Pre-Construct Archaeology Excavation ELO14575 EVT Portland Wharf, Tower Bridge, Shad Thames, Southwark, London, SE1: WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London Archaeological Watching Brief Archaeology ELO14576 EVT Tooley Street/Shand Street/Barnham Street (Land bounded by), Southwark, GEOTECHNICAL Museum of London London, SE1: Archaeological Watching brief SURVEY Archaeology Service ELO14627 EVT Tooley Street/Shand Street/Barnham Street (Land bounded by), Southwark, WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London London, SE1: Archaeological Watching brief Archaeology Service ELO14727 EVA Potters Fields [Land at], Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological Evaluation TRIAL TRENCH Museum of London Archaeology ELO14735 EVA Queen Elizabeth Street (No 19), Southwark, London, SE1: An archaeological TRIAL TRENCH Museum of London evaluation Archaeology ELO14759 EVA Tooley Street [More London Plot 10] Southwark London SE1: Archaeological WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London Evaluation Archaeology Service ELO14854 EVT Three Oak Lane (Nos 1-2), Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological excavation EXCAVATION Pre-Construct Archaeology

ELO15303 EVT Potters Fields Park, Tooley Street, Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological EXCAVATION Museum of London Excavation Archaeology Service ELO15308 EVA Potters Fields, Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological Evaluation EVALUATION Museum of London Archaeology Service ELO15401 EVT Fair Street [St John's Churchyard], Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological WATCHING BRIEF L- P Archaeology Watching Brief ELO15677 EVT Vine Lane [Potters Field]/Tooley Street, Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological FIELD Southwark Archaeological Intervention OBSERVATION Excavations Committee (MONITORING) ELO15680 EVT Potter's Field (Nos 10-11), Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological Intervention FIELD Department of Greater OBSERVATION London Archaeology (MONITORING) (Southwark & Lambeth) ELO15694 EVT Tooley Street [Anning and Cobb], Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological FIELD Unassigned Intervention OBSERVATION (MONITORING) ELO15708 EVT Tooley Street (No 201), Southwark, London, SE1: Archaeological Watching Brief WATCHING BRIEF Pre-Construct Archaeology ELO15724 EVA Tooley Street/Shand Street/Barnham Street (land bounded by), Southwark, EVALUATION Pre-Construct Archaeology London, SE1: Archaeological Evaluation ELO15804 EVT Tooley Street/Morgan's Lane/Weavers Lane [London Bridge City], Southwark, EVALUATION; Museum of London London, SE1: An archaeological evaluation and watching brief WATCHING BRIEF Archaeology Service ELO17825 BL Queen Elizabeth Street (No. 19) London SE1 2LP: Archaeological Watching Brief WATCHING BRIEF Museum of London Archaeology ELO17841 EVT Lafone Street (Nos. 10-16) London Borough of Southwark SE1: Archaeological OPEN AREA Museum of London Excavation EXCAVATION Archaeology ELO20085 BL Tooley Street [GHI Lalit Hotel] London SE1 2JR: Excavation EXCAVATION L- P Archaeology

Figure 6: Late 16th century. Plan of Horseye Downe (Corner 1855).

Figure 7: 1746. John Rocque. Map of London.

Archaeological Desk Based 185 Tower Brdge Road, London Borough of Southwark, SE1 2UF © February 2020 Assessment Figure 8: 1799. Richard Horwood. Map of London. . LAN1001544. ed. Licence no © Crown copyright 2017. All rights reserv Figure 9: 1875. Ordnance Survey 1:1056 scale.

Archaeological Desk Based 185 Tower Brdge Road, London Borough of Southwark, SE1 2UF © February 2020 Assessment . ary : Sheet 84 © British Libr olume IV V

Figure 10: 1887. Chas. E. Goad Ltd. Insurance Plan of the City of London. . LAN1001544. ed. Licence no © Crown copyright 2017. All rights reserv Figure 11: 1896. Ordnance Survey 1:1056 scale.

Archaeological Desk Based 185 Tower Bridge Road, London Borough of Southwark SE1 2UF © February 2020 Assessment Figure 12: c.1905. Postcard showing the main etrance to the bank. . LAN1001544. ed. Licence no © Crown copyright 2017. All rights reserv Figure 13: 1916. Ordnance Survey 1:2500 scale.

Archaeological Desk Based 185 Tower Bridge Road, London Borough of Southwark SE1 2UF © February 2020 Assessment © Google Earth, May 2018.

Figure 14: 2018. Satellite image.

Archaeological Desk Based 185 Tower Bridge Road, London Borough of Southwark SE1 2UF © February 2020 Assessment

Proposed

7.0 Development

1 Guildford Street, Chertsey: Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment| 40 Note This drawing is not to be scaled. Use figured dimensions only. All dimensions are to be checked on site and any discrepancies, errors or omissions are to be reported to the architect prior to commencement of works.

Commercial 105sqm

ALL DIMENSIONS APPROXIMATE

SCHEME DESIGN SUBJECT TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER /SERVICES ENGINEER, & PLANNERS COMMENT

FOR DISCUSSION

project date scale drawn BB PARTNERSHIP LTD 185 Tower Bridge Road Jan 20 1:100 GS C H A R T E R E D A R C H I T E C T S London drawing drwg. no rev. Studios 33-34, 10 Hornsey St, London. N7 8EL Basement Plan Tel 020 7336 8555 - e-mail - [email protected] GCZ - 49 - Proposed © 2018 BB PARTNERSHIP LIMITED ALL RIGHTS RESERVED DO NOT SCALE CHECK ALL DIMENSIONS ON SITE