Former Water Works, Deals Gateway, Deptford An Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment for St James Homes Ltd by Jennifer Lowe Thames Valley Archaeological Services Site Code DPS99/77 November 1999 Former Water Works, Deals Gateway, Deptford An Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment Report 99/77 by Jennifer Lowe Introduction This desk-based study is an assessment of the archaeological potential of the Deptford Pumping Station, located at Brookmill Road in the London Borough of Lewisham (TQ 3760 7660) (Fig 1). The project was commissioned by Mr Stephen Trenwith of St James Homes Ltd, Wellington House, 209–217 High Street, Hampton Hill, Middlesex, and comprises the first stage of a process to determine the presence/absence, extent, character, quality and date of any archaeological remains which may be affected by redevelopment of the area. Site Description, Location and Geology A Thames Water Pumping Station currently occupies the site, covering an area of approximately 5 hectares. The site lies within Lewisham, on the boundary between this borough and Greenwich, and is located on the eastern bank of the Ravensbourne River which flows northwards to join the Thames at Deptford Creek (Fig 2). The majority of the site is open space with two covered reservoirs (infilled) being mostly set below ground. To the south of these is the James Engine House with several ancillary buildings and structures nearby. A former engine house and ancillary workshops is present to the north. The western margin of the site is now defined by the Dockland Light Railway tracks which run parallel to the river (Fig 2). The northern area, formerly playing fields is currently occupied by a contractors compound. The site is located on alluvium (BGS 1981) and lies at a height of approximately 5.7m above Ordnance Datum. Planning Background and Development Proposals Planning permission is to be sought for the redevelopment of the site for residential, live-work and office development. There are no definitive plans of the development proposals at this time. A scheme involving the creation of 16 blocks of flats with courtyards and other areas of open space has been suggested for the northern proportion of the site, with Thames Water maintaining an operational area to the south centred on the James Engine House. Although the scheme is provisional, the client considers that the foundation design will be piled and that that the structures will include basements. 2 Archaeology and Planning (PPG 16 1990) provides guidance relating to archaeology within the planning process. It points out that where a desk-based assessment has shown that there is a strong possibility of significant archaeological deposits in a development area it is reasonable to provide more detailed information from a field evaluation so that an appropriate strategy to mitigate the effects of development on archaeology can be devised: Paragraph 21 states: ‘Where early discussions with local planning authorities or the developer’s own research indicate that important archaeological remains may exist, it is reasonable for the planning authority to request the prospective developer to arrange for an archaeological field evaluation to be carried out...’ Should the presence of archaeological deposits be confirmed further guidance is provided. Archaeology and Planning stresses preservation in situ of archaeological deposits as a first consideration as in paragraphs 8 and 18. Paragraph 8 states: ‘...Where nationally important archaeological remains, whether scheduled or not, and their settings, are affected by proposed development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation...’ Paragraph 18 states: ‘The desirability of preserving an ancient monument and its’ setting is a material consideration in determining planning applications whether that monument is scheduled or unscheduled...’ However, for archaeological deposits that are not of such significance it is appropriate for them to be ‘preserved by record’ (i.e. fully excavated and recorded by a competent archaeological contractor) prior to their destruction or damage. Paragraph 25 states: ‘Where planning authorities decide that the physical preservation in situ of archaeological remains is not justified in the circumstances of the development and that development resulting in the destruction of the archaeological remains should proceed, it would be entirely reasonable for the planning authority to satisfy itself ... that the developer has made appropriate and satisfactory provision for the excavation and recording of remains.’ Further guidance is provided by the Lewisham Borough Unitary Development Plan, 31–35 (Lewisham UDP, Adopted July 1996) 31) Although the Borough does not currently contain any Areas of Archaeological Importance nor Scheduled Ancient Monuments (within the meaning of section 33 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act, 1979) there are a number of areas in the Borough where important archaeological remains have been found, and where more may yet be found. 32) The Borough contains a rich archaeological resource spanning the full history of human activity in the British Isles. The Council, on the advice of the Museum of London’s Archaeology Service and the Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit, has identified a number of ‘Areas of 2 Archaeological Priority’. Their location are illustrated on the Proposals Map, and details are set out in Schedule 3. They cover Roman remains found along the lines of the two Roman roads which ran through the Borough, through Anglo-Saxon and Medieval settlement sites, mainly beside rivers, to Deptford’s strategic role as a shipbuilding centre and later Victorian county houses in what were then green field sites within the Borough. 33) Items of archaeological importance are not always to be found buried underground, but can also include buildings with social and historical significance. The protection, excavation, removal and storage of valuable remains is becoming increasingly difficult given the pace and scale of modern development. There is a mismatch between the rate of discovery and the facilities and financial resources available to remove and store the finds. 34) Accordingly, the current approach of the DoE and English Heritage is to ensure that potentially important sites are identified and evaluated prior to development, and that any significant remains are preserved in situ and not destroyed by the development. In this way their preservation for the future is secured despite being inaccessible for the time being. Where it is not practicable to preserve remains in situ, consideration will be given to their excavation and recording prior to their destruction by development. 35) The potential damage from development can be reduced by appropriate land use policies, and many of the ‘Areas of Archaeological Priority’ are designated for open space. The site, due to its close proximity to the Ravensbourne River, does fall within one of the Boroughs’ ‘Areas of Archaeological Priority’ Methodology The assessment of the site was carried out by the examination of pre-existing information from a number of sources recommended by the Institute of Field Archaeologists paper ‘Standards in British Archaeology’ covering desk-based studies. These sources include historic and modern maps, the Greater London Sites and Monuments Record, geological maps, and any relevant publications or reports. Archaeological Background A search was made of the greater London Sites and Monuments Records (GLSMR) on 20th October 1999 for a radius of 500m around the site, the results are summarised in Appendix 1 and the locations of the entries are shown on Figure 1. The search revealed a substantial number of entries for this area, ranging from Prehistoric to post-Medieval, with five entries being located within the development area itself. The GLSMR entries for the site include features associated with the water industry, or industry in general. The earliest entry located on the site is for a Roman cremation [Fig 1; 35]; a ‘blackware urn’ was found on the site in 1853. Other entries for the site date to the Medieval/post-Medieval periods. A Medieval flour mill/water mill is recorded as being on the site around 1588, and may well correspond to the mill which lay outside the site 3 on the western bank of the Ravensbourne which was demolished by the 1850s [30]. Similarly, a wooden water wheel and wooden pipes were recorded during a watching brief of flood prevention work; the pipes may be part of the original 19th century works [35]. Ravensbourne Farm, possibly of 18th century date, lay on the western side of the river on Mill Lane, now Brookmill Road [34]. This area was built on for terraced housing by 1880. Prehistoric activity is recorded in this area, although it is relatively sparse. The Lewisham Borough UDP points out that the Ravensbourne River has provided a quantity of prehistoric finds, with Mesolithic tools and weapons, and two bronze age axes being recovered form the river [40]. Other prehistoric evidence comes from archaeological investigations close by. To the north-west of the site an Iron Age pit was excavated which contained a flint artefact and a fragment of quernstone [18], and immediately north of the site four flint flakes were uncovered during a watching brief [36]. As indicated above, Roman activity has been recorded on the development site itself, in the form of a Roman cremation burial, presumably human. An inhumation burial was uncovered on Vanguard Street in 1868 to the north-west of the site. It was originally interpreted as Roman due to the depth at which is was encountered (2.75m) and the fact that it was aligned east-west, however, no further dating evidence was found [17]. Roman activity is in the area is also suggested by a few sherds of residual Roman pottery from the south-east [42], and a ditch and a pit located during an excavation to the north-west of the site [18]. The possible remains of a Roman building were uncovered during sewer works in 1866, on Deptford High Street, when a portion of tessellated pavement was revealed as well as massive brickwork [13].