68 1.6.2 69
Once appointed, the Main Works Contractor (MWC) will verify detailed methodologies for each of the above mitigation techniques.
Consultation
The decision as to where/whether preservation in situ should be undertaken would be made by in agreement by EH, SCC and EAOW, taking into account other environmental constraints and mitigation requirements: i.e. such agreement would take into account the need to balance routing and methodology requirements in order to mitigate other impacts (for instance, landscape, ecology or traffic). The methodology for determining whether/where preservation in situ would be warranted is outlined below.
70
The approach to archaeological assessment and mitigation is staged and iterative. To date, heritage assets identified through desk-based methods (DBA and aerial photograph assessment) and field reconnaissance survey have been presented to EH and SCC through the submission of technical reports. Accordingly, EH and SCC have been requested to review the significance of any heritage assets within the Onshore Cable Route, and to identify any heritage assets of national significance or equivalent that may be appropriate to preserve in situ.
71
Prior to implementation of the proposed archaeological assessment programme, the proposed onshore electrical transmission works would impact upon numerous heritage assets of unknown significance. In addition, following the proposed stage of geophysical survey, further potential heritage assets of unknown significance within the Onshore Cable Route would be identified.
72
EAOW, with input from the Project Archaeologist, will produce a detailed design, proposing a 55m Preferred Onshore Cable Corridor which would aim to avoid any geophysical anomalies of apparent national significance. This proposal would be presented for approval by EH and SCC, in advance of the subsequent proposed stage of trial trenching.
73
The trial trench location plan would be proposed by EAOW, designed with input from the Project Archaeologist and presented for approval by EH and SCC in advance of the proposed stage of fieldwork.
74
Subsequently, and following submission of technical reporting relating to the proposed stage of trial trenching, EH and SCC will be asked to review the significance of heritage assets within the 35m working width/HDD/CCS areas, in order to agree whether preservation in situ, advance/’set-piece’ archaeological excavation, or Archaeological ‘Strip, Map and Record’ is the most appropriate next stage.
Outline Written Scheme of Investigation: Archaeology and Cultural Heritage (Onshore) Rev 01
Page 21
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89