| Abstract: |
The watching brief comprised the observation by an experienced archaeologist of the machine excavation of 21 geotechnical trial pits (Fig. 2), each measuring between 3m and 4m in length by between 0.6m and 1m wide and up to 4m deep, the mechanical excavator being equipped with a toothless bucket and nonarchaeologically significant deposits being removed by the contractors under archaeological supervision. In addition to the trial pits, fifteen windowless sample boreholes (Fig. 2) were also excavated to depths of up to 5m below present ground level (bpgl), preceded by hand digging to 1.2m and monitored archaeologically. A number of cable percussion boreholes (Fig. 2) were also excavated across the site, though only two of these (CP2 and RH3) along with a machine-excavated pit above a third (RH7) were archaeologically monitored. It had initially been intended to excavate a number of rotary boreholes though these were changed to cable percussion boreholes, however the numbering sequence for each of the interventions, devised before the fieldwork commenced, was retained for ease of reference. Three trial pits included in the original plan were not excavated as they lay within buildings still under occupation, whilst a number of other interventions were moved from their intended locations for practical reasons. Sufficient time allowance was made by site contractors for the investigation of any archaeological remains revealed during groundworks. When archaeological deposits were encountered, they were investigated by hand, characterised and excavated as necessary. They were then planned and recorded in accordance with Technical Manual 1: Fieldwork Recording Manual (CA 2013). Each borehole was recorded on a pro-forma borehole recording sheet and each trial pit was recorded on a pro-forma trench recording sheet. Representative sections of all pits were drawn and photographed, even if they contained no deposits of archaeological interest, drawn records including the full depth of the geotechnical intervention. All finds and samples were bagged separately and related to the context record. All artefacts were retained for processing and analysis in accordance with Technical Manual 3: Treatment of Finds Immediately after Excavation (CA 1995). Due care was taken to identify deposits with environmental potential, with a view to possible future environmental sampling, though no such material was sampled at this stage because of the high risk of contamination; geotechnical samples taken during the trial pitting and window sampling, being analysed for contaminants and to inform future works. Artefacts from topsoil and other recent contexts were noted but not retained unless they were of intrinsic interest (e.g. a complete early 20th-century beer bottle from TP5). All artefacts were collected from stratified excavated contexts except for large assemblages of post-medieval or modern material. During February 2017, Cotswold Archaeology maintained an archaeological watching during geotechnical investigations at Power Court, Luton, Bedfordshire. The geotechnical investigations comprised the machine excavation of trial pits, cable-percussion coring and window sampling. The work was commissioned by 2020 Developments (Luton) Ltd on behalf of Luton Town Football Club and was carried out in order to inform a planning application to Luton Borough Council (LBC; the local planning authority) for a new football stadium with ancillary stadium related facilities, along with residential and community/commercial development, hotel and infrastructure. Previous archaeological investigations to the south of the site had revealed evidence of medieval and post-medieval activity, the former associated with a 13th century castle (known as Fulk de Breaute’s Castle). |
