SDO11443 - A Proposed Development of Land at Park Farm, Gillingham, Dorset: Area 1 (ST 820 258) and Area 2 (ST 821 255). Preliminary Archaeological Assessment.

'An archaeological assessment of land at Park Farm, Gillingham, Dorset has comprised a detailed site inspection and a review of documentary sources and historic maps held in Dorchester County Record Office and Dorchester Reference Library. The study incorporates two application areas; Area 1 consists of an outline application for residential development covering an area of around 6 hectares; and, Area 2, consists of an outline application for employment development, covering an area of around 5.8 hectares. The main archaeological interest for the site lies in the known presence of part of the western boundary of the Medieval deer-park, a large part of which is a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM Dorset 796), but not the portion which crosses through the proposed development areas. The earliest reference to a deer park at Gillingham was in AD 1228. The park pale survives in part as an earthwork within the boundaries of the site and is on a NW to SE alignment. The former boundary is represented by a low earthwork bank, approximately 5m wide, with a linear hollow on its SW side representing the associated ditch. In other parts of the site (to the SE) the park pale does not survive as a surface feature and in parts, all traces have been removed by a tarmac covered car parking area. The review of historic maps and documentary records has traced the land-use history of the site from the early 17th century to the present day, and has confirmed the surface evidence for the presence of the former deer park boundary. Without the availability of a detailed proposed site layout, it is uncertain what the impact of the proposed development on the deer park boundary will be. Across the remainder of both areas, there are no further surface indications for archaeological activity. The low-lying nature of the land coupled with the lack of evidence from historical sources, indicates that there are unlikely to be archaeological remains of a settlement or funerary nature of any period within the confines of the two development areas. However, at this stage, this cannot be confirmed.' .'