Agenda item

Beyond the Castle Archaeological Site

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Clifford)

 

Report of the Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning)

 

Minutes:

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Clifford)

 

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning) to note the initial recent archaeological findings and their potential national significance and consider the recommendations for future work that offers a comprehensive strategic direction for managing future work across the site.

 

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

 

 

Option 1: Do Nothing

Option 2: Continue piecemeal / ad hoc approach

Option 3: Take forward a comprehensive approach

(PREFERRED OPTION)

Advantages

With no archaeological investigations or further works there are no additional demands for council resources.

 

 

Limited demand on staff resources.

 

Provides the best conditions to discover and record Lancaster’s Roman archaeological history.

 

Maximises potential for economic benefits, including visitor numbers and spend.

 

Significant discoveries would contribute to the museums service and the uniqueness of the local collections.

 

Sets formal framework for future project work that will meet funder’s requirements and best practice in archaeology.

 

Developing and implementing a comprehensive management plan for the site will enable a proactive approach that plans costed works and in the long term provides better quality service that is more cost effective.

 

The council can meet its responsibilities by taking a leadership role in ensuring appropriate management and development of the site.

 

Potential new income generation opportunities from special exhibitions, workshops and seminars, merchandising and catering.    

 

Disadvantages

The opportunity to discover and tell Lancaster’s Roman story and raise Lancaster’s profile, is not taken.

 

Tourism, museums and wider economic benefits not delivered.

 

Some work on the site is still required but is unlikely to attract significant external funding.

Agenda for future work is reactive with the potential for the agenda to be set by others without the benefit of expert advice or an agreed strategy.

 

Lacks scale to secure significant funding, leading to a reduced and poorer quality evidence base.

 

Missed opportunities to capitalise on developing plans for the museums service.

Current staff resources required to coordinate approach at this early stage.

 

Some financial implications for the council, but also external funding opportunities.

 

Risks

Site has some condition issues that present a risk to the archaeological record and Scheduled Ancient Monument.

 

There is currently limited protection of the site, which constrains the ability to ensure the site is investigated / excavated appropriately.

 

Implicit to the do nothing approach is an acceptance of a reactive approach to maintenance that could prove more costly over the long term.

 

Potential reputational damage to the Council in terms of its responsibilities for the site.

 

Intellectual property rights relating to the understanding of the site may not be limited to the Council and its agreed partners.

Absence of comprehensive management plan likely to lead to a reactive approach that could be more costly and fail to protect heritage assets in the short term.

 

Potential reputational damage to the Council in terms of its responsibilities for the site.

 

Resource/ space requirements for finds, archives and to provide suitable working and visitor areas are not currently available. This can be addressed by emerging options for the museums in the next year or so.

 

External funding is not guaranteed. Liaison with funders will help to gauge interest and support.

 

The Roman story may turn out to be less significant than expected. This seems unlikely but the process of revealing the heritage of the site will be of huge interest to experts and amateur archaeologists in any event.

 

The officer preferred option is Option 3 (Take forward a comprehensive approach) as it ensures that the City Council is able to guide the future archaeological investigations within a robust framework that provides the greatest chance of securing external funding necessary. The actions are all linked to the successful achievement of discovering Lancaster’s Roman story and the significant benefits it could bring to the city, subject to the quality and significance of the finds and there being a viable and affordable business case.

 

Option 1 (Do nothing) fails to acknowledge and capitalise on the potential offered by the new understanding of Lancaster’s Roman history. With discoveries likely to be of national significance this would seem to be a missed opportunity.  It may avoid further cost pressures, however.

Option 2 (Continue piecemeal approach) may provide limited benefits, but will ultimately yield a fragmented archaeological story due to the small scale of investigation over a protracted period.

 

This project is at an important point and the actions set out in Option 3 provide a comprehensive programme to successfully maximise this heritage opportunity. This approach recognises the likely national significance of the site, as well as its importance to Lancaster. The scale of archaeological potential has the ability to put Lancaster ‘on the map’ as a significant Roman heritage site offering new possibilities as a heritage destination, public space and place of discovery. Telling Lancaster’s Roman archaeology story through further excavation, interpretation and display can be an essential ingredient in the city’s offer for visitors and for local communities, bringing with it significant economic benefits. A strategic partnership with expert advisors, including Universities, is likely to arise from this work with the potential to benefit Lancaster well into the future.

 

Councillor Clifford proposed, seconded by Councillor Leyshon:-

 

“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”

 

Councillors then voted:-

 

Resolved unanimously:

 

That, subject to the resolutions of Budget Council:

(1)             The Council works with Historic England to establish appropriate protection of the site, including a possible extension of the Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM).

(2)             A formal academic report is commissioned to capture archaeological understanding of the site, to date, and to provide a basis upon which future development of the site can be established.

(3)             An active Site Management Plan is developed to provide ongoing care of the site along with prioritised recommendations for urgent remedial repairs, noting that its implementation may require additional funding in future years.

(4)             An expert project board is established for the site that will set out a five year archaeological research framework and can assist in developing academic, heritage, scientific research and funding partnerships.

(5)             Early work is undertaken to develop a medium term funding strategy for the five year research framework.

(6)           Cabinet notes potential requirements for space, preferably adjacent to the archaeological site, for visitor, museum, education and commercial services.

 

Officer responsible for effecting the decision:

 

Economic Development Manager

 

Reasons for making the decision:

 

The decision is consistent with thefollowing outcome of the Corporate Plan 2016-2020, Sustainable Economic Growth: “The attractiveness and offer of the district as a place to visit or invest in will be improved. Enhance Lancaster’s urban centre through investment in the built environment, heritage assets and the public realm.” The decision also recognises the importance of the visitor economy to the district and the work this report will take forward has the potential to make a strong contribution to Lancaster’s history and its narrative.

 

Supporting documents: