Life science and laboratory development

Archaeology for Life Science and Laboratory Development in Cambridge

Laboratory schemes combine deep foundations, heavy servicing and fixed occupation commitments, which makes archaeological programme risk unusually costly.

Cost driver
Depth and completeness of ground disturbance
Decide early
Foundation strategy and archaeological scope together
Main risk
Fixed occupation dates
Typical method
Full excavation of the affected footprint

Why this scheme type carries the requirement it does

Lab buildings need deep plant space, extensive below-ground services and vibration-sensitive foundations, so ground disturbance across the footprint tends to be deep and close to total. Where nothing can be preserved in place, mitigation normally means excavating the whole affected area rather than a sample of it.

The approach that keeps it proportionate

The archaeological scope should be understood before the construction programme is fixed and, ideally, before foundation design is frozen. Where depth of disturbance can be reduced, archaeological scope falls with it. Where it cannot, the excavation is better priced and programmed early than discovered late.

Questions

Common questions on this

We are pre-let with a fixed handover. How do we protect the date?

By resolving evaluation and the approved mitigation scheme before the construction programme is committed, and by treating archaeological fieldwork as a sequenced programme activity with its own float rather than a risk allowance.

Project review

Archaeology on a life science and laboratory development scheme?

Send the footprint, the depth of disturbance and the planning position. We will set out the requirement and the programme it implies.