Check the map and the proposed groundworks
Start with the council's constraints map and the area's archaeological description. Historic England's London approach uses tiers reflecting significance and potential. These help the planning authority identify proposals needing archaeological attention; they are not a schedule of identical requirements for every property in a shaded area. [1]
Describe the actual disturbance: foundations, basement excavation, drainage trenches and other below-ground work. A proposal with little ground disturbance raises a different assessment question from a substantial new basement. Evidence of previous development can be relevant, but do not assume that earlier building work removed every archaeological deposit. [2]
Archaeological interest can also exist outside a mapped priority area. The absence of a designation should therefore be read alongside the Historic Environment Record and the development's location and scale, not as an absolute guarantee that no remains could be affected. [1] [2]
Who advises the council?
Historic England's Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service, commonly called GLAAS, advises London planning authorities other than Southwark, which has its own archaeological adviser. The applicant's archaeological consultant prepares the relevant assessment or investigation; the council's adviser reviews what is needed and whether it is adequate. [2]
Epping Forest District is outside that London service area. Essex's Historic Environment Record is managed by Place Services at Essex County Council. For an Epping Forest proposal, check the district council's requirements and obtain the appropriate Essex records rather than commissioning only a London records search. [3] [2]
What might the application need?
A desk-based assessment brings together the available historical and archaeological evidence and examines the likely effect of the design. Where that is insufficient, a field evaluation may be needed to establish what survives before the council can properly assess the application. Policy HE5 of the NPPF published on 17 August 2026 calls for proportionate archaeological information and field evaluation where necessary. [4] [5] [2]
This is not the same as automatically requiring a full excavation before every application. Agree the question the investigation needs to answer and its scope. Historic England's February 2026 London guidance explains how the assessment and planning process fit together. [2]
What can happen after permission?
A permission may require an agreed Written Scheme of Investigation and archaeological work tied to the construction programme. Depending on the findings and impact, the response may involve preserving remains in place, investigation and recording, or archaeological observation during specified groundworks. Read the condition carefully: an obligation to agree the scheme before work begins cannot be satisfied by commissioning a report after excavation. [2]
Allow for reporting and archiving as well as the site work. Under current policy HE10, recording and making evidence accessible can be required where heritage significance would be lost, but the ability to record remains is not itself a reason to permit otherwise unacceptable harm. [5]
Give the archaeological adviser the proposed foundation and basement strategy early, and incorporate the agreed investigation into the programme. The useful outcome is a defined scope and sequence, not simply a report labelled “archaeology” with no connection to the design.