A series of archaeological mitigation works were undertaken in advance of, and during, construction work for a hydro scheme grid connection cable in Glen Lyon, Perthshire, between 2009 and 2010. The cable was to be inserted along the floor of Glen Lyon, connecting seven small hydro sub-stations and one larger substation.
A Cultural Heritage Chapter for the Environmental Report was produced by CFA following a site visit and using baseline information provided by Historic Scotland and Perth and Kinross Heritage Trust (PKHT), and the Environmental Statements relating to the proposed hydro schemes. This Chapter identified the cultural heritage resource along the proposed route.
As part of the cultural heritage mitigation strategy, a full field survey was then undertaken of the grid route to identify sites at risk from the development, following which action mitigation sheets were produced recommending appropriate mitigation for each site to reduce or prevent damage to the sites during construction, and further archaeological mitigation was then agreed with PKHT. Mitigation ranged from site avoidance, to the monitoring of on-site works and undertaking watching briefs in selected areas. A final site visit was undertaken to record the status of each site and to identify how successful the mitigation recommendations had been in protecting the sites.
In total, 44 sites were identified as being at risk from the development. Of these, 35 sites were avoided by the cable route. Three of these sites were in sensitive areas and so watching briefs were undertaken at these locations.
Nine linear sites were locally affected by the development. Where possible care was taken to cut through these at poorly preserved locations. A watching brief was maintained on those sites and no significant deposits or features were disturbed.
All of the affected sites were monitored during construction to ensure no further damage was sustained to the sites. No further archaeological remains were uncovered during the groundbreaking work in these areas.
The final site visit identified that all sites had been avoided where avoidance mitigation was recommended and no further damage had been sustained to the sites during reinstatement works.