15th January 2005, 01:54 PM
I agree with Troll that Curators have to be the policemen. They are part of the plannng system, and like other Planning Officers (and Building Control officers) they have to go out and inspect work to ensure standards are satisfactory, in the public interest - just like the planning and BC people.
As I droned on about before, in the first instance an offence (for want of a better word) by a contractor is a contractual matter: he has not fulfilled his contractual obligations to his client. Now, his client probably doesn't mind (or know). So it's down to the authorities who imposed the conditions to inspect and enforce. If a builder misses out a damp proof course - or continues with brickwork without having the dpc inspected - the building control officer will nab him, make him pull it down and do it properly. Yes, the architect (if applicable) will also keep an eye out for these things, as the bulder would be in breach of his contract by not installing the specified dpc. You see the parallels? The equivalent of the archityect is the consultant acting for the client, but one wonders if he would be as diligent (no offence meant!)
Commercial archaeology is (for better or worse) part of the planning system and must be enforced as such. This does NOT mean simply writing a letter saying the post-ex rport that was due 2 years ago, but going out and looking and being nasty when required.
Money? That's what planning application fees are for. If they're not enough, put them up.
Big fierce curators, that what we want! Armed to the teeth - no sorry, getting carried away a bit!
As I droned on about before, in the first instance an offence (for want of a better word) by a contractor is a contractual matter: he has not fulfilled his contractual obligations to his client. Now, his client probably doesn't mind (or know). So it's down to the authorities who imposed the conditions to inspect and enforce. If a builder misses out a damp proof course - or continues with brickwork without having the dpc inspected - the building control officer will nab him, make him pull it down and do it properly. Yes, the architect (if applicable) will also keep an eye out for these things, as the bulder would be in breach of his contract by not installing the specified dpc. You see the parallels? The equivalent of the archityect is the consultant acting for the client, but one wonders if he would be as diligent (no offence meant!)
Commercial archaeology is (for better or worse) part of the planning system and must be enforced as such. This does NOT mean simply writing a letter saying the post-ex rport that was due 2 years ago, but going out and looking and being nasty when required.
Money? That's what planning application fees are for. If they're not enough, put them up.
Big fierce curators, that what we want! Armed to the teeth - no sorry, getting carried away a bit!