1st August 2009, 01:27 PM
I am not sure what the relevance of planning case 09/00191/FUL actually is to this discussion or the demise of SUAT.
Archaeological costs rise making the development not viable (there does not seem to have been an evaluation). The developer seeks a higher yield development using an English Provision for buildings (not archaeological sites). The council refuse permission. The developer appeals. This is not that unusual.
Peter
Archaeological costs rise making the development not viable (there does not seem to have been an evaluation). The developer seeks a higher yield development using an English Provision for buildings (not archaeological sites). The council refuse permission. The developer appeals. This is not that unusual.
Peter