19th May 2010, 01:50 PM
Dinosaur Wrote:I'm reasonably certain I can remember cases in the past where Local Societies etc have, in fact, undertaken what would conventionally be regarded in this day and age as 'commercial' jobs - in fact any right-minded developer with a plot of land likely to contain archaeology and in no particular hurry to develop (all those land-bank sites that Tesco and co sit on, for starters) wouldn't be going far wrong in approaching any local societies to see if they can get all the archaeology out of the way in advance of any planning process for free/peanuts (or Unitof1's plan B, bulldoze it). Wouldn't that potentially have a significant effect upon the commercial archaeology sector?
I don't disagree that some developers could take advantage of community archaeologists in this way, however, they might find themselves falling foul of PPS5 when they come to applying for permission to develop at a later date.
Unless they have consulted the CM and worked to an agreed brief/WSI then they could find themselves in the clarts. For starters, perservation in situ or avoidance of 'substantial harm' is the watch word and preservation by record is no longer an automatically acceptable default position. So if you've preserved it by record without talking to the CM... standby for incoming.
D. Vader
Senior Consultant
Vader Maull & Palpatine
Archaeological Consultants
A tremor in the Force. The last time I felt it was in the presence of Tony Robinson.
Senior Consultant
Vader Maull & Palpatine
Archaeological Consultants
A tremor in the Force. The last time I felt it was in the presence of Tony Robinson.