7th January 2013, 11:12 PM
(This post was last modified: 7th January 2013, 11:17 PM by kevin wooldridge.)
P Prentice Wrote:i dont think you could continually update a national/regional/county/district/ or even borough her. there is usually far too much to be interpretted. a specific site will always require a specific dba with very little opportunity for crossover if it is done properly. and the number of staff working in her/smr that are capable of interpretting the data they collate is worryingly few.
Perhaps I wasn't very clear. What I meant was...developer makes application. Planning department instructs HER section to make report on specific site proposal as technical advice to planning committee. Developer pays proportional fee for technical advice dependent on scale of development. If development proceeds, technical advice becomes basis for evaluation or excavation WSI....thereafter the normal madness of commercial archaeology returns with any number of competitors cutting their throats to achieve the project brief.....Of course this system has been tested. Its what we used to have in some parts of the country prior to PPG16...it worked!!
Many local authorities issue planning outlines for particular sites when trying to attract investors/developers. There is no problem with such an outline also including an historic/archaeological element
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...