27th February 2006, 01:33 PM
If the work was done under a planning condition, then presumably there was a Written Scheme of Investigation to control the work.
If the WSI was up to scratch, it should have detailed what would be done with the archive, including all finds. If so, the developer is bound by it, or else will be in breach of his consent.
If the WSI did not detail these requirements, then its author (and the curator who approved it) are at fault, and may be in breach of the IFA Standards and Guidance for Excavation (or Watching Brief?) (assuming they are members of the IFA).
Therefore, there are two potential lines of attack - enforcement action by the local authority against the developer, and a disciplinary complaint to the IFA against the offending archaeologists. The latter won't remove the problem, but it will make others think more carefully when writing similar documents.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
If the WSI was up to scratch, it should have detailed what would be done with the archive, including all finds. If so, the developer is bound by it, or else will be in breach of his consent.
If the WSI did not detail these requirements, then its author (and the curator who approved it) are at fault, and may be in breach of the IFA Standards and Guidance for Excavation (or Watching Brief?) (assuming they are members of the IFA).
Therefore, there are two potential lines of attack - enforcement action by the local authority against the developer, and a disciplinary complaint to the IFA against the offending archaeologists. The latter won't remove the problem, but it will make others think more carefully when writing similar documents.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished