15th November 2005, 01:40 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by mercenary
Building designs seem to change frequently and with little respect for the impact on the archaeology. If it changes while the WB is going on there is a chance that something can be done. (the curator can be notified) More often it happens once the WB has been ostensibly completed, once the planning permission has gone through.
I think personally this sort of situation highlights a flaw in the system, not neccessariliy the practice of in situ. Naughty developers need checking up on, whether it be archaeology or any other condition they have to deal with. In instances where planning permission has gone through and the WB completed, perhaps the flaw was allowing the WB to cease (I'm not passing judgement on any particular case/person here, just the principle off early bath WBs) without any further checks. After all, building inspectors show up to confirm they're happy with trenching for footings, why shouldn't archaeologists turn up to OK trenches like that even after the formal 'recording and observation'WB is over. It would be a relatively small expense (considering that it wouldn't be a formal WB, just a confirmation visit) and we could all sleep easy.
(I really have worked in the field)