Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
London-Birmingham rail link HS2
#11
I eventually managed to access the DFT web site. According to section 6.3 of the review document, a full assessment of the archaeological potential has yet to be made

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/hs...of-aos.pdf
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...
Reply
#12
i'm in the business of research not mitigation - i wish
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers
Reply
#13
[QUOTE][I eventually managed to access the DFT web site. According to section 6.3 of the review document, a full assessment of the archaeological potential has yet to be made
/QUOTE]

It would appear that an initial appraisal of route options has been made solely on the basis of designated heritage assets, which is not an unreasonbable basis for refining options prior to detailed EIA. It would appear that Arup has been advising HS2 to date and presumably thier Historic Environment Team have been engaged. HS2 has recently run a PQQ exercise to appoint EIA consultants. It will be interesting to see which consultants are appointed to the panel and whether the route will be divided into sections and shared amongst a number of EIA practices.
Reply
#14
ken_whittaker Wrote:It will be interesting to see which consultants are appointed to the panel and whether the route will be divided into sections and shared amongst a number of EIA practices.

And even more interesting further down the line to compare the quaity of the results.

:face-stir:
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.
Reply
#15
1. If there are known sites which will be damaged/destroyed/affected, then on what scale and how can that be mitigated (or avoided)?
2. If there are unknown sites, aren't these of little value until they're excavated/researched anyway?

There may be economic or ecological reasons to oppose it, but if point 1 is correctly managed then I don't see any reason to oppose it for archaeological reasons...point 2 will provide jobs and lead back into point 1 anyway.
Reply
#16
Just a basic idea from a basic archaeologist. I can't wait to work on a long term project that covers many different landscapes and areas. The fact that this helps create an alternative to road transport makes me happy. And don't let the Tories convince you it was their idea. Sorry for not being more erudite.
Reply
#17
Arhaeological issues aside I cannot see how, in a country where local government is cutting front line services to the bone, the vast expense of this rail link can be justified. The way technologies are going who actually needs to travel ? I can understand using it for freight but apart from allowing workers in London to compute to the north what does it really do? A vast red herring that will make a few jobs in the short term for the construction companies ( and archaeologists) and will be redundant before it is built. I don't want my taxes going on something like this. xx( I will eat my hat if it is ever completed
Reply
#18
I tend to agree Wax, I am not convinced by the economic or environmental benefits. However, having it stop at Birmingham airport might mean further airport expansion in the SE is less likely. I am a bit bemused by all the people who live in The Chilterns describing it as one af the last unspoiled landscapes in the south/country and the media running that line. Maybe they should get out of London a bit more.

@pdurdin
Quote:1. If there are known sites which will be damaged/destroyed/affected, then on what scale and how can that be mitigated (or avoided)?
2. If there are unknown sites, aren't these of little value until they're excavated/researched anyway?

There is also another category, that of 'known unknowns'; where there is some information that a site is/might be there, with a stab at dating, but nothing else is known. Therefore of some value, but unknown in significance.

I've certainly got my beady eye on doing some work on this project.
Reply
#19
Oxbeast Wrote:@pdurdin
There is also another category, that of 'known unknowns'; where there is some information that a site is/might be there, with a stab at dating, but nothing else is known. Therefore of some value, but unknown in significance.
I would say those fit under point 1, and it becomes a matter of scale of the work required.
Reply
#20
Hurrah, the south of England gets a vast chunk of money flung at it! Maybe the rest of us should go for independance too!
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Headhunting in London BAJR 1 1,722 26th February 2014, 02:31 PM
Last Post: BAJR
  Last Chance for teh Diggers Forum Session in London BAJR 1 1,778 28th October 2013, 11:31 PM
Last Post: BAJR
  Birmingham Uni staff may strike BAJR 3 2,319 18th February 2013, 12:45 PM
Last Post: Bologneighs
  Staff aggrieved as University of Birmingham leaves Archaeology in ruins BAJR 1 1,759 10th October 2012, 09:16 AM
Last Post: BAJR
  Birmingham Uni Archaeology - Thrown in the Trowel BAJR 4 2,674 2nd October 2012, 07:55 PM
Last Post: HammerOfThor
  Comments on Birmingham's IAA review and closure of archaeology HammerOfThor 2 1,777 1st October 2012, 08:37 AM
Last Post: BAJR
  ''Introduction to Archaeology' course. in London BAJR 1 2,120 14th September 2012, 05:00 PM
Last Post: BAJR
  Closure at Birmingham BAJR 50 24,818 23rd August 2012, 06:10 PM
Last Post: BAJR
  Birmingham Archaeology redundancies Hal Dalwood 49 28,032 30th April 2012, 11:39 AM
Last Post: P Prentice
  Anyone going to TAG 2011, Birmingham? kevin wooldridge 6 3,268 11th November 2011, 02:43 AM
Last Post: Bodger51

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)