+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: good news and bad (/showthread.php?tid=1827)
good news and bad - Troll - 4th February 2005
English Heretics and county/City councils (around 35 so far) are involved in computer mapping areas due for "regeneration". Databases are seen as potentially enormous sources of information however, this is seen as a cost cutting exercise removing the developers need for evaluations. The idea is that developers will somehow be aware of their responsibilities in advance of development. My question is this, the idea will only work if the resultant database is accurate so how is it that the fieldwork in these areas are being undertaken as evaluations themselves with developers deciding how much information we can retrieve? Second, are English Heretics motivated from a heritage standpoint or, one of pleasing corporate developer lobbyists?}
good news and bad - sniper - 4th February 2005
the only way I could see it working is if all sites that are even remotely likely to be developed have an evaluation done on them before any developer gets involved in order that the database can attempt to be accurate. So who exactly is going to pay for that?
++ i spend my days rummaging around in dead people ++
good news and bad - Oxbeast - 7th February 2005
Am I understanding this correctly?
Presumably the databases would be the SMR/HER. If a developer looked at an area defined by a polygon or something, they would get a printout of dozens of sites, both relevant and irrelevant. Is this meant to reduce the need for desktops? Or just help the planners reduce their costs by choosing areas without much stuff (i.e. archaeology) around?
good news and bad - troll - 8th February 2005
"by providing invaluable data on the location and extent of archaeology...it will avoid each project starting from scratch in considering archaeology and will give developers an early idea of what their responsibilities are likely to be" Sounds a bit iffy to me-The data being recorded is gathered through evaluation archaeology under commercial restraints. This "snapshot" is then meant to form the main corpus of the data upon which future decisions are made-seemingly without any further, corroborative work....I don`t like this in so many ways...:face-confused:
good news and bad - BAJR Host - 9th February 2005
So who decides the relevance and potential of unknown sites...
god its as bad as PASTMap in SCotland... a really good tool...but never ever meant to be used for Development Control