Call for more time on Flintshire Roman dig

[BAJR]

CONCERNS have been raised that archaeologists have three weeks to uncover historical finds at a Flintshire site where a substantial Roman settlement was uncovered last week.

As groundwork began on a 180-house scheme at the Croes Atti project in Oakenholt, near Flint, builders unearthed a section of Roman road, pottery and evidence of an industrial complex processing lead and silver mined at nearby Halkyn Mountain and a three-week exploration of the site is now under way.


However, North Wales Assembly Member Mark Isherwood fears this is not long enough and called for a Welsh Government Statement on the matter in this week’s Business Statement.


Speaking in the Assembly he said: "The Minister may be aware of the exciting discovery at the Croes Atti development in Oakenholt in Flintshire, where Roman artefacts and a Roman road have been unearthed.

However, although CADW is aware of the historical importance of the site, because planning permission has been granted, I believe that archaeologists have been given only three weeks to uncover any other historically important finds that may exist before the site is bulldozed.
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wa...-32774052/


Any news on this??

[Martin Locock]

More background here: http://www.leaderlive.co.uk/news/119543/...lders.aspx

[Dinosaur]

Wonder what the evaluation consisted of? :face-thinks:

[Martin Locock]

According to the HER on Archwilio, there is no record of a desk-top or evaluation.

[Dinosaur]

That's quite poor...

Had to do a WSI recently for a (English) site which had planning permission from a District Council with a Condition saying that a scheme of archaeological mitigation had to be commisioned post-permission, but without any specifics at all - made writing the WSI quite tricky, having no idea what mitigation was expected! A phone call to the county mountie determined that they hadn't even been consulted in the process and my call was the first they'd heard about it - they weren't impressed! At least in this case there's an out-of-date DBA to work from. Seems to be an increasing amount of this sort of thing going on

[Martin Locock]

This story adds a little - there may have been an evaluation, but the watching brief is being part funded by Cadw. My guess would be that if there was no strong condition it isn't because of the current situation but because there is a long planning history (with an outline consent in the 1990s).

[Dinosaur]

Particularly like the link at the bottom if you want to learn more...about buying ladies shoes....

Sorry Martin, you're doing all the research for me while I'm dipping in and out between writing a particularly annoying background info for specialists report...aaah!

You'd have thought if they've known about the road and the procurator's house for 40 years then a bit of geofizz (even if only along the road) might have been in order, as an absolute minimum....would have been a lot cheaper for the developer than what they've got now (quite apart from any PR fiasco), think they've been poorly advised...