Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
22nd October 2008, 02:44 PM
detailed pre-application discussions are a form of dealing with any potential issues... which can save money... depending on the size of the development... ie.. I would not advise it on a shed application on a patio, but would on a 50 house development next to a Roman Fort ...
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2005
22nd October 2008, 02:45 PM
Unit, talk is cheap (or even free) as they say. No, there are no charges for discussions that I'm aware of. Suggest you find and read the relevant planning circular that brought this system in.
Officers are / or will be taking responsibility for discharging conditions they have recommended. That was not a misprint and is a change. Not county archaeologists, but potentially unitary, city, and district archaeologists where they hold sway. Just in some cases they may not have been told yet, especially those that are not based in planning departments. This may also apply to County Archs in relation to conditions on County Schemes e.g. minerals apps, where the County is the Planning Authority. I'm not sure.
As to handles the charges, well here it's the development control admin - so we're not collecting this money as a team or administering it. Confused? Good. So am I.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2005
22nd October 2008, 02:50 PM
Quote:quote:things like the work having to commence within 3 or 5 years of the determination
That's true M. However, that's is not a pre-commencement condition and as such does not need discharging. It's the little design related, environmental, contaminated land, archaeology, and so on ones that ned dsicharging. But in a lot of cases these can be sorted out in advance, which I assume is the point of this change.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2005
22nd October 2008, 03:11 PM
Charging for the discharge of conditions has been standard for almost a year now in a good part of the country. One of the authorities I cover also charges, on a sliding scale, for all pre-application advice, depending upon the scale of the development. On occasions archaeology is involved and is billed for to the developer accordingly.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
22nd October 2008, 03:24 PM
Makes my heart glad to have escaped from planning.
Right, off to save a listed barn..............
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
22nd October 2008, 03:41 PM
I hope that you are charging for it
M The 99% are applications post determination, they come with a watching brief condition disguised in the written scheme of works use of words so horribly modelled, and now to have the condition discharged they need to be accompanied by the charge.
vulpes suggests
Quote:quote: in a lot of cases these can be sorted out in advance, which I assume is the point of this change.
And my point is how can I sort that out in advance or rather would it be ethical because for me to do it I would need to get to the client before they applied to the curators which I donât do at the moment? I let the clients find me to fulfil their post determination condition or if it is predetermination I ring up the curators and they say subject to the proposal it might be a watching brief. But if I was to target my advertising at potential clients before they have applied (which will generate costs to me) I would presumably also get replies from the 90% of potential planning applicants that currently the curators deal with that donât require any archaeological services. Even me ringing up the curator to discuss the proposed scheme as related to me by my potential client is a cost to me that I would have to retrieve from somewhere. This is the cross subsidised work that all curators do when they look at all the applications and filter out the ones that require archaeology (at my level). Obviously if this scheme generates lots of new work for me a bit of advertising and a few phone calls might be recouped through field work (cross subsidy) but that might be by doing unnecessary work. And if it starts that the curators expect that I would have done a site visit and have prepared some background I would probably have to have some standard upfront fee. Have they not with these fees introduced a principle, which is that archaeological conditions can be avoided prior to determination? And if as historicbuilding says they are within their rights to charge for predetermination consultation (and access to smr) am I within the creed allowed to say to ALL people that ring me Do not call the curators, This is my price to do an evaluation even if it transpires that the curators might not have had any concerns about the site or proposed scheme.
Standard for a year -they only got the report out last May 2007
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2005
22nd October 2008, 03:42 PM
Build here! Build here! Free advice![:o)]
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2005
22nd October 2008, 03:47 PM
Unit of 1 why don't you b***** off and read this.
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/...pdf/10.pdf Para. 10 etc.
And then if you have any questions direct them to the CLG not BAJR. Ta!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
22nd October 2008, 04:06 PM
Does anyone else think that this is not a bajr issue
Thanks for the read no mention of archaeology in it. says listed and conservation areas are exempt?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
22nd October 2008, 04:07 PM
fair comment... fair comment indeed!
Read the facts.. then ask advice...not make up interpretations and make statements !
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
Lets take that to include archaeology too, shall w
