31st May 2006, 12:36 PM
Hi Merc
To be honest, I'm surprised that more developers haven't tried to litigate over botched or not quite as informative as they could be evals. Or sites that drag on.
The nasty about going straight into strip, map and sample is that there is little room for manouever if something needs to be preserved. Also, you then could never fall back on the 'unexpected discovery' and apply for some government money (although that's extremely unlikely to be forthcoming in a PPG16 site anyway).
That's one hell of a gamble - I'd want something in writing from them stating they know the full implications of what they're getting into, and the planning authority standing right behind me. If they found a juicy Roman cemetery, for example, that could bankrupt the development.
Do you not think that jumping straight in is against PPG16?
To be honest, I'm surprised that more developers haven't tried to litigate over botched or not quite as informative as they could be evals. Or sites that drag on.
The nasty about going straight into strip, map and sample is that there is little room for manouever if something needs to be preserved. Also, you then could never fall back on the 'unexpected discovery' and apply for some government money (although that's extremely unlikely to be forthcoming in a PPG16 site anyway).
That's one hell of a gamble - I'd want something in writing from them stating they know the full implications of what they're getting into, and the planning authority standing right behind me. If they found a juicy Roman cemetery, for example, that could bankrupt the development.
Do you not think that jumping straight in is against PPG16?