19th June 2006, 11:00 PM
Whatever happened to the standard phrase in briefs, "overburden reduced to the first significant archaeological horizon"? Was the topsoil significant and therefore worthy of planning? How on earth did the consultant get this past a curator? This methodology also is clearly in breach of another standard phrase, "further excavation to be conducted using stratigraphic principles." If the topsoil was not removed by machine then it has to be removed by hand to satisfy this requirement. If not then any further features are dug out of sequence. Madness. Sounds like a report to the IFA job, as it's bad practice all round.