3rd September 2006, 07:12 PM
This would all depend on depth of deposits and the final building foundation depths.. a deal could be struck whereby preservation in situ would both ensure the surface was undamaged (i know) and also that the developer was not presented with a whopping bill to excavate the archaeology. In PPG16 and NPPG5 we have the problem where the excavation of archaeology is not the goal, it is the mitigation of any archaeological deposits to minimise damage... which may require the developer to alter buidling plan - This can be cheaper than say the cost of excavating a Bronze Age site and all the additional post ex costs...