26th October 2006, 08:59 PM
I appear to work in a different system to everybody else:
For example hurting back said the objective of an evaluation is:
"accurately assess the nature and extent of any archaeological remains sufficiently to create a reliable mitigation strategy".
The objective of a pre-determination evaluation is to provide enough infomation so that a reasoned planning decision can be made that is will it be refused or a condition place upon it. Evaluation can be used to determine the scope of an excavation and/or form the basis of the tender competition for an excavation.
1manand his desk said.
"It is the smaller developers, or those in more cut-throat competitive industries, that tend to be budget slashers."
Most developments work on tiny margins compared to risk for example housing, pfi schemes etc."
Big developers PLCs or pension funds etc have duties to share holders/investors which again means they have to be very careful about costs.
Somebody said "I would never advise a client do more than is required by their planning condition" Why on earth not? There may be good reason for doing things the planning system cannot demand - managing risk and closely defining the scope of an excavation are good examples of this. I do this all the time.
The notion that the cost of a digging team for a day equates to the delay cost of a few hours delay for the main contractor on a pipeline
is simply not the case. A few minutes more like - having said that the delay cost on most pipelines can be capped.
As for the notion that it is the unexpected delays that cause the problems not just the actual archaeology costs is a simplification. There is a cost to any project in terms of archaeologists being present unexpected or not.
Myself I see nothing wrong with students/new graduates being employed by Units (provided that they are properly trained in H&S) how else are people going to get experience? Particularly on placements that form part of the degree course at the better Universities.
What is important however is that the project is correctly monitored, staff are supervised and the "quality" of the work is checked. There should also not be too many of them
Peter Wardle
For example hurting back said the objective of an evaluation is:
"accurately assess the nature and extent of any archaeological remains sufficiently to create a reliable mitigation strategy".
The objective of a pre-determination evaluation is to provide enough infomation so that a reasoned planning decision can be made that is will it be refused or a condition place upon it. Evaluation can be used to determine the scope of an excavation and/or form the basis of the tender competition for an excavation.
1manand his desk said.
"It is the smaller developers, or those in more cut-throat competitive industries, that tend to be budget slashers."
Most developments work on tiny margins compared to risk for example housing, pfi schemes etc."
Big developers PLCs or pension funds etc have duties to share holders/investors which again means they have to be very careful about costs.
Somebody said "I would never advise a client do more than is required by their planning condition" Why on earth not? There may be good reason for doing things the planning system cannot demand - managing risk and closely defining the scope of an excavation are good examples of this. I do this all the time.
The notion that the cost of a digging team for a day equates to the delay cost of a few hours delay for the main contractor on a pipeline
is simply not the case. A few minutes more like - having said that the delay cost on most pipelines can be capped.
As for the notion that it is the unexpected delays that cause the problems not just the actual archaeology costs is a simplification. There is a cost to any project in terms of archaeologists being present unexpected or not.
Myself I see nothing wrong with students/new graduates being employed by Units (provided that they are properly trained in H&S) how else are people going to get experience? Particularly on placements that form part of the degree course at the better Universities.
What is important however is that the project is correctly monitored, staff are supervised and the "quality" of the work is checked. There should also not be too many of them
Peter Wardle