29th February 2008, 05:33 PM
Hi Beamo
I'm sure the RSA has described how the impact of piles have a wider "spread" than just the obvious direct damage (for details see PARIS publications or ask your RSA about "cornflake man"s paper at PARIS 3). Therefore (despite EHs "guidance") it is nearly impossible to calculate percentage of damage as the in-direct impacts are entirely dependant many factors. My response to piling schemes is generally to say that unrecorded loss of remains is unacceptable. As archaeological monitoring of piling is generally impossible I would not accept that as mitigation. If its a housing scheme (with gardens etc) I take the application to be a material change of use which allows PD rights to be exercised in the future which threatens remains and therefore require full excavation as the development implies more threat than the direct impact.
In your case perhaps you should forget preservation in-situ because clearly hammering piles through remains (resulting in un-calculable damage) is not preservation. I would go the excavation route as any other solution seems to involve risk.
I don't quite understand your evaluation/recording shorthand as they are completely different beasts aren't they?. If evaluation hasn't taken place why are you getting into mitigation? An evaluation trench shouldn't be dug through archaeological deposits should it? Maybe a few small sondage in specific areas to assess stratigraphy but not wholesale digging through remains.
I am pretty worried that after 18 years of PPG16 that people think we can design our way out of dealing with archaeology by driving big holes into it. Any piling scheme will create un recorded damage, plus compression over time, plus moisture management issues, plus cause problems for the next poor DC archaeologist who has to deal with the demolition and grubbing out, plus not applying the polluter pays principle, plus not really preserving in-situ but really just acting like the proverbial three monkeys.
Not a personal attack Beamo just a general fatigue with bl**dy piling schemes put forward by developers and consultants who quote EH and Arup survey to justify non action.
Steven