9th September 2010, 09:30 PM
I'd just like to say the the worst case I've ever seen of writing a site off despite strong evidence that it was really quite important was a local unit (local authority based), whose 'close relationship' with the curators left a potentially interesting site to be trashed, and the most flagrant case of diggers not spotting natural (despite even having the evaluation report for an adjacent site that noted the presence of over a metre of colluvium overlying natural) was a local unit based all of 15 miles down the road, who'd dug at least 10 sites that year within a kilometre of the site. I'd tend to think that claiming local knowledge as a help to quality on individual jobs is usually a smokescreen for special pleading - it's what they then do with the local knowledge to add value in outreach and community work, or how they use it to work more efficiently that would count in my book. If a unit can afford to move diggers 100 miles and put them up and still undercut a local unit, the locals are missing a trick... (or would that be employing staff rather than using 'self-employed' subbies...)
The worst dba I've ever seen was indeed produced by a consultancy over 150 miles distant, but to be fair, work I've seen by them in their back yard was equally awful.
The worst dba I've ever seen was indeed produced by a consultancy over 150 miles distant, but to be fair, work I've seen by them in their back yard was equally awful.