26th May 2011, 06:46 PM
Brody I apologise you have been baited by my short hand reference to your words which were (now I know that you are north of the boarder I will slow the pace down)
I could not imagine a tendering situation in which HERs would be involved in the tender or two HERs or what needs codifying in a guidence. That an HER might produce a brief I understand (not that that’s in pss5) but they don’t conduct the tender. Where the HERs are screwing the tenders is by producing evaluation briefs post determination. It seems to me that if they require an evaluation post determination then according to pps5 they did not get adequate information with the application so could not have accepted the application.
Basically the development is a fait accompli and the archaeologist has to spend time researching the unknown without an evaluation and fitting that quote into the developers timetable..now I live for evaluations and my problem is getting to clients pre application…..
Quote:[SIZE=3]when tendering for work, -
Quote:you'd know that each HER would be following the same proceedure, which would be codified in the guidance document, and so would be transparent to the outside user.[/SIZE]
I could not imagine a tendering situation in which HERs would be involved in the tender or two HERs or what needs codifying in a guidence. That an HER might produce a brief I understand (not that that’s in pss5) but they don’t conduct the tender. Where the HERs are screwing the tenders is by producing evaluation briefs post determination. It seems to me that if they require an evaluation post determination then according to pps5 they did not get adequate information with the application so could not have accepted the application.
Basically the development is a fait accompli and the archaeologist has to spend time researching the unknown without an evaluation and fitting that quote into the developers timetable..now I live for evaluations and my problem is getting to clients pre application…..
Reason: your past is my past