29th May 2011, 11:21 AM
RedEarth's experience of local planners and inconsistences is very much the same as mine I suspect we must work in the same area or the problem is very wide spread. Round here one local Government set up has got rid of their County archeaologist so who knows where the planners will be getting their archeaological advice ( if any).
As for Dinosaur's last post I have also come across the problem with drainage and other utilites and support infra structures which are often more intrusive than the new building. This is especially true on smaller projects. On large scale development it is part and parcel of the job and tends to get factored in. It would help if those setting the level of archaeological mitigation understood these impacts and had actually seen what installing these things does to a site. ( I hate car parks which with grading of slopes, drainage systems & digging out to give the depth to the hard core can be very damaging)
As for Dinosaur's last post I have also come across the problem with drainage and other utilites and support infra structures which are often more intrusive than the new building. This is especially true on smaller projects. On large scale development it is part and parcel of the job and tends to get factored in. It would help if those setting the level of archaeological mitigation understood these impacts and had actually seen what installing these things does to a site. ( I hate car parks which with grading of slopes, drainage systems & digging out to give the depth to the hard core can be very damaging)