11th August 2008, 11:59 AM
It's not just the size of the hole (ahem), but it's function, proximity to other buildings, etc.
The crux is what is considered enabling and does not need planning permission, versus what constitutes development commencing. Geotechnical works, for example, do not need permission, so in theory a developer could 'test' 100% of the site and dig it all away. I suspect something similar could be done with remediation, but this is generally conditioned. In BAJR's example, I would request the enforcement officers have a look, as this seems like development to me!
Recentently, I had a site where there was an archaeology condition and a remediation condition. Both had the same 'no development shall take place' statement, and they decided to do the remediation first. And cleared the entire site. No more archaeology. So did they breach the condition, or was the entire permission invalid because it was contradictory?
And of course there is the demolition of buildings not in a conservation area....I would think that more damage to the historic environment is done through this perfectly legal undertaking than pretty much anything else....
ML
The crux is what is considered enabling and does not need planning permission, versus what constitutes development commencing. Geotechnical works, for example, do not need permission, so in theory a developer could 'test' 100% of the site and dig it all away. I suspect something similar could be done with remediation, but this is generally conditioned. In BAJR's example, I would request the enforcement officers have a look, as this seems like development to me!
Recentently, I had a site where there was an archaeology condition and a remediation condition. Both had the same 'no development shall take place' statement, and they decided to do the remediation first. And cleared the entire site. No more archaeology. So did they breach the condition, or was the entire permission invalid because it was contradictory?
And of course there is the demolition of buildings not in a conservation area....I would think that more damage to the historic environment is done through this perfectly legal undertaking than pretty much anything else....
ML