11th August 2008, 06:53 PM
As a few points.
What does and does not need permission is a complex subject.
As a rule of thumb anything normally done by a builder will normally require planning permission unless there are permitted development rights (in effect bulk granting of planning permission without forms being submitted).
If this is a hypotectical situation and the developer was just poring concrete into an area already disturbed - what harm was done? How come all this spectacular archaeology was uncovered.
Under the current act conservation areas can be designated or areas included because of their historic and archaeological value.
In the case of the remediation work and archaeology - the answer is simple the development cannot lawfully start because the programme of archaeological work cannot be undertaken.
There is nothing illegal in undertaking works for which planning permission may be required without planning permission being asked for!
Peter
What does and does not need permission is a complex subject.
As a rule of thumb anything normally done by a builder will normally require planning permission unless there are permitted development rights (in effect bulk granting of planning permission without forms being submitted).
If this is a hypotectical situation and the developer was just poring concrete into an area already disturbed - what harm was done? How come all this spectacular archaeology was uncovered.
Under the current act conservation areas can be designated or areas included because of their historic and archaeological value.
In the case of the remediation work and archaeology - the answer is simple the development cannot lawfully start because the programme of archaeological work cannot be undertaken.
There is nothing illegal in undertaking works for which planning permission may be required without planning permission being asked for!
Peter