9th October 2014, 11:32 AM
There are lots of types of subsidy that have gone on in the creation of many of the "units". It gets a bit more difficult to spot the subsidies that are still going on now without drilling into each unit. Some of it can come down to charity status, VAT exemptions but there are also service agreements with councils, cheap rents, pensions, access to curation, insurance, access to HER.
I do think that the costs of doing any archaeology post application is done in a contrived economy. PPG16 was all about trying to create a fake economy and tried to use evaluation as a tendering stage but it was stupid as the planning permission has been granted so all the "system" was looking for was going through the motion archaeology, the kind that didn't notice that the digger was an unqualified manpower service recruit who could pick the job up in a day.
Personally I think that if we can do the archaeology before application prices will drop but profit to archaeologists will go up, basically because we can get away from being undercut by people employing unqualified diggers to do evaluations. I think that the true market wants the "best" evaluation.
Sorry about the failed archaeologists comment but they are, something along the lines of those who cant, teach.
I wouldn't say that it was a preference rather that's what the planning system has allowed by evaluating the archaeology post application
I do think that the costs of doing any archaeology post application is done in a contrived economy. PPG16 was all about trying to create a fake economy and tried to use evaluation as a tendering stage but it was stupid as the planning permission has been granted so all the "system" was looking for was going through the motion archaeology, the kind that didn't notice that the digger was an unqualified manpower service recruit who could pick the job up in a day.
Personally I think that if we can do the archaeology before application prices will drop but profit to archaeologists will go up, basically because we can get away from being undercut by people employing unqualified diggers to do evaluations. I think that the true market wants the "best" evaluation.
Sorry about the failed archaeologists comment but they are, something along the lines of those who cant, teach.
Quote:pre determination evaluation should be mandatory but the reason it aint is because developers prefer to have permission and squeeze off the conditions at their leisure
I wouldn't say that it was a preference rather that's what the planning system has allowed by evaluating the archaeology post application
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist