16th November 2016, 12:53 PM
[URL="https://www.historicengland.org.uk/advice/technical-advice/archaeological-science/preservation-in-situ/"]
"the below-ground environment is understood fully, particularly before construction or land-use change begins."
Dear EH full understanding is done by field evaluation. The ONLY point of a field evaluation is to asses the cost of excavation and possibly a cost of preserving the record produced by excavation. It seems to me that all the case studies presented by eh have not presented any costs for "excavation" bar one where I presume a cost was established because this was the in situ preservation solution:
I presume that the "otherwise expected" in "the scale and complexity of the site was beyond that which the site owners might have otherwise expected to have encountered and because the owners had met all of their obligations regarding archaeological conditions" is a legal term. I wonder if I could try it out. This emergency funding programme could I have some please sir. Is it statutory?
what does owners had met all of their obligations mean
Quote:Preservation in situ[/URL]
Preservation in situ is the term used to refer to the conservation of an archaeological asset in its original location. It can describe situations when a site is preserved as part of a development scheme, but also refers to the long-term management of wetland archaeological sites. .
Critical to the success of any preservation in situ scheme is that the below-ground environment is understood fully, particularly before construction or land-use change begins. Where development does take place over archaeological sites every effort should be made to minimise the harm to the significance of the site. This is explained in more detail in the guidance below.
"the below-ground environment is understood fully, particularly before construction or land-use change begins."
Dear EH full understanding is done by field evaluation. The ONLY point of a field evaluation is to asses the cost of excavation and possibly a cost of preserving the record produced by excavation. It seems to me that all the case studies presented by eh have not presented any costs for "excavation" bar one where I presume a cost was established because this was the in situ preservation solution:
Quote:Historic England was also willing to offer some funding (through its emergency funding programme) help with the costs of this excavation (because the scale and complexity of the site was beyond that which the site owners might have otherwise expected to have encountered and because the owners had met all of their obligations regarding archaeological conditions).
I presume that the "otherwise expected" in "the scale and complexity of the site was beyond that which the site owners might have otherwise expected to have encountered and because the owners had met all of their obligations regarding archaeological conditions" is a legal term. I wonder if I could try it out. This emergency funding programme could I have some please sir. Is it statutory?
what does owners had met all of their obligations mean
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist