Hi
This is all very well, but there is still the problem that neither the LPA
nor the developer know what archaeology they are letting themselves in for.
Though I would say that things are never cut and dried until the final
report is printed.
To get back to Crispin's point there might need to be two alternatives:-
A: Based on Crispin's suggestion in the case of no evaluation, 'The LPA has
granted consent with a condition securing an archaeological evaluation and
subsequent further work as required.'
B: If there was prior evaluation which indicated the need for further
recording, 'The LPA has granted consent following an evaluation, but with a
condition securing further work archaeological recording.'
Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Iles Peter [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 13 February 2002 09:39
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: HBSMR - ALGAO Consultation Final Outcome list
>
> This sounds a cunning plan. Has anyone tested it at appeal?
> Could you send an example of the wording used, we might look at copying
> you.
>
> pete iles
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 12 February 2002 11:45
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: HBSMR - ALGAO Consultation Final Outcome list
>
>
> To get over the problem of dealing with archaeology as a condition on a
> full
> approval where evaluation has for various reasons not been possible, eg a
> bus station site or where landowner has no access due to clauses in leases
> etc. we also apply a foundation design condition. The foundation design
> cannot be changed without prior approval of the Planning Authority and the
> foundation design can only be produced once appropriate archaeological
> evaluation of the site has taken place. We also use this condition in
> conjunction with colleagues dealing with polluted sites, a sort of belts
> and
> braces approach.
>
> Frank Green
>
> Heritage Officer
>
> The information in this e-mail is confidential. The content may not be
> disclosed or used by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you are
> not the intended recipient, please notify the Council's Data Protection
> Administrator immediately on 01264 368231. Test Valley Borough Council
> cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this
> message as it has been transmitted over a public network. If you suspect
> that the message may have been intercepted or amended please call the Data
> Protection Administrator on the above phone number.
>
>
> ********************
>
> This e-mail contains information intended for the addressee only.
> It may be confidential and may be the subject of legal and/or
> professional privilege.
> If you are not the addressee you are not authorised to
> disseminate, distribute, copy or use this e-mail or any attachment to it
>
> The content may be personal or contain personal opinions and
> unless specifically stated or followed up in writing,
> the content cannot be taken to form a contract or to be an expression
> of the County Council's position.
>
> LCC reserves the right to monitor all incoming and outgoing email
>
> LCC has taken reasonable steps to ensure that outgoing communications do
> not
> contain malicious software and it is your responsibility to carry out any
> checks on this email before accepting the email and opening attachments.
>
> ********************
|