PPG 16 is not law it is a guidance and if a developer was to push that he
didnt want to pay for an excavation and he could prove this was why is
planning application was turned down the council could face rather large
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Briggs" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] Roman remains face obliteration at Southwark site
> [log in to unmask] wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: British archaeology discussion list
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Rob
>> Sent: 31 May 2006 22:44
>> "Its cases like this where there should be the opportunity for those
>> who are out of work to volunteer to get the project finished and
>> recorded before destruction"
>> Probably showing my ignorance here, but I thought a planning app.
>> granted under PPG 16 meant that all archaeology had to be recorded,
>> not "only as much as the developer can afford"?
> For enforcement, what is critical is not whether the developer can afford
> the archaeology, but whether the council can afford to risk the legal
> John Briggs
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/352 - Release Date: 30/05/2006