Archaeological Survey
Edward
I own a share in a small piece of land (about an acre) and we co-
owners are thinking of applying for planning permission. We've been
told that, if planning is permitted, we would be required to undertake
an archaeological survey.
As I understand it, and as things stand at the moment, there is no law
that says I cannot hire a digger and just dig the site up prior to the
application being submitted (or accepted). Would this be legal, and
would it obviate the requirement to carry out the archaeological
assessment? I _know_ it would be an act of inexcusable vandalism -
I'm merely interested in the legality.
Thanks
Edward
The Natural Philosopher
AFAIK and this came up when talking to various builders and planning
people, the general opinion was that if you do find something, and the
archaeologists get to hear, they can shut you down for years while the
burrow and mutter.
My advice would be to diog a test trench right across the site, and if
nothing shows up, present that as evidence that there is nothing there,
and if something does, make a moral ethical and commercial decision as
to what the heck to do next.
ruined archaeology is not worth actually re-digging. I dont think its
illegal to wreck a site: Only to wreck it AFTER the archaeolgists have
got a court order..or something like that.
> Thanks
>
> Edward
Adrian Brentnall
We had a similar situation back at the last house in Suffolk.
They'd found Roman remains next-door - so when we applied to erect an
extension to the garage, the County Archaeologists were very interested.
What they wanted to do was to be present when the footings were being
dug - though there was always the question of 'what if they identified
something ?'.
In the end we built a timber extension sitting on paving slabs - so
didn't disturb any archaeology, didn;t need any building regs & didn't
involve the archaeologists - though that might not work in your case <g>
Adrian
Andrew Mawson
"Edward" <teddy...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5ddb76dc-a2fd-4cde...@d27g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
Tell "Time Team" that you keep finding loads of Roman / Stone Age
Bronze Age artifacts, and they'll come down and do a resistance
survey - find nothing and go off in a huff : BUT you then have the
survey <G>
AWEM
harry
A friend of mine had a house near a medieval church. He wanted to put
up a substantial garage. When he applied for planning permission he
was told there would need to be a archeological dig (they thought
there might be corpses there)
The best bit was, he would have to pay for it!!!!! £20,000 they
wanted.
Needless to say he abandoned the idea.
Tim Lamb
<adr...@ambquality.co.uk> writes
>HI Edward
>
>Edward wrote:
>> This is purely hypothetical.
>> I own a share in a small piece of land (about an acre) and we co-
>> owners are thinking of applying for planning permission. We've been
>> told that, if planning is permitted, we would be required to undertake
>> an archaeological survey.
>> As I understand it, and as things stand at the moment, there is no
>>law
>> that says I cannot hire a digger and just dig the site up prior to the
>> application being submitted (or accepted). Would this be legal, and
>> would it obviate the requirement to carry out the archaeological
>> assessment? I _know_ it would be an act of inexcusable vandalism -
>> I'm merely interested in the legality.
>> Thanks
>> Edward
>
>We had a similar situation back at the last house in Suffolk.
>They'd found Roman remains next-door - so when we applied to erect an
>extension to the garage, the County Archaeologists were very interested.
>
>What they wanted to do was to be present when the footings were being
>dug - though there was always the question of 'what if they identified
>something ?'.
We have a similar situation here. An area of flood plain where there is
evidence of cress production is zoned as being of *archaeological
interest*.
My understanding is that, prior to works commencing, we are required to
notify the local museum.
>
>In the end we built a timber extension sitting on paving slabs - so
>didn't disturb any archaeology, didn;t need any building regs & didn't
>involve the archaeologists - though that might not work in your case <g>
What about building on piles? Houses on a nearby contaminated chemical
site were built this way. The *borer* appeared to create the holes for
concrete back fill without actually removing any soil. The rest of the
foundation was beam and block.
regards
--
Tim Lamb
Steve Walker
With the added bonus that a couple of carefully pre-positioned, but
uninteresting artefacts could get your foundation trenches dug too ;)
SteveW
Andy Champ
>
> We have a similar situation here. An area of flood plain where there is
> evidence of cress production is zoned as being of *archaeological
> interest*.
>
This is a flood plain, that used to be covered in ponds, and you want to
build on it? Isn't there just the teeniest risk of damp feet?
Andy
Tony Bryer
> As I understand it, and as things stand at the moment, there is no law
> that says I cannot hire a digger and just dig the site up prior to the
> application being submitted (or accepted). Would this be legal, and
> would it obviate the requirement to carry out the archaeological
> assessment?
IANAL but wouldn't this constitute starting work without planning
permission. In the reverse situation - having a planning permission that
is about to expire - digging a trench is IIRC deemed to be starting work.
--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on' Melbourne, Australia
www.superbeam.co.uk www.superbeam.com www.greentram.com
Bob Eager
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 05:45:31 -0700 (PDT) Edward wrote :
>> As I understand it, and as things stand at the moment, there is no law
>> that says I cannot hire a digger and just dig the site up prior to the
>> application being submitted (or accepted). Would this be legal, and
>> would it obviate the requirement to carry out the archaeological
>> assessment?
>
> IANAL but wouldn't this constitute starting work without planning
> permission. In the reverse situation - having a planning permission that
> is about to expire - digging a trench is IIRC deemed to be starting
> work.
Not if he was just gardening! .-)
--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
The Natural Philosopher
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 05:45:31 -0700 (PDT) Edward wrote :
>> As I understand it, and as things stand at the moment, there is no law
>> that says I cannot hire a digger and just dig the site up prior to the
>> application being submitted (or accepted). Would this be legal, and
>> would it obviate the requirement to carry out the archaeological
>> assessment?
>
> IANAL but wouldn't this constitute starting work without planning
> permission. In the reverse situation - having a planning permission that
> is about to expire - digging a trench is IIRC deemed to be starting work.
>
I dont think digging a trench for ahem 'drainage purposes' requires
planning permission. Or indeed for just landscaping the gardemn
"I wanted to build a replica of the WWI Ypres Salient, M'lud"
Tim Lamb
<no....@nospam.invalid> writes
:-)
I may have overstated the word *similar*.
In our case the works might be a backwater dug to improve the coarse
fishery.
Housing has of course been constructed on land of a similar nature but
within the *development envelope*.
regards
--
Tim Lamb
Alasdair
<teddy...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>This is purely hypothetical.
>
>I own a share in a small piece of land (about an acre) and we co-
>owners are thinking of applying for planning permission. We've been
>told that, if planning is permitted, we would be required to undertake
>an archaeological survey.
I am all for preserving ancient artefacts but the grossly unfair thing
about this is that the developer has to pay the cost of the
archaeological dig. It is even more unfair because if any of the
stuff turns out to be "treasure", the government grabs it.
I take the view that if "society" wants to preserve our heritage,
society as a whole, i.e. the State, should pay for the archaeological
dig.
--
Alasdair.
rbel
unitof1
belongs to the landowner. I think that its totally barmy that the
planning system can dictate what you do to your archaeology once you
get caught in the system. Watch any timeteam and all they do is ask
the landowners permission and so long as its not an ancient scheduled
monument site anybody can dig away so long as they don’t get involved
in mineral extraction or some environmental pollution. So dig it up,
I bet you could get a load of local volunteers to help you.
Almost all archaeologists now depend on development work as you have
to pay. Get as many quotes as you can but quite often there are local
cartels in operation.
One of the things that I have found is that landowners are not want to
argue against archaeological conditions put on their planning
applications and unfortunately archaeologists are then seen as part of
a tax on your developments. Only once have a client (mad) who asked
me to try and get the condition removed which I said I would for a
very nominal fee and the condition was removed but the client (hence
mad) did not pay me.