Discharging an archaeological condition in phases

An archaeological condition is almost never a single piece of work, and budgeting for it as one is how schemes end up with a stalled groundworks package. The condition typically has three limbs: approve a written scheme of investigation before any development begins, carry out the approved scheme, then complete analysis, reporting and archive deposition before occupation. Each limb is a separate discharge, each attracts its own application fee, and the last one has a habit of arriving eighteen months after anybody budgeted for it.

The money question on a phased site is narrower than it looks. It is whether the condition as worded lets you discharge it phase by phase, or whether it requires the whole scheme approved and implemented before the first spade goes in.

Why the condition is usually staged

Where a site has archaeological interest, national policy requires the significance of the asset to be understood, and where loss is justified, that the evidence is recorded, analysed and made publicly accessible. A single condition cannot deliver that at the point of decision, because nobody yet knows what is there.

So the authority imposes a staged condition on the advice of its archaeological curator, usually the county archaeologist or an equivalent advisory service. Stage one secures the method. Stage two secures the fieldwork. Stage three secures the product, meaning the report, the publication and the deposited archive.

Read the condition before pricing anything. The wording determines whether you can start groundworks in phase one while phase three remains unexcavated, and that single point is worth more to a programme than any saving on day rates.

The written scheme of investigation

The written scheme is the document that controls cost, because it defines the scope of everything that follows. It should set out the archaeological background, the research aims, the fieldwork methodology, the sampling strategy, the staffing and specialist provision, the post-excavation programme, the publication intention and the archive destination.

Prepare it in consultation with the curator rather than submitting it cold. A scheme that the curator has pre-agreed is approved in weeks; one that arrives unannounced generates comments, a revised version and another fee. Our note on what a written scheme of investigation contains sets out the sections.

Scope is where the negotiation happens. Trench percentages, the extent of geophysical coverage, whether a strip-map-and-record approach replaces open-area excavation, and the depth of post-excavation specialist analysis are all arguable, and all have five-figure consequences on a site of any size.

Make sure the scheme names the phases and ties fieldwork to each. A scheme written for the whole site, with no phase structure, invites the curator to ask for the whole site to be investigated before any development starts.

Evaluation, mitigation and reporting stages

The normal sequence runs:

1. Desk-based assessment, usually submitted with the application rather than conditioned.
2. Geophysical survey, where ground conditions suit it, to target the next stage.
3. Trial trench evaluation, sampling a percentage of the site to establish what survives and where.
4. A mitigation strategy agreed with the curator, which may be preservation in situ through design change, targeted excavation, a watching brief during groundworks, or a combination.
5. Fieldwork to the agreed strategy.
6. Post-excavation assessment, then analysis, publication and archive deposition.

Stage three is the one that governs the budget for everything after it, and it is priced on trench metreage, machine and welfare provision, and the number of archaeologists on site. The way that pricing works is set out in our note on how archaeological evaluation trenching is priced.

Stage six is the one that gets forgotten. Post-excavation on a productive site can run for a year or more and includes specialist analysis of pottery, bone, environmental samples and metalwork, conservation of finds, radiocarbon dating where the stratigraphy warrants it, and publication. Receiving museums commonly charge a deposition fee per archive box, so check the museum's published charges before the fieldwork generates the boxes.

Partial discharge across a phased site

Partial discharge is possible, and it is the single most useful thing to secure. Two routes:

The clean route is to agree the condition wording at decision stage so that it expressly permits submission and approval of details for each phase separately, with no development in a phase until that phase's details are approved. Ask for that wording in the heads of terms discussion or in response to the draft conditions.

The retrofit route is an application under section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to vary the condition. That costs an application fee, takes eight weeks, and gives the authority an opportunity to revisit the condition in other respects. It works, and it is slower and more exposed than getting the wording right first time.

Where the condition is silent on phasing, authorities will sometimes accept a phased submission by agreement and issue partial approvals. Get that agreement in writing from the case officer before relying on it, because a lender's solicitor reading the condition literally will not take a verbal assurance.

Monitoring fees charged by the curator

Many archaeological advisory services charge for their involvement, and the charges fall into recognisable categories: advice on the written scheme, site monitoring visits during fieldwork, and advice to the authority on whether the condition can be discharged.

These are published charges set by the advisory body, which may be a county council service, a unitary authority team or a contracted provider, and they differ substantially between areas. Take the figures from the current published schedule for the relevant service rather than from a previous project, and build them into the budget as a named line rather than absorbing them into the contractor's fee.

One practical point. The curator's monitoring role means your contractor's programme has to accommodate monitoring visits, and a visit that cannot be arranged for a fortnight stops the discharge even when the fieldwork is finished.

Where a finding changes the layout

The budget risk that dwarfs all the fee lines is a discovery that forces design change. Remains of national importance may need preservation in situ, which means a foundation redesign, a change to drainage runs and levels, and potentially a reduction in developable area.

The planning route for that change depends on its scale: a non-material amendment for a minor layout adjustment, a section 73 variation for something larger, or a fresh application where the quantum changes. Each has its own fee and determination period, and each sits on the critical path.

The protection against this is sequencing. Complete the evaluation before the detailed design is fixed, even where the condition would allow otherwise, because a trench result that arrives after the drainage design is signed off costs far more than the same result arriving before it.

Programming against groundworks

Archaeology sits on the critical path almost by definition, since it has to happen before the ground is disturbed. The programme items to allocate real durations to are:

• preparing and agreeing the written scheme, allowing for curator comments
• the discharge application for stage one, allowing the statutory determination period
• fieldwork mobilisation, including access, welfare and machine availability
• the fieldwork itself, with contingency for ground conditions and weather
• interim reporting and the curator's sign-off of fieldwork
• post-excavation assessment, analysis and publication
• archive deposition and the final discharge application before occupation

Winter working is possible for most archaeological fieldwork, unlike several ecological survey seasons, which makes archaeology a useful thing to front-load in a programme otherwise constrained by survey windows. Where groundworks will be monitored rather than preceded by excavation, the arrangement is a watching brief, and what that involves is covered in our note on the archaeological watching brief.

Fieldwork and reporting should be carried out by an organisation and individuals working to recognised professional standards, and councils expect a suitably qualified author for this work, with professional review strongly advised. Fees for discharge applications are indexed annually, so take the current figures from the published fee schedule.

See PlanScope pricing: one free report, £50 per report, or Professional for unlimited reports. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval. This is general guidance, not legal advice; check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it.