9th March 2007, 09:49 AM
I agree Vulpes. It seems to me that any threat to changing the PPG16-related part of what we do in archaeology will come from changes in the planning system, not the Listed Buildings Controls and Scheduling laws which this deals with.
I can see this offering more archaeological sites statutory protection to be honest. All we have at the moment are one set of protected monuments which will become grade I's under the new system. This will give us a chance to add more to the list as grade II* and II over time. For a long time, English Heritage have followed a policy of scheduling a "representitive sample" of classes of monuments (ie if you have eight forts of national importance, they only scheduled the best six). This should now mean we can at least protect the other two with one of the lower grades, instead of nothing which is what we have at the moment.
I can see this offering more archaeological sites statutory protection to be honest. All we have at the moment are one set of protected monuments which will become grade I's under the new system. This will give us a chance to add more to the list as grade II* and II over time. For a long time, English Heritage have followed a policy of scheduling a "representitive sample" of classes of monuments (ie if you have eight forts of national importance, they only scheduled the best six). This should now mean we can at least protect the other two with one of the lower grades, instead of nothing which is what we have at the moment.