7th February 2012, 07:40 PM
My understanding of the National Planning Policy Framework is that it will rely heavily on an updated version of the 'local plan'. This is the part where the Tories claim local communities can influence the kind of planning in their area, although once you get beyond the inclusion and definition for green-belt, conservation areas, prioritty zones, economic development zones etc etc (all diktat from above), its hard to see how much room there is for local influence. My understanding of the broader issues behind the Manchester case are that the University disposing of its role in this isn't necesarily a bad thing (nor after getting rid of the digging arm of the service 2 years back entirely unexpected). Question is who, if anyone, will step in to pick up the pieces.
Might it be hoped that English Heritage could step in and set up a system similar to that which is currently in place in London and provide an archaeological advisory service? The fact that the neighbouring Merseyside authorities also seem bereft of an advisory service suggest a North West version of GLAAS could be one effective solution.....never really understood why some of England's richest boroughs in London get so much 'goodwill' from EH and the poorer regions get next to nowt....(Yeah I know its historical....)
Might it be hoped that English Heritage could step in and set up a system similar to that which is currently in place in London and provide an archaeological advisory service? The fact that the neighbouring Merseyside authorities also seem bereft of an advisory service suggest a North West version of GLAAS could be one effective solution.....never really understood why some of England's richest boroughs in London get so much 'goodwill' from EH and the poorer regions get next to nowt....(Yeah I know its historical....)
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...