4th June 2014, 03:33 PM
Not sure I got the PINS CIrcular reference. Find something to do with rights of way and defra? Not sure How independent opinion leads to reaching a conclusion as to the merits of a proposed devopment other than by supporting it or objecting to it.
Thing is Beamo I am not a public servant I am paid for by the developer presumably under polluter pays principles. I am also not sure that the NPPF heritage statement is an archaeological report. I presume that the reason a developer would submit the document is because it does recomend the development, because the developer has considered the impact on the heritage and that they have suitably mitigated for it. Possibly recommendation by nullification but the examples I am thinking of are where the client has asked for a statement from the archaeologist that the proposed mitigation would allow the development to go ahead. Seems to me that the client wants me to help them get their permission and that I should put my mouth where the money is and make a public comment about it like everybody else. If the curator wants to disagree then they can say so. Doing it like this I think would make the process transparent.
When ever I have seen archaeology discussed at a public enquiry there has been a archaeologist for the scheme and one against.
Thing is Beamo I am not a public servant I am paid for by the developer presumably under polluter pays principles. I am also not sure that the NPPF heritage statement is an archaeological report. I presume that the reason a developer would submit the document is because it does recomend the development, because the developer has considered the impact on the heritage and that they have suitably mitigated for it. Possibly recommendation by nullification but the examples I am thinking of are where the client has asked for a statement from the archaeologist that the proposed mitigation would allow the development to go ahead. Seems to me that the client wants me to help them get their permission and that I should put my mouth where the money is and make a public comment about it like everybody else. If the curator wants to disagree then they can say so. Doing it like this I think would make the process transparent.
When ever I have seen archaeology discussed at a public enquiry there has been a archaeologist for the scheme and one against.
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist