9th June 2014, 01:21 PM
Marc
It is not that the Inspectorate 'expect the expert to acct as an advocate' - N.2.2. from your quotation merely states that this action is possible, but that it must be made clear within the endorsement of the expert witness' written evidence as to what is being presented as expert opinion and what is being put forward as the promotion of the proposed scheme.
With regard to your second point, the NPPF is quite clear as to the purpose of a heritage statement or assessment (para 128) and of the minimum requirement necessary to fulfil that purpose. For a proposed scheme that affects a number of heritage assets in different ways, it is very likely that the heritage statement/assessment will look more like an EIA as there will need to be some explanation of the methodology that has been used in order to reach the conclusions expressed in that document with regard to significance of impact/effect etc.
Beamo
It is not that the Inspectorate 'expect the expert to acct as an advocate' - N.2.2. from your quotation merely states that this action is possible, but that it must be made clear within the endorsement of the expert witness' written evidence as to what is being presented as expert opinion and what is being put forward as the promotion of the proposed scheme.
With regard to your second point, the NPPF is quite clear as to the purpose of a heritage statement or assessment (para 128) and of the minimum requirement necessary to fulfil that purpose. For a proposed scheme that affects a number of heritage assets in different ways, it is very likely that the heritage statement/assessment will look more like an EIA as there will need to be some explanation of the methodology that has been used in order to reach the conclusions expressed in that document with regard to significance of impact/effect etc.
Beamo