12th June 2015, 01:19 PM
Marc Berger Wrote:Nppf para 128 says that the assets have to be considered for the decision making process. At the end of the day that's a case officer or a planning committee. In some cases it might be an inspector. It's got nothing to do with a "planning" advisor".And the planning officer or committee, not being archaeologists themselves will consult with their in house team of planning archaeologists. Your previously highlighted example of the site you prepared a Heritage Statement for and subsequently evaluated might have saved everyone's time and money if you had taken note of Heritage England's considerations of significance and the advice of the LPA archaeologists.
That said I am in no way saying that I agree with the HE and LPA arguments/decision in that example, or that I think that evaluation is not the most effective way of both assessing significance and providing the best way for field archaeologists to provide a reasonable estimate of risk (financial and temporal) to a developer.