12th June 2015, 06:19 PM
Sikalgaita
Prentice as outlined to Sika, you spotted it, they still come up with the threat of more "assesment" with a wsi. What was interesting is that they then appear to have wimped out of excavation and gone down a watching brief route....But it still admits that the decision has not followed nppf para128. Which is where they now need to be kicked. Any ideas about when the "Nppf is not being adhered to" complaints. I don't think any clients would support an appeal to the committee or why should they, which government department issued nppf?
Quote: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.yes they had lost the plot or rather what plot where they on. I gave up on the heritage statements thing after the dc said it was not good enough but the client submitted it anyway. The dc made me model it on one that had been produced which included all the wordings that they then got upset about. Both parties were going all out that their opinion was that there would be no development. What's interesting is that I have a similar case where I found more sigNificant archaeology but the development was approved and the dc has had written into the condition that I have to donate my archiv.e of the evaluation to them. Once the decision was approved they rang my client and told them not use me anymore. I informed the client that they should get somebody else because the dc would screw me with the wsi. That sites still ongoing but thanks for the interest.
Prentice as outlined to Sika, you spotted it, they still come up with the threat of more "assesment" with a wsi. What was interesting is that they then appear to have wimped out of excavation and gone down a watching brief route....But it still admits that the decision has not followed nppf para128. Which is where they now need to be kicked. Any ideas about when the "Nppf is not being adhered to" complaints. I don't think any clients would support an appeal to the committee or why should they, which government department issued nppf?
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist