24th September 2010, 05:12 PM
As ever I seem to have been working in a different system to everybody else for the last 20 years....
It has always been clear who the sheriffs are- the LPAs and their advisors backed up by EH. The market has never been totally free - anybody doing fieldwork required by planning condition have to be approved by the LPA. In the early days their was much protectionism and true commercial firms were treated with real suspicion. This persists today with "approved lists" see the recent thread.
The Cotwes merger makes no real difference to the market place. PPS 5 is a major change and yes it has changed the market place it has enlarged it. As for the notion of a Fully Chartered Institute and barring the market to all but suitably qualified and experienced how does this fit into the integration reporting of the impacts on "heritage assets"?
This article misses the fundamental point about heritage protection in the planning system it is not about research but preservation and mitigation or a last minute distress purchase. The article calls for the following:
" Archaeologists should be involved with their clients management teams from the earliest opportunity in the development cycle – managing risk, minimising impact (and associated costs), and maximising the knowledge yield from any cultural heritage intervention."
I've been doing this for the last 22 years. It also suggested that PPS 5 "The new document sets the historic environment alongside other competing planning concerns, moving away from a tick-box culture of compliance and enabling commercial archaeologists to propose practical and cost effective solutions." Get real this change came about when PPG 16 was brought in - in fact before PPG 16 was introduced.
Peter Wardle
It has always been clear who the sheriffs are- the LPAs and their advisors backed up by EH. The market has never been totally free - anybody doing fieldwork required by planning condition have to be approved by the LPA. In the early days their was much protectionism and true commercial firms were treated with real suspicion. This persists today with "approved lists" see the recent thread.
The Cotwes merger makes no real difference to the market place. PPS 5 is a major change and yes it has changed the market place it has enlarged it. As for the notion of a Fully Chartered Institute and barring the market to all but suitably qualified and experienced how does this fit into the integration reporting of the impacts on "heritage assets"?
This article misses the fundamental point about heritage protection in the planning system it is not about research but preservation and mitigation or a last minute distress purchase. The article calls for the following:
" Archaeologists should be involved with their clients management teams from the earliest opportunity in the development cycle – managing risk, minimising impact (and associated costs), and maximising the knowledge yield from any cultural heritage intervention."
I've been doing this for the last 22 years. It also suggested that PPS 5 "The new document sets the historic environment alongside other competing planning concerns, moving away from a tick-box culture of compliance and enabling commercial archaeologists to propose practical and cost effective solutions." Get real this change came about when PPG 16 was brought in - in fact before PPG 16 was introduced.
Peter Wardle