25th October 2007, 02:04 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by vulpes
Bit of a theme emerging here - architects who seem to hold heritage in contempt... But still there's the recent planning appeal in Devon against a building recording condition where the inspector on dismissing the appeal stated:
Quote:quote:The appellant states that âarchaeology is normally understood to be the study of prehistoric remains, or antiquities of medieval originâ. However, I have no evidence of such a limited definition. The OED defines the word as âancient history generally, the systematic study of antiquities or matters of earlier timesâ. PPG16 â Archaeology and Planning states âTodayâs archaeological landscape is the product of human activity over thousands of years. It ranges through settlements and remains of every period from the camps of the early hunter gatherers 400,000 years ago to remains of early 20 century activitiesâ. It is clear, therefore that the Government draws
the parameters widely.
I've got a PDF of the full statement if you want to show it to your ignorant potential client.Personally I would stretch it through into the late 20th century in the case of structures which are rare or unusual. It's up to us to make coherent arguments really.
Which is pretty much the same planning appeal decision that was made re: a case in Lancashire about 8 years ago - the owrding of the condition was deemed in some respects to be unreasonable as it was for a 'qualified practitioner' or similar wording to do the survey and the inspector decided that if we produced an adequate brief and monitored it then anyone could do the work, providing they fulfilled the brief - and we had some resaonable records from architects, and occasionally the owners of buildings, as well as the archaeological contractors - we did however have a higher share of rejects and returns for amendment and improvement from the non-archaeologists. It is quite in order therefore (IMO) to tell the architect/developer that he can appeal against recording if they want to but the precendents are such that they will lose the appeal.