I'd like to respond to Martin Locock's comment on the uses of planning conditions. PPS 5 states:



"Where the loss of the whole or a material part of a heritage asset's significance is justified, local planning authorities should require the developer to record and advance understanding of the significance of the heritage asset before it is lost, using planning conditions or obligations as appropriate. The extent of the requirement should be proportionate to the nature and level of the asset' significance. Developers should publish this evidence and deposit copies of the reports with the relevant historic environment record."



This makes it clear that a report from an excavation carried out under a condition is clearly not just for planning purposes, since it is to advance understanding. I would have thought that this also included ensuring the report could contribute to research.



Best wishes,



Paul Gilman



Historic Environment Records Manager



Historic Environment Branch



Essex County Council| telephone: 01245 437636 | extension: 51636



Mobile:07748623970 | email: [log in to unmask]



EssexWorks 



For a better quality of life

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail





-----Original Message-----

From: The Forum for Information Standards in Heritage (FISH) [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Martin Locock

Sent: 17 August 2010 11:46

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: [FISH] HEGEL - how a standard for grey literature might help.



Just to pick up on this (and related to Bradley's comments about reports

lacking data he wanted)



> I'd say that a report that lacked key information that was required by a relevant standard should be the basis for refusing to discharge a condition shouldn't it? Otherwise what force does any condition have



Planning conditions do not in general go into the nitty gritty of a

requirement, but a report that (in the curator's opinion) failed to meet

all aspects of a standard might be signed off anyway by the case

officer.  Planning conditions are too cumbersome to accommodate the

nuanced world of such judgements, and their enforcement is a grey area

where the planning authority has the absolute right (subject to judicial

review) to refuse a submission by an applicant seeking discharge, in

practice giving the authority's officers considerable freedom to insist

of further submissions.



But a planning authority's test would fitness for purpose: a report

produced for planning would be tested for planning purposes.  It would

be difficult for an authority to reject a report because it might fail

to be fit for some other purpose, like research.



If Bradley argues that a report must contain a plan, in the planning

context it may well be the case that a plan was provided by some other

mechanism: this reduces the value (to him) of the report (unless he

sought this information out) but is irrelevant to whether the report

served its primary purpose.



Martin



-- 

Martin Locock

Rheolwr Cymorth y Project        Project Support Manager



Llyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru        National Library of Wales

[log in to unmask]            Ffôn / Phone 01970 632885



Un o lyfrgelloedd mawr y byd    One of the great libraries of the world

http://www.llgc.org.uk/





  Click https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/xmTdB81jgPbTndxI!oX7UkccJfXxjPVW3XKPYHsTmPMCGnvdEohN7iL2O7uRx4A60hsLU1F1SriBj3G9C26e4g==  to report this email as spam.





This email (including any attachments) is intended only for the recipient(s) named above.  It may contain confidential or privileged information and should not be read, copied or otherwise used by any other person unless express permission is given.  If you are not a named recipient, please contact the sender and delete the email from your system. It is the recipient's responsibility to ensure that appropriate measures are in place to check for software viruses.