I took great interest in an archaeological find of national importance (treasure trove) in or near to Frithwood which is a wooded area in the Billericay \/ Laindon area.I have just joined the program at ArchiUK.com to Discover the UK Historic Environment: Historical & Archaeological Site Locations Layered onto LiDAR & Old Maps and I am impressed with the details already becoming available.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Unfortunately, the latest Labour government, or their councillors have decided it is no longer useful to keep Archaeological Sites safe from house developers, or natural habitats, or the well being of the local residents, and they don’t appear to care very much for the needs of flooding, doctor surgeries, schools etc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In fact, from the looks of it, lets see how many large 4 and 5 bedroomed houses we can fit into a small country area, as we do not need social housing, just lots of large houses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Along the way of researching these suggestions, I keep coming up with research done by Basildon council fairly recently which seems to offer a completely different recommendation. I attach it here in case it gets lost.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I discussed the new planning frameowrk document with chatgpt and the inferences were that :<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thanks \u2014 that link is the actual December 2024 version of the UK planning policy<\/strong>, and it\u2019s the right one to check for how heritage and archaeology must<\/em> be treated in planning decisions. GOV.UK<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Here\u2019s what it actually says and matters for your situation at Frith Wood<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Paragraph 202<\/strong> makes the broad point that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource<\/strong> and should be conserved in a way appropriate to their significance. GOV.UK<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Paragraph 203<\/strong> says that plans should actively include strategies for conserving and enjoying the historic environment and heritage assets most at risk, considering social, cultural, environmental benefits and how new development contributes positively. GOV.UK<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n That means plans and allocations themselves have to take account of heritage \u2014 you can\u2019t just push that off to later conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Paragraph 205<\/strong> requires local planning authorities to maintain and use<\/strong> a Historic Environment Record to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n That\u2019s legally important: it means they cannot ignore archaeological potential<\/em> just because it\u2019s not designated yet \u2014 they must look at likely presence too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the NPPF glossary and guidance, archaeological interest<\/strong> is explicitly included as a form of heritage asset if the site holds or potentially holds<\/em> evidence of past human activity worthy of expert investigation. Planning Portal<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n So even without scheduling or formal designation, Frith Wood\u2019s archaeological potential (Roman or Saxon) is something the council must assess before deciding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Paragraphs around 207<\/strong> in the guidance (supported by what many councils apply in practice) require applicants to identify and describe the significance of any heritage assets that may be affected<\/strong>, including the contribution of setting. Planning Portal<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n This is the point where developers sometimes try to use a very skimpy archaeological desk-based assessment and hope the council accepts it. The NPPF says you need appropriate detail proportionate to the asset\u2019s importance<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n what about disability in planning and road use which appears to have been negated<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is a really important point \u2014 and you\u2019re right to be angry about it. Disability does not sit on the sidelines of planning or highway decisions<\/strong>, even though councils often behave as if it does.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Let\u2019s pin this down properly, in law and policy terms, not hand-waving.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Two parallel duties apply:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Public bodies (councils, highways authorities) are under the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED)<\/strong> to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Crucially: They cannot lawfully:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cDue regard\u201d means the authority must:<\/p>\n\n\n\n If a committee report or highway design:<\/p>\n\n\n\n That is legally vulnerable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Courts are clear:<\/p>\n\n\n\n A failure to properly apply the PSED is unlawful, even if the outcome might<\/em> have been the same.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The NPPF still requires development to be:<\/p>\n\n\n\n That includes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n If a scheme:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Then it is not inclusive by design<\/strong>, even if it ticks a few boxes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is a big one, and very relevant to what you\u2019ve raised before.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Telling disabled people:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cUse another bridge \/ another road \/ another route\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n is not neutral<\/strong> if that alternative is:<\/p>\n\n\n\n That can amount to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Especially where the route in question is promoted as:<\/p>\n\n\n\n What councils often do:<\/p>\n\n\n\n What the law requires:<\/p>\n\n\n\n If a plan or scheme systematically excludes<\/strong> disabled people, that\u2019s not unfortunate \u2014 it\u2019s discriminatory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Strong planning\/highways wording looks like this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe scheme fails to demonstrate compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010. The design and operation of pedestrian routes and highway infrastructure have been assessed from the perspective of able-bodied users only, with no meaningful consideration of wheelchair users or people with mobility impairments. Reliance on alternative routes places disabled users at a substantial disadvantage and does not constitute a reasonable adjustment.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n That\u2019s hard for a council to brush off.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Then you may be looking at:<\/p>\n\n\n\n This applies whether it\u2019s:<\/p>\n\n\n\n What\u2019s striking in your case is the pattern:<\/p>\n\n\n\n That\u2019s not balanced decision-making.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If you want, I can:<\/p>\n\n\n\n You\u2019re not asking for special treatment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I took great interest in an archaeological find of national importance (treasure trove) in or near to Frithwood which is a wooded area in the Billericay \/ Laindon area.I have just joined the program at ArchiUK.com to Discover the UK Historic Environment: Historical & Archaeological Site Locations Layered onto LiDAR & Old Maps and I … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-40","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/uklidar.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/uklidar.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/uklidar.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/uklidar.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/uklidar.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=40"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/uklidar.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":49,"href":"https:\/\/uklidar.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40\/revisions\/49"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/uklidar.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=40"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/uklidar.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=40"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/uklidar.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=40"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n\n\n\n\ud83d\udccc 1. The NPPF still<\/em> treats heritage and archaeology as a material consideration<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\ud83d\udccc 2. Local plans and decisions must include a positive strategy<\/strong> for conserving heritage assets<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\ud83d\udccc 3. Authorities must<\/em> use the Historic Environment Record<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n\ud83d\udccc 4. Archaeological interest is<\/em> heritage interest<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\ud83d\udccc 5. Applicants must describe significance<\/em><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n1. Disability is not optional<\/strong> in planning or highways<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\ud83d\udd39 Equality Act 2010 (very strong)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\ud83d\udc49 This duty applies when plans are prepared<\/strong>, when planning decisions are made<\/strong>, and when roads and footways are designed or altered<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n2. \u201cDue regard\u201d has teeth (this is where councils fall over)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\n3. Planning policy backs this up (including the 2024 NPPF)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\n4. Highways and road use: \u201cuse an alternative route\u201d is often unlawful<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\n5. How disability gets \u201cnegated\u201d in practice (and why it\u2019s wrong)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\n6. How to challenge this properly (not emotionally, but effectively)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n7. If this was ignored in reports or decision-making\u2026<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\n8. Joining the dots (heritage + disability)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n\n
You\u2019re asking for the law to be applied properly<\/strong> \u2014 and that\u2019s a very strong place to stand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n