Item No:
Date:
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT
Archaeological investigations to support planning applications
P/2007/2386 – Le Foin Bas, Route Orange, St Brelade
Purpose of the Report
The purpose of this report is to seek the Minister’s support for pre-determination excavations at this site in connection with proposals affecting a location identified as an area of archaeological potential (AAP). The archaeological interest of the site relates to the potential presence of a mound which may exist at or close to the location of proposed excavations.
Background
The recent work to identify the first tranche of archaeological sites following the adoption of the SPG on archaeology has identified this site as having archaeological interest. Accordingly, in line with the processes set out in the guidance, a request was made for a desk based assessment of that interest in the context of a planning application for the provision of an extension and a swimming pool at the property under the reference number above. A desk based assessment (DBA) was commissioned locally by the applicant from a member of the Societe Jersiaise Archaeological Section. The document was sent to the department’s consultant professional archaeologists Oxford Archaeology for their consideration.
Oxford Archaeology advised that the DBA was ‘a little skimpy’ and that various areas needed further work. They disagreed with mapping correlation evidence, and with the conclusion of the DBA that a watching brief was the most appropriate way to deal with this matter. Oxford Archaeology’s professional advice was that archaeological excavation was required before determination of the application to properly inform decision making and to provide the applicant with a greater certainty of potential risk to the project.
The applicant’s archaeological advice that a watching brief post-decision would suffice is considered to be unacceptable on the basis that once a permit has been issued and works commenced, subsequent finds will at best delay the project, and at worst might stop it completely if they were significant, leading to the possibility of having to revoke or seriously amend the permit at a stage when resources will have already been expended on the scheme.
Subsequently a brief for pre-determination excavation was prepared (by the department’s consultants) and forwarded to the applicant’s agent by the department requiring investigative trenching so that both the applicant and the department would have greater certainty about the potential archaeological interest of the site before the application was determined.
The applicant has objected to this requirement, and his architect has provided some information in relation to trial holes for drainage investigations in the hope that they might assist with the archaeological investigation. This information has been considered by the Department’s consultant archaeologists who advise that there is nothing immediately useful in the drainage pit investigation as their location is away from the potential archaeological interest.
The general information about the ground conditions have however refinement a refinement of the requirements put forward for the trial trenches, and an amendment to the brief for that work.
The comments in the applicants letter of 11 January in relation to the way in which the works would need to be engineered are not accepted as it is considered that such works would not be necessary / correct in normal archaeological practice, the more so if the brief is revised to take account of the ground condition information provided subsequent to the original brief having been sent out.
Discussion
The process for dealing with planning applications which may impact on sites of archaeological interest and importance is being developed following the adoption of the SPG and the appointment of consultant archaeologists to provide the department with expert professional advice. It appears to be working satisfactorily as far as it has gone to date, but this is the first instance where pre-determination investigations have been requested, and in this case the applicant does not wish to carry out the work (apparently on the grounds of cost). It is therefore necessary for a decision to be made as to whether the advice of the department’s consultant professional archaeologists should be followed, or the need for the pre-determination archaeological investigation be waived on the grounds of the applicant’s unwillingness to provide it, with the application being determined on its merits, excluding the potential archaeological interest of the site at this stage.
It is also relevant to consider that the decision on this matter will set the direction for future cases where pre-determination investigation is advised by the department’s consultant archaeologists. In the event that the request for pre-determination investigation is upheld and the applicant remains unwilling to provide it, it remains open to the Minister to refuse the application on the basis of the provision of insufficient information.
Legal and resource implications
SPG has been adopted in relation to archaeological sites and along with Island Plan Policy guide the way in which Planning applications are managed and the level of information which is requested to enable a properly informed recommendation to be formulated. If insufficient information is submitted and the application is permitted there is a risk that archaeology may be lost or damaged, or if there are finds of high significance the contract may be delayed or worse with the potential for costs claims against the department. Thus the request for full information prior to determination allows for a fully informed assessment of the application and provides much greater certainty for all concerned.
The process as recommended is within existing resources. If archaeological remains were to be found during the contract where permission had been given without full information, it is possible that additional costs may be incurred in relation to dealing with finds and potential costs relating to delay of the construction works.
Conclusions
In considering the various communications in relation to this matter in light of adopted policy and SPG, it would appear that, if the Island’s archaeology is to be properly considered and taken seriously, investigations such as are sought here are as important as other investigations such as contamination and ground conditions. Thus proper investigation is needed prior to determination so that if nothing is found then the application can be progressed with that knowledge and, if approved, construction can go ahead unencumbered. If however the mound is found and is of interest, or in fact is important, then the scheme can perhaps be varied so that any remains can be protected or a project design can be developed for planned excavation and recording. Until that information is known, the uncertainty benefits no-one, including the applicant.
Recommendation
That the Minister endorse and uphold the request for pre-determination archaeological investigations and reports in accordance with the brief (revised) provided by Oxford Archaeology relative to the proposed development at Le Foin Bas, Route Orange, St Brelade (P/2007/2386).
Action Required
- Advise the applicant and agent of the decision and forward the revised brief for the pre-determination investigations.
- Advise Development Control as above
Written by: | Janet Dore, Principal Historic Buildings Advisor |
| |
Approved by: | Kevin Pilley, Assistant Director, Policy and Projects |
| |
Endorsed by: | |
Attached
Emails and correspondence.
Jd/29 January 2008
gov.je