Archaeology Enforcement Policy January 2022

2.1.1 Although compliance with planning conditions is always the responsibility of the developer, for practical purposes archaeological enforcement issues can be divided into two general categories: those arising from the actions (or omissions) of a developer and those arising from the actions (or omissions) of their archaeological contractor. Examples in the first category would include commencing development on a site of archaeological interest without complying with conditions (e.g., for prior excavation) or refusing to commission publication of work. In the second category would fall (inter-alia) sub-standard fieldwork or a failure to produce timely or adequate reports, judged by reference to the approved project design and relevant CIfA standard.

2.1.2 The Council’s Archaeological Service's overall objective is to avoid non- compliance issues arising through setting clear requirements and ensuring properly qualified archaeologists undertake work. Where non-compliance arises, the Service will seek to resolve issues effectively by working with developers and archaeological contractors within the planning framework administered by the Planning Service and professional standards set by the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. If matters cannot be resolved voluntarily then formal action may be recommended through planning enforcement procedures and/or, if appropriate, by complaint to the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. In serious cases it may be necessary to recommend that the Planning Service impose a stop notice or initiate court proceedings. Serious or persistent failures by archaeological contractors to meet recognised professional standards may lead to sanctions being imposed by the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. Where the council’s Archaeological Service has evidence that such professional failings exist and, having given reasonable notice and opportunity has been unable to obtain a satisfactory resolution to them, it will advise the Planning Service and the contractor's potential clients of its concerns in writing until such time as the archaeological contractor concerned has demonstrated that necessary improvements have been made.

2.2 Non-compliance arising from actions or omissions of developers (see Appendix 1)

2.2.1 Potential breaches of planning control affecting an archaeological site are likely to be brought to the attention of the council’s Archaeological Service by members of the public, planning officers or identified by members of the archaeology team. Archaeological remains are vulnerable to rapid and irreversible destruction by modern earthmoving machinery. For this reason, swift and robust enforcement action can be essential to prevent serious loss.

2.2.2 Under normal circumstances, an officer from the County Archaeology Service will investigate any report within 2 working days by contacting the Planning Service and (where practical and safe to do so) visiting the site in question. If the officer establishes that there is a threat to important archaeological remains then they will recommend appropriate remediation and work in collaboration with the responsible planning officer and/or enforcement officer to secure compliance, ideally as a voluntary remedy by the developer. If there is a need to seek formal enforcement action the council’s Archaeological Officer will decide what recommendation to make to the Planning Service. Breach of condition notices may be appropriate for minor infringements but for more serious cases an enforcement notice or Injunction would be considered. Where the objective is to prevent ongoing damage an urgent stop notice may be essential if works continue after the developer has been informed of the problem.

2.2.3 Archaeological schemes of work secured by planning conditions cover post-excavation analysis, publication and archiving as well as investigative fieldwork. This work is monitored by the council’s Archaeological Service and should be completed within a specified timescale, normally 12 months of the completion of fieldwork. Developers are required to ensure that their appointed archaeological contractor completes the post-excavation programme in a timely manner and are strongly advised to enquire as to their publication record and any outstanding backlog issues prior to appointment. The Archaeology Service will not be able to advise the Planning Service that the condition has been fully complied with until all fieldwork, analysis, reporting, and archiving is completed. If analysis, publication, or archiving is delayed then the service will investigate the cause and, if there is no reasonable explanation or evidence of persistent and excessive delay, may recommend enforcement action and/or refer the archaeological organisation concerned to the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (see below).

2.2.4 Different procedures apply where archaeological work is conducted to inform a planning application. In this case, the planning authority can be advised that an archaeological report is required to inform their determination of an application. If no report, or a report of an inadequate standard, is submitted then a Regulation 4 direction can be issued to require further information or planning consent can be refused on the grounds that the application has inadequate archaeological documentation.

2.2.5 Development outside local planning processes also follows different procedures. In these cases’ the "developers" normally have some general duty of care and may work within a specific statutory regulatory framework (e.g., the Water Industry). Such developers can be reminded that they are expected to operate in an environmentally sensitive manner. Where reminders are ineffective the council would refer serious breaches to the relevant regulatory authority or Government Department.

2.3 Non-compliance arising from actions or omissions by archaeologists (see Appendix 2)

2.3.1 Non-compliance can arise from the actions or omissions of professional archaeologists. In such cases the client developer is placed in non- compliance and must secure effective remediation from his archaeological contractor. In some case’s problems are not isolated but systemic, for example an archaeological contractor who repeatedly fails to meet professional standards of fieldwork or to produce reports in a timely manner. In the latter cases a pattern can emerge over a period of years.

2.3.2 Where non-compliance is identified, the monitoring officer will seek to establish whether the root of the problem lies with the client developer or the archaeological contractor. If the latter, then in the first instance a judgment will be made by the monitoring officer in consultation with the council’s Archaeological Officer as to the severity of the problem. In all but the most serious cases, resolution would initially be sought through discussion with the archaeological project manager and any requests or conclusions documented by exchange of written correspondence. The developer and the Planning Service will be advised of the incident and its resolution. In serious cases, or where no satisfactory resolution can be agreed, the Council’s Archaeological Officer will decide how to proceed, taking legal advice as necessary. The options to be considered include:

• advising the Planning Service in writing of the perceived shortcomings recommending action to secure compliance. As the enforcing authority it would be for the Planning Service to formally advise the developer of what is required to secure compliance. Where a developer suffers loss or inconvenience resulting from professional shortcomings’ they can seek redress either for breach of contract or, if a private person, by reference to the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982
• in the case of statutory undertakers, the client would be informed
• a complaint to the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists -Registered Organisation committee alleging significant shortcomings in professional standards. This option is only available for ROs
• a complaint to the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists alleging a breach of the Code of Conduct by an individual member, normally the project manager named in the project design

2.3.3 Where an archaeological contractor has a track record of unresolved non-compliance issues then the council will inform the Planning Service of this record. In such cases, the council may also require additional guarantees and safeguards from the contractor to demonstrate that they will be able to undertake the work to the required standard and timescale. The council will notify both the contractor and the relevant developer of such additional measures and the reasons for them in writing.