WEST of SCOTLAND
ARCHAEOLOGYSERVICE
Annual Report of the West of Scotland Archaeology Service
2017/18
SummaryThis annual report covers the period from 1 April 2017 to 31 March 2018.
During the report period, the Service dealt with 1774 new casework items, 42 more than in
the previous year. This modest 2.4% increase in new casework returns the Service workload
to the average demand levels experienced in recent years. Last year’s reported fall in thenumber of planning applications identified as potentially raising archaeological issues has
been reversed, returning to a level within the normal range experienced in previous years.
Monitoring the weekly lists of planning applications received from the ten member Councils
and from the Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park Authority constituted 549 of the
new work items. This essential element of the Service’s work ensures that applications whichraise potential archaeological issues which have not been fully dealt with at the preapplication stage can be identified for consideration. The monitoring of the weekly lists, alongwith direct referrals from planning officers, identified 877 new planning applications whichmight raise archaeological issues and required further assessment.
A further 348 new casework items in other categories also arose in the reporting period.
Following last year’s agreement with the local government Improvement Service, spatial datafrom our Historic Environment Record was provided to their Spatial Hub website, allowing
our authorities to meet the historic environment element of their statutory responsibilities
under the EU INSPIRE Directive on time, and without the need for additional resources.

New Casework 1 April 2017 to 31 March 2018
Council Area

Total of New
Casework Items

Weeklylists

Argyll & Bute

52
49
53
50
52
48
45
49
53
47
51

184
89
29
66
52
42
87
132
40
92
64

General/Multi-Council

346
155
87
142
130
105
155
234
102
176
132
10

110
17
5
26
26
15
23
53
9
37
17
10

Total

1774

549

877

348

East Ayrshire
East Renfrewshire
Glasgow
North Ayrshire
Renfrewshire
South Ayrshire
South Lanarkshire
West Dunbartonshire
West LothianNational Park Authority

Planning
Applications

Other

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

1Planning Application Casework 2017-2018
The increase in new planning applications identified as potentially raising archaeologicalissues appears to have confirmed that the corresponding slight fall in numbers during year
2016/17 was a statistical ‘blip’ when compared to the average calculated for a five-year
trend. During 2017/18, 877 such cases (an increase of 59) were subject to detailed
examination by the Service. Of those 877 applications which the Service staff examined indetail, 451 (51%) were assessed as raising potentially significant historic environment issues.
The incremental rise in the percentage of potential cases which were identified as raising
significant issues appears to confirm the advantages of the Service’s archaeological impact
mitigation system. Since its implementation in 2014, this award-winning revised working
method has successfully streamlined the identification and assessment of planningapplications, allowing the Service to make better use of officer time within the Service andwithin the planning services of member authorities.
At the same time, initiatives to improve access to and availability of external historic
environment data has allowed easier integration of relevant new information into the Historic
Environment Record (HER), enhancing the quality of Development Management advice andimproving the Service’s response time.
The benefits of this casework handling system on the speed of processing planningapplications can be seen in the Annual Performance Statistics set out in Appendix 1, but theenhanced performance is heavily dependent on reliable access to planning application
documents on member councils’ online services. Where localised disruption to the eplanningsystem has occurred, adverse impacts have been mitigated by the temporary reintroductionof precautionary casework consultation referrals to the Service from non-archaeological staff
within the member Councils, and by targeted requests from the Service to member Council
staff for further details on applications potentially raising significant issues.
Summary Table of Planning Applications 2012-2018
Numbers identified for detailed further
assessment

Numbers of these then assessed as raising
significant archaeological issues

Argyll & Bute
East Ayrshire
East Renfrewshire
Glasgow
Inverclyde
North Ayrshire
Renfrewshire
South Ayrshire
South Lanarkshire
West Dunbartonshire
West LothianNational Park

12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18
244 316 208 159 160 184
80
115
112
95
101
105
51
62
84
99
94
89
25
24
38
40
43
35
32
21
27
22
24
29
8
6
12
11
9
18
39
51
52
48
63
66
10
16
16
18
31
29
15
9
45
55
50
55
58
52
22
30
25
32
30
31
28
24
44
41
43
42
9
11
21
26
24
26
94 103 108
72
92
87
36
36
39
24
34
36
134 134 122 154 140 132
65
58
66
68
67
76
14
17
33
23
26
40
8
7
10
11
12
13
83
79 104 128
66
92
33
36
57
57
28
53
54
64
54
65
52
64
27
30
21
31
24
29

Total

833

926

886

866

818

(% raising issues)

877

332

369

417

413

403

451

(40%) (40%) (47%) (48%) (49%) (51%)

In addition to identifying and initiating new casework during the reporting period, the Service
also carried forward work on 301 planning application cases which had been initiated inprevious years. While one of these cases required the Service to provide an archaeologicalexpert witness for East Ayrshire Council’s representation at a major Public Local Inquiry, the
The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

2

majority of the Service’s work on these cases consisted of providing advice to developers
and to Council planning staff on the appropriate scale of fieldwork and standards of reporting
required to satisfy archaeological conditions on consents which had been granted in earlier
years and were being implemented during the reporting period. Rather more than half ofthese cases (c. 55%) involved new commercial archaeological fieldwork during the reporting
period, while the remainder involved pre-fieldwork planning discussions or post-fieldwork
analysis or reporting matters.
The Service monitors fieldwork carried out by commercial archaeological organisations in
response to planning conditions to ensure appropriate compliance. This monitoring role also
provides a measure of independent quality assurance for the developers. The scale andspread of such fieldwork activity has provided a proxy measure of development activity on
the ground in previous years. The total of 171 such cases carried forward in the reporting
period was similar to that in the preceding year, but appears to show a slight slowing down indevelopment activity compared to recent years. However, the degree of change in thereporting period is not so great as to be currently of statistical significance on its own.

Other Casework 2017-2018
In addition to casework items generated from weekly lists and planning applications, a further
348 items of other new work were initiated in the report period. (See table below, figures forthe previous year in brackets).
Pre-application planning enquiries

67

(94)

Permitted Development enquiries

46

(27)

Development Plan consultations

2(2)

Policy liaison matters

7

(10)

Historic Environment Record information management matters

97

(86)

General or Historic Environment Record enquiries

30

(26)

Other Archaeological Consultations

10

(11)

Scottish Rural Development Programme audits and other agri-environment matters

96 (100)

Other (includes items sent in error)

1

(0)

348

(356)

Total

As is to be expected, the numbers of new casework items in the different categories havevaried, but the overall total is within the range of normal annual fluctuations recorded overrecent years.
Pre-application planning enquiries
Pre-application enquiries continue to be an important area of Service casework, as they
provide an opportunity to ensure that archaeological matters are identified at as early a stage
in the planning process as possible. Nevertheless, there has been a further reduction in thenumber of such early enquiries from developers and their agents during the reporting period.
Without a more detailed breakdown of user statistics for the Service website It is not possible
to determine whether this is as a result of agents for the developers making use of the freelyavailable online information without consulting the Service for the relevant planning advice,or whether it constitutes an early sign of decreased development activity or confidence going
forward in the medium-term. Taken together with the modest down-turn in numbers of new
fieldwork projects referred to in the Planning Application Casework section above, this
The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

3continued fall in pre-application enquiries may reflect developers’ caution in project planningin the current economic and political environment.
Permitted development enquiries
There were 46 requests for assistance in connection with Scottish Water, Scottish Water
Solutions, Scottish Power, Scottish and Southern Electricity, Transerve, and Transport
Scotland proposals during the reporting period. These requests to assist the statutory
undertakers in implementing their own policies for the protection of the historic environment
have contributed to the fee income generated through the approved WoSAS Access toInformation and Charging Policy. The substantial increase in this category of casework waslargely a result of a greater number of enquiries from one of the electricity companies.
Policy matters, professional standards, and liaison with other bodies
During the reporting period, the Service continued to be consulted on, and to comment on
Scottish Government proposals for the future of the planning system.
The Service continued to represent the interests of the member councils on an Association of
Local Government Archaeological Officers (ALGAO:Scotland) workgroup on the delivery of
the aims of Historic Environment Scotland’s Scotland’s Archaeology Strategy.
During the reporting period, the Service continued to contribute to the measures included in
Scotland’s Historic Environment Data Strategy (SHED Strategy), the collaborative national
strategy for the collation, management and exchange of historic environment data.
During the reporting period, the Service provided the ‘curatorial member’ to the Inspection
Panel of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) in the assessment of two
archaeological contractors wishing to continue to be included in CIfA’s Registered
Organisation scheme.
Through membership of ALGAO:Scotland, and its ‘observer status’ at meetings of the Built
Environment Forum Scotland (BEFS), the Service was able to provide information andadvice relevant to the roles and responsibilities of the WOSAS member councils, so as tobetter inform the discussions of BEFS member organisations.
Through membership of the Scottish SMR Forum, the Service represented the interests ofthe member councils in discussions on national data standards and collaborative working
patterns between HERs and other bodies including Historic Environment Scotland, theTreasure Trove Unit, and the Improvement Service.
Historic Environment Record matters
As in previous recent years, the sustained high levels of planning application casework has
limited staff time which could be available for updating the Historic Environment Record.
However, some external assistance was provided by a volunteer HER assistant in thecurrent reporting period. During the reporting period 260 new site records were added to theHistoric Environment Record database, and amendments or additions were made to 428
existing site records, partly with the assistance of our volunteer. In addition, 270 crossreferenced archive records were created within the HER following the receipt of completed
reports on archaeological projects.
During the reporting period 239 archaeological event records were created, once again
falling slightly from the exceptional number recorded in 2015/16, but still on-trend with thehigher levels of activity recorded since 2014. This record-creation work by the Service largely
reflects the quantity of post-excavation analysis and reporting work which has been
completed by commercial archaeological contractors following past fieldwork, and can betaken as a proxy measure of the overall scale of archaeological work initiated bydevelopment management casework undertaken by the Service in previous years.
The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

4

Public engagement, training, and research assistanceDuring the reporting period, the Service assisted or liaised with three local amateurarchaeological or historical groups in the preparation of local heritage fieldwork projects orfunding bids, and assisted five PhD candidates with the provision of data for their theses, orby responding to requests for interviews or research survey responses.
In excess of twenty telephone enquiries from the public were dealt with during the initial
contact call through reference to relevant information in the HER, but because of the shortduration of the calls, these did not trigger a formal time-recording entry in the Consultations
Log module of the HER, and are thus not otherwise recorded in our annual statistics.
Over the reporting period, the Service received more than 60 working days’ assistance froma volunteer member of the public, working on the HER. The volunteer, a post-graduate
archivist, wished to extend her skill-set to include digital data management and, aftertargeted induction training on HER systems, has completed several pilot studies in dataconcordance and data entry tasks which will assist the Service in planning futurecollaborative work with national agencies.
WoSAS staff accepted an invitation to speak at a UK seminar in York arranged by Historic
England to discuss the treatment and management of archaeological issues in major
infrastructure projects.
The Service provided the ‘Archaeology in the Planning System’ element of a professional
practitioners’ training day organized by the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA).
The Service engaged with Dumfries and Galloway Council Museums Service and theDumfries and Galloway Council Archaeologist and two archaeological researchers regarding
proposals to jointly develop a Regional Archaeological Research Framework for South-west
Scotland.
Agri-environment matters
The apparent stability in the level of agri-environment casework carried out over the current
reporting period and the last disguises the fact that the majority (72%) of the cases wereconsultation requests from Forestry Commission Scotland Conservancy offices to comment
on forestry applications they had received. The remaining cases were scoping requests fromforestry agents or landowners preparing new forestry proposals or felling licenceapplications, and in only one case was a follow-up request for fee-chargeable HER
information and land management advice received.
A further recorded fall in the proportion (64.6%) of cases which meet the Service’s
performance standard for Forestry Casework (80% responses within 21 days) results fromthe Service’s decision to prioritise resourced casework. The consultation response timetable
for Forestry Commission Scotland Conservancy offices allows a four-week period for replies,
and it is this timetable which the Service has adopted to provide greater flexibility inmanaging responses to this un-resourced workload.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

5

1

Running the Service

1.1

The Service’s Joint Committee met on three occasions, on 21 September 2017, on 17
August 2017, and on 15 March 2018. The August 2017 meeting was the first of the
new Committee following Local Government elections, and included consideration of
the pre-audited annual accounts for 2016/17, as set out in governance procedures
previously agreed with Audit Scotland.

1.2

The Service's Steering Group met four times during the year to consider various
matters in connection with the running of the Service, including the ongoingassessment of alternative future service delivery models and the development ofproposals for the implementation of a preferred model.

1.3

During the reporting period, the Service carried out a cost-neutral office relocation
within the same building. The Service staff now sit within the Development Plan &City Design group, and on the same floor as Development Management colleagues.
The office move has greatly improved informal networking contacts with a range ofplanning service colleagues and has provided a much improved working environmentfor Service staff.

1.4

The balance in the Service's reserve account at year end stood at £105,318 (seeAppendix 2). The level of financial reserves at the financial year end was higher than
had been predicted because of lower salary and employee-related costs following atemporary change to staff work rostering, and because projected contingency
spending was not required. The level of financial reserves remains within the range
specified in the Service’s approved Reserves Policy.

1.5

The amount of external income generated by the Service over the report period
continued to be sustained close to previous years’ levels. An annual review of therevised Access to Information and Charging Policy approved by the Joint Committee
in March 2015 suggest that there is no immediate need to review its provisions or
charging rates. Over the reporting period, the Service received £14,500 for theprovision of archaeological information and advice to developers and their agents.

1.6

Continuing a pattern reported on in the preceding two years, there has been no
significant uptake from forestry agents for archaeological information and advice
since centrally funded transitional payments for the provision of such advice andinformation were phased out.

1.7

In each of the last three years there has been a small increase in the proportion ofplanning applications assessed as raising archaeological issues after being examined
in detail. A further increase has been recorded in the latest reporting period, taking
the proportion of cases examined which raise identifiable issues above 50% for the
first time. It is likely that this incremental rise in cases assessed as raising potential
archaeological issues is a result of improvements in several areas; the introduction ofa streamlined system of identifying and assessing relevant planning applications, thelinked reduction in the number of precautionary casework referrals to the Service fromthe Councils, and enhancements to the HER which facilitates informed assessment ofcasework.

1.8

During the reporting period, the Service was approached by the planning service ofEast Dunbartonshire Council to discuss the provision of curatorial archaeologicaladvice and HER services to the Council.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

62

Historic Environment Record Maintenance and Development
2.1

During the report period 260 new site records were added to the Historic Environment
Record (HER) database, 428 existing site records were amended, 239 archaeologicalevents records were added, and the HER was informed of the commencement of 171
new fieldwork events. Following the receipt of reports on previous archaeologicalprojects 270 archive records (indexed and cross-referenced hyperlinks to the reports
received by the Service in digital format) were created.

2.2

The Service’s website (http://www.wosas.net) was not updated regularly over thereport period, as available staff time has been directed towards a re-design to allow are-launch bringing the online content up to date with procedural changes and therequirements of the Scottish Historic Environment Data Strategy. Nevertheless,during the same period, there were over 650,000 “hits” on the existing website.

2.3

The Service continued its liaison role with the national heritage agencies as themember Councils’ representative on the Association of Local Authority Archaeological
Officers (ALGAO:Scotland), and the associated SMR Forum Scotland, in thediscussions on the development of links with other data providers. WoSAS continued
to contribute to national initiatives on a cost-neutral basis to ensure that the shareddata sources which are being developed under the Scottish Historic Environment
Data Strategy (SHED Strategy) meet the needs of the WoSAS member Councils.
During the reporting period, two data exchanges with Historic Environment Scotland
were completed.

2.4

Early engagement with the Spatial Information team of the local authority
Improvement Service has ensured that the WoSAS HER meets with the nationallyestablished protocols required to comply with the INSPIRE (Scotland) 2009
Regulations concerning public access to spatial data. During the reporting period, theImprovement Service’s new Spatial Hub website was launched and spatial data on
the historic environment for all the WoSAS member Councils was mounted on the
portal at its launch. The Spatial Hub is designed to allow local authorities to meet theirstatutory responsibilities for spatial data access without having to set up their own
INSPIRE-compliant portals. By providing collated and curated HER data to the Spatial
Hub on an agreed six-monthly basis, WoSAS will assist member councils to meet thislegal requirement without the need for additional resources.

2.5

Throughout the reporting period, the Service engaged in the ‘OASIS validation’ ofdraft archaeological reports received by the HER following data entry or editing by theauthors. OASIS is a UK-wide national archaeological data repository set up at the
University of York with funding from national agencies. It is designed to holdarchaeological reports and information from across the heritage sector. Local
authorities have been given a major role in the validation of the reports generated,
and in integrating the finalised and validated information into local HERs so it remains
available for local researchers and the commercial sector in future. Discussions areunderway to update and improve the OASIS reporting system, and the WoSAS HER
has contributed to these discussions to ensure the final version is fit for purpose in themodern planning system.

2.6

Over the reporting period, the Service received more than 60 working days’
assistance from a volunteer member of the public, working on the HER. The
volunteer, a post-graduate archivist, wished to broaden her areas of knowledge andexpertise, and to extend her skill-set to include digital data management. Following
brief targeted induction training on general HER systems, and on the specificstructure of the WoSAS HER, the volunteer completed several pilot studies in dataconcordance and data entry tasks, the results of which will assist the Service in
The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

7

quantifying the scale of resources needed to engage with possible future collaborative
projects with national agencies.
2.7

During the reporting period, the Service assisted or liaised with three local amateurarchaeological or historical groups in the preparation of local heritage fieldwork
projects or funding bids, and dealt with more than 20 short-duration telephoneenquiries regarding HER information on specific sites or areas.

2.8

Service staff assisted five PhD candidates with the provision of data for their theses,
or by responding to requests for interviews or research survey responses.

2.9

The Service engaged with Dumfries and Galloway Council Museums Service and theDumfries and Galloway Council Archaeologist to compare HER data standards andprovide an assessment of the feasibility of using the combined Local Authority data tobring forward a funding bid for a project to jointly develop a Regional ArchaeologicalResearch Framework for South-west Scotland.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

8

3

Advice to Argyll and Bute Council
Development Management Advice

3.1

Over the report period 52 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 184 new planning applications were identified asraising potential archaeological issues, 168 by the Archaeology Service and 16 by
Council staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 64 planning applications
which had been submitted in previous years.

3.2

The 184 new planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of thepolicy and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. Of the 184 applications, 179 (97.28%) were actioned within 21 days (ourperformance standard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

WoSAS

Refusal of planning application recommended
Archaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition requiredStandings buildings survey condition
Avoidance/protection within, or to side of development
Refer to Historic Environment Scotland (Scheduled or Listed asset)
No issue, or no action possible

2
10
30
47
1
2
4
72
168

TotalsCouncil

5
1
1
1
1
7
16

Total of
cases

2
15
31
48
2
2
5
79
184

Altogether, 105 of the 184 planning applications (57.1%) identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework examples
3.3

Refusal of the submitted planning application was recommended in two cases, thefirst of which was for the erection of a single wind turbine close to nationally important
Scheduled Monuments near Benderloch, where the application had been supported
by an archaeological and cultural heritage assessment which was found to be
factually incorrect and seriously misleading. A proper assessment of the potential
impacts on the landscape settings of 29 nationally important sites had not been
undertaken, and so it was impossible for the Council to make a fully informed decisionon the application. A further application was for the erection of a small telecoms maston Colonsay,

3.4

Proposals to erect buildings for a fish hatchery at Machrihanish were identified as
threatening the extant remains of a historically important telegraph and early wirelessstation. Following additional research, and liaison with Historic Environment Scotland
regarding their assessment of the site against the criteria for designation as aScheduled Monument, the Service advised refusal of plans as currently constituted,
but said that it might be possible to redesign the development layout to preserve thesignificant elements of the radio station in situ and address the issue of direct impact
on sub-surface remains through the attachment of conditions on any consent for arevised proposal.

3.5

The continuing archaeological work in advance of sand and gravel quarrying at
Kilmartin Quarry has uncovered remains of a Neolithic domestic settlement, incontrast to the extensive ritual remains found previously. In addition to the 4,000
year-old settlement, evidence of medieval occupation of the site and a slightly later
The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

9

clamp kiln were also found, showing that the large area excavation will reveal more of
the lives of the people who lived there from deep prehistory to the recent past.
Other Advice within the Council's Area
3.6

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including Council
staff, in respect of 110 other items of casework, including 9 pre-application enquiries,
8 HER site information queries or public enquiries, and 21 enquiries from statutory
undertakers.

.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

104

Advice to East Ayrshire Council
Development Management Advice

4.1

Over the report period 49 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 89 new planning applications were identified as raisingpotential archaeological issues, 31 by the Archaeology Service and 58 by Council
staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 25 planning applications which
had been submitted in previous years.

4.2

The 89 new planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of the policy
and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. Of the 89 applications, 87 (97.75%) were actioned within 21 days (ourperformance standard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

WoSAS

CouncilArchaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition requiredStandings buildings survey condition
Refer to Historic Environment Scotland (Scheduled or Listed asset)
No issue, or no action possible

Total of
cases

2
7
6

1
9
7
2

3
16
13
2
1
54
89

Totals

1
15
31

39
58

Altogether, 35 of the 89 planning applications (39.3%) identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework example
4.3

The Service continued its support for the council in its objection to the major leisureand tourism development proposed within the nationally important designated Garden
and Designed Landscape surrounding Loudoun Castle, near Galston. An
archaeological expert witness from the Service appeared at the Public Local Inquiry
as part of the Council’s team of specialists. While in favour of the principle of thedevelopment, the council remains of the view that the applicant has not provided
sufficient information to accurately assess whether or not the project could succeed inits stated aims regarding the castle, a ruined ‘A’ Listed ruined mansion, without
detriment to the equally important Designed Landscape and other heritage assets.
Other Advice within the Council's Area

4.4

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including Council
staff, in respect of 17 other items of casework, including 10 pre-application enquiries,
and 2 HER site information queries or public enquiries.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

11

5

Advice to East Renfrewshire Council
Development Management Advice

5.1

Over the report period 53 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 29 new planning applications were identified as raisingpotential archaeological issues, 11 by the Archaeology Service and 18 by Council
staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 12 planning applications which
had been submitted in previous years.

5.2

The 29 new planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of the policy
and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. Of the 29 applications, 27 (93.1%) were actioned within 21 days (ourperformance standard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

WoSAS

CouncilArchaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition required
Avoidance/protection within, or to side of development
No issue, no action possible, including no issue after further work

Total of
cases

1
1
4
0
5
11

0
5
6
1
6
18

1
6
10
1
11
29

Totals

Altogether, 18 of the 29 planning applications (62.1%) identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework example
5.3

The way in which the modern planning system deals with archaeological issues
without adversely affecting the aims of supporting sustainable development was
illustrated by the progress of a large-scale housing development at Maidenhill,
Newton Mearns. As the need to address potential archaeological issues had been
flagged up at an earlier stage, the developer in this case arranged for the field
evaluation of four areas to be undertaken before the submission of the detailed
applications. The scope of the extensive evaluations was agreed with WoSAS in
advance, and following professional best practice, the developer commissioned
further excavation to record surviving but vulnerable archaeological remains whichwere identified. Although the fieldwork elements of the archaeological mitigation wellalready well advanced when the application was determined, archaeologicalconditions were attached to planning consent to ensure that the Council retained thenecessary powers to ensure that the agreed post-excavation analysis and reportingwas completed to a satisfactory standard.
Other Advice within the Council's Area

5.4

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including Council
staff, in respect of 5 other items of casework, including 1 pre-application enquiry, and
1 HER site information query.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

126

Advice to Glasgow City Council
Development Management Advice

6.1

Over the report period 50 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 66 new planning applications were identified as raisingpotential archaeological issues, 50 by the Archaeology Service and 16 by Council
staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 24 planning applications which
had been submitted in previous years.

6.2

The 66 new planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of the policy
and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. Of the 66 applications, 56 (84.8%) were actioned within 21 days (ourperformance standard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

WoSAS

CouncilRefusal of planning application recommended
Archaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition requiredStandings buildings survey condition
Refer to Historic Environment Scotland (Scheduled or Listed asset)
No issue, no action possible, including no issue after further work

Total of
cases

1
10
10
0
2
3
24
50

0
1
1
1
0
0
13
16

1
11
11
1
1
3
37
66

Totals

Altogether, 29 of the 66 planning applications (43.9%) identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework example
6.3

The Service recommended the refusal of the submitted planning application for amixed use development on the site of the Govan Graving Docks, on the south side of
Clyde close to the city centre. The historical importance of the Govan Graving Docksis reflected in their designation as an ‘A’ Listed structure. The Service’s preapplication advice and recommendations to the developer regarding the criticalelements of the Graving Docks site which should be respected in new proposals
appeared not to have been incorporated into the final submitted design. Althoughsupporting documents correctly stated that it would be possible to mitigate directarchaeological impacts through building recording and archaeological monitoring
work, the overall assessment did not address the likely impacts on the setting of thedocks. Several tall towers would visually overwhelm and overshadow the generally
low-lying dock infrastructure, and remove its connection with its historicalsurroundings in views in to the site from nearby viewpoints.
Other Advice within the Council's Area

6.4

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including Council
staff, in respect of 26 other items of casework, including 8 pre-application enquiries, 4
HER site information queries or public enquiries, and 3 enquiries regarding statutory
undertakings.

6.5

During the report period the manager of the Service represented the Council on theAntonine Wall Research Group and contributed to discussions on revisions to the
Supplementary Planning Guidance for development management in and around theAntonine Wall World Heritage Site.
The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

13

7

Advice to North Ayrshire Council
Development Management Advice

7.1

Over the report period 52 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 52 new planning applications were identified as raisingpotential archaeological issues, 40 by the Archaeology Service and 12 by Council
staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 21 planning applications which
had been submitted in previous years.

7.2

The 52 new planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of the policy
and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. Of the 52 applications, 49 (94.2%) were actioned within 21 days (ourperformance standard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

WoSAS

CouncilArchaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition required
No issue, no action possible, including no issue after further work

Total of
cases

6
9
9
16
40

0
5
2
5
12

6
14
11
21
52

Totals

Altogether, 31 of the 52 planning applications (59.6%) identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework example
7.3

During the reporting period, details of the post-excavation findings from the extensive
archaeological works at Hunterston Power Station were disseminated. Analysis of therecords made on site, and of the finds and samples recovered have revealed that thiswas an important multi-phase coastal site where a Neolithic settlement enclosure was
replaced in the Early Bronze Age, and then further elaborated with entrance
fortifications in the Late Bronze Age. A series of palisaded circular features were thenconstructed within it from this period until the end of the Iron Age. All of this is on thesame site, providing a rare occurrence of continuity on a single site across several
centuries. Evidence for early iron working evidence was found in these later phases
covering the critical boundary between the Bronze and Iron Ages, a critical time forhuman development in Europe.
Other Advice within the Council's Area

7.4

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including Council
staff, in respect of 26 other items of casework, including 4 pre-application enquiries, 2
HER site information queries or public enquiries, and 6 enquiries from statutory
undertakers.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

148

Advice to Renfrewshire Council
Development Management Advice

8.1

Over the report period 48 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 42 new planning applications were identified as raisingpotential archaeological issues, 29 by the Archaeology Service and 13 by Council
staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 15 planning applications which
had been submitted in previous years.

8.2

The 42 identified planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of thepolicy and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. All 42 applications (100%) were actioned within 21 days (our performancestandard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

Refusal of planning application recommended
Archaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition requiredStandings buildings survey condition
No issue, no action possible, including no issue after further work

TotalsWoSAS

Council

Total of
cases

2
7
4
3
13
29

1
0
6
3
0
3
13

1
2
13
7
3
16
42

Altogether, 26 of the 42 planning (61.9%) applications identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework example
8.3

Refusal of the submitted planning application was recommended in relation to an
application for the erection of twelve houses with car parking and landscaping on partof Old Ranfurly Golf Club, Bridge of Weir. The proposed site lies close to the masonryremains of Ranfurly Castle, a late medieval tower-house and near the earthwork
remains of its earth-and-timber predecessor on Castle Hill. Both sites are protected inlaw as Scheduled Monuments. The proximity of the important lordly residences, andsome historical evidence of ancillary medieval activity and later industrial
development within the site raised potential direct archaeological issues which could
have been addressed through the attachment of suitable conditions. However, thepredicted adverse impacts on the current landscape setting of the two castles were
judged to be significant enough to warrant refusal of the application on historic
environment planning policy grounds.
Other Advice within the Council’s Area

8.4

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including Council
staff, in respect of 15 other items of casework, including 4 pre-application enquiries, 1
HER site information queries or public enquiries, and 6 enquiries from statutory
undertakers.

8.5

The Service continued to advise on the historic environment implications of thecouncil’s new City Deal projects, and continues to meet with design teams in order tominimise risks of delays or unforeseen archaeological costs.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

15

9

Advice to South Ayrshire Council
Development Management Advice

9.1

Over the report period 45 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 87 new planning applications were identified as raisingpotential archaeological issues, 44 by the Archaeology Service and 43 by Council
staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 31 planning applications which
had been submitted in previous years.

9.2

The 87 new planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of the policy
and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. Of the 87 applications, 84 (96.6%) were actioned within 21 days (ourperformance standard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

WoSAS

CouncilRefusal of planning application recommended
Archaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition requiredStandings buildings survey condition
No issue, no action possible, including no issue after further work

Total of
cases

1
4
3
14
1
21
44

0
2
5
5
1
30
43

1
6
8
19
2
51
87

Totals

Altogether, 36 of the 87 planning applications (41.4%) identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework example
9.3

Refusal of the submitted planning application was recommended where the proposeddevelopment of a house lay adjacent to the nationally important ruins of the 12th
century St Nicholas’ church, Prestwick. Although a small-scale development, thelocation and detailed design raised very serious direct and indirect archaeologicalissues. Direct issues concerned the likelihood of any development disturbing
medieval buried human remains, as the wall enclosing the modern graveyard aroundthe ruined church is suspected to have been built within a larger pre-Reformation
burial ground of more irregular shape. In addition, the proposed house would havecompleted the encirclement of the ruined church by modern development, and would
have been of such a scale as to obscure the nationally important church ruins fromview in the open aspect towards the nearby railway line and beyond that, the sea.
Other Advice within the Council's Area

9.4

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including Council
staff, in respect of 23 other items of casework, which included 12 pre-applicationenquiries, 1 HER site information query, and 2 enquiries from statutory undertakers.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

16

10

Advice to South Lanarkshire Council
Development Management Advice

10.1

Over the report period 49 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 132 new planning applications were identified as raisingpotential archaeological issues, 77 by the Archaeology Service and 55 by Council
staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 56 planning applications which
had been submitted in previous years.

10.2

The 132 new planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of thepolicy and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. Of the 132 applications, 127 (96.2%) were actioned within 21 days (ourperformance standard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

WoSAS

CouncilRefusal of planning application recommended
Archaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition required
Refer to Historic Environment Scotland (Scheduled or Listed asset)
No issue, or no action possible

Total of
cases

0
8
19
18
0
32
77

2
4
14
10
1
24
55

2
12
33
28
1
56
132

Totals

Altogether, 76 of the 132 planning applications (57.6%) identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework example
10.3

The Service recommended the refusal of two Wind Farm applications in the Upper
Ward of Lanarkshire because of their likely adverse impacts on nationally important
heritage assets. A number of contentious applications have been opposed in recent
years, either through refusal of planning consent, or through formal objection by theCouncil to S36 applications to the Scottish Government under the Electricity Acts. A
further appeal case at Priestgill, on the edge of the existing Clyde Wind Farm wasundergoing assessment by the DPES Reporters’ Unit during the reporting period.
Through the submission of written statements arguing the Council’s case against thatof the appellant, it was possible for the Service to raise important points of principle
about the roles and responsibilities of local authorities with regard to the managementof landscape change affecting the historic environment. This formal exchange ofviews led to the historic environment issue being addressed in greater detail thanother factors affecting the development, and prompted a decision by the Reporters tohold a Public Inquiry Hearing Session on the matter, to take place after the current
reporting period.
Other Advice in the Council's Area

10.4

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including Council
staff, in respect of 53 other items of casework, including 7 pre-application enquiries,
4 HER site information queries or public enquiries, and 7 enquiries from statutory
undertakers.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

17

11

Advice to West Dunbartonshire Council
Development Management Advice

11.1

Over the report period 53 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 40 new planning applications were identified as raisingpotential archaeological issues, 12 by the Archaeology Service and 28 by Council
staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 18 planning applications which
had been submitted in previous years.

11.2

The 40 identified planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of thepolicy and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. Of the 40 applications, 37 (92.5%) were actioned within 21 days (ourperformance standard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

WoSAS

CouncilRefusal of planning application recommended
Archaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition required
Refer to Historic Scotland (scheduled monument or listed building)
No issue, no action possible, including no issue after further work

Total of
cases

0
0
1
3
0
8
12

1
2
1
4
1
19
28

1
2
2
7
1
27
40

Totals

Altogether, 13 of the 40 planning applications (32.5%) identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework example
11.3

The Service recommended that development of a replacement agricultural building at
Mount Pleasant Farm near Old Kilpatrick be resisted as the site lay directly on the lineof the Antonine Wall Roman frontier, now a World Heritage Site. The Service advisedthat the submission of the proposals through the Agricultural Prior Notification
process did not comply with national policies, and that a full planning application
would be the more appropriate route to seek consent. Lengthy discussions andnegotiations were initiated to find a compromise solution, which had not been
resolved at the end of the reporting period. This case exemplifies the sometimes
complex way in which historic environment issues interface with the planning systemand the limitations of planning authorities’ powers.
Other Advice within the Council's Area

11.4

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including Council
staff, in respect of 9 other items of casework, including 1 pre-application enquiry, and
1 HER site information query.

11.5

During the report period the manager of the Service also represented the Council on
the Antonine Wall Research Group and contributed to discussions on revisions to the
Supplementary Planning Guidance for development management in and around theAntonine Wall World Heritage Site.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

18

12

Advice to West Lothian Council
Development Management Advice

12.1

Over the report period 47 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 92 new planning applications were identified as raisingpotential archaeological issues, 47 by the Archaeology Service and 45 by Council
staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 21 planning applications which
had been submitted in previous years.

12.2

The 92 new planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of the policy
and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. Of the 92 applications, 89 (96.7%) were actioned within 21 days (ourperformance standard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

WoSAS

CouncilArchaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition requiredStandings buildings survey condition
Avoidance/protection within, or to side of development
Refer to Historic Environment Scotland (Scheduled or Listed asset)
No issue, no action possible, including no issue after further work

Total of
cases

7
12
7
1
2
2
16
47

2
14
5
0
0
1
23
45

9
26
12
1
2
3
39
92

Totals

Altogether, 53 of the 92 planning applications (57.6%) identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework example
12.3

The development of further car parking spaces at Beecraigs Country Park waspreceded by archaeological excavation, as the previous phase of development on thehilltop site had identified a prehistoric timber circle and a ploughed-out burial mound,and hints of other, more domestic features. Fragments of two further circularprehistoric features were identified and fully excavated, despite earlier unauthorised
disturbance to the site’s development footprint.
Other Advice within the Council's Area

12.4

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including Council
staff, in respect of 37 other items of casework, including 6 pre-application enquiries, 6
HER site information queries or public enquiries, and 1 enquiry from a statutory
undertaker.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

19

13

Advice to the Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park Authority

13.1

Archaeological advice is provided to the National Park Authority planning service
under the terms of a chargeable Service Level Agreement covering the whole of the
National Park area. In the year 2016-17 the National Park Authority paid £16,667 to
the Service for archaeological planning advice, and other historic environment advice.
Development Management Advice

13.2

Over the report period 51 weekly lists of planning applications from the Council weremonitored by the Service and 64 new planning applications were identified as raisingpotential archaeological issues, 24 by the Archaeology Service and 40 by Park
Authority staff. In addition further work was done in respect of 14 planningapplications which had been submitted in previous years.

13.3

The 64 identified planning applications were assessed by the Service in terms of thepolicy and guidance contained in Scottish Planning Policy and Planning Advice Note
2/2011. Of the 64 applications, 60 (93.8%) were actioned within 21 days (ourperformance standard is 80%), with the results set out in the table below:
Potential issues first identified by:

WoSAS

CouncilArchaeological assessment or evaluation prior to determination required
Negative suspensive condition requiring archaeological excavation
Archaeological watching brief condition requiredStandings buildings survey condition
Avoidance/protection within or to side of development
No issue, no action possible, including no issue after further work

Total of
cases

5
3
1
1
0
14
24

4
4
8
2
1
21
40

9
7
9
3
1
35
64

Totals

Altogether, 29 of the 64 planning applications (45.3%) identified for detailed
assessment required some form of response to address the potential impacts of the
proposals on archaeological remains.
Casework example
13.4

An archaeological excavation in advance of housing development at Succoth,overlooking the head of Loch Long, identified a long sequence of prehistoric activity
on the site from the Neolithic period onwards. The latest features on the site
appeared to be part of a circular structure, but its date, and that of the earlier features
could not be established accurately from the stratigraphic analysis. As is common
with excavations on prehistoric sites, a full interpretation of the evidence recovered
and recorded during fieldwork will only be possible when post-excavation analysis
work has been completed.
Other Advice within the National Park Authority’s Area

13.5

During the report period advice was provided to a variety of clients, including National
Park Authority staff, in respect of 17 other items of casework including 6 preapplication enquiries, 7 forestry consultations, and 2 enquiries from statutory
undertakers.

13.6

During the report period the manager of the Service also represented the National
Park Authority in online discussions with other members of the National Parks
Historic Environment Working Group and contributed to discussions on policy mattersrelevant to the Park.

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

20

14

Information and Advice to Developers/Agents and to Statutory Undertakers

14.1

There were 67 requests for pre-application information and advice from developers or
their agents, including 32 requests for Historic Environment Record digital extracts. In
addition, detailed advice on the implementation of planning conditions was provided
to archaeological contractors working for developers on 75 cases where planningpermission had been granted in previous years.

14.2

There were 46 requests for assistance in connection with Scottish Water, Scottish
Water Solutions, Scottish Power, Scottish and Southern Electricity, Transerve, andTransport Scotland proposals. The substantial increase in this type of casework waslargely a result of increased enquiries from one of the electricity companies. Theseenquiries were generally in relation to advice to assist the statutory undertakers in
implementing their own policies for the protection of the historic environment while
operating under Permitted Development Rights. In those cases where archaeologicalinformation or advice was provided and where fieldwork interventions wererecommended, relevant fees were levied by the Service through its approved Accessto Information and Charging Policy.

14.3

During the reporting period the provision of assistance to developers and their agentsin accordance with the WoSAS Access to Information and Charging Policy generated£14,500 income for the Service.

15

Agri-Environment Advice

15.1

Changes in 2014 to funding priorities for national agri-environment schemes and to
the treatment of historic environment assets within their site boundaries resulted in aweakening of the importance of historic environment factors in central government
decision-making for the current scheme except with regard to forestry projects.

15.2

Continuing an established pattern which has been reported on in the preceding two
years, in the current reporting period there has been no significant uptake fromforestry agents for archaeological information and advice since centrally fundedtransitional payments for its provision were phased out. Despite renewed Forestry
Authority guidance on the validity of local authorities’ fee-charging for thisarchaeological service, and clarification that such fees were eligible to be met fromthe existing public grant, only one commercial request for information and advice wascommissioned in the reporting period. Consultation with other local authority
archaeological services indicates that similar procedural failings are beginning to beexperienced across Scotland in increasing numbers and in more areas.

15.3

Except in the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park area where the National
Park Authority has itself underwritten the costs of providing such advice to forestry
agents planning new forestry projects or felling proposals, any such consultations aretreated as un-resourced work, and removed from our priority work-load lists.

15.4

As priority caseloads permit, the Service continues to respond to consultations onforestry proposals when these are sent as part of the Forestry Authority’s Local
Authority consultation process. However, responses are limited to general advice andsummary information, or to drawing attention to what appears to be incomplete orinadequate provision for the historic environment within the proposals where this isapparent. As this is now not part of our priority work-load, we conform to the Forestry
Commission’s longer response timetable, which has led to a concomitant reduction in
the proportion of cases which meet the Service’s own, shorter, internal performancestandard for Forestry Casework in “Other Work Areas” (see Appendix 1).
The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

21

Appendix 1
Annual Performance Statistics 2017-18 (figures for the previous year in brackets forcomparison)

Monitoring of Weekly lists of planning applications
The performance standard in the WoSAS Service Level Agreement for this area ofwork is for 90% to be monitored and actioned within 14 calendar days of receipt.
Performance

100.00%(99.82%)

Planning and Listed Building Consultations
The performance standard in the WoSAS Service Level Agreement for this area ofwork is for 80% to be actioned within 21 calendar days of receipt.
Planning Applications
Argyll & Bute
East Ayrshire
East Renfrewshire
Glasgow City
North Ayrshire
Renfrewshire
South Ayrshire
South Lanarkshire
West Dunbartonshire
West LothianLoch Lomond & The Trossachs

97.28%
97.75%
93.10%
84.85%
94.23%
100.00%96.55%
96.21%
92.50%
96.74%
93.75%(83.65%)(91.40%)(95.83%)(80.65%)(94.83%)(97.67%)(92.47%)(91.43%)(88.89%)(95.39%)(98.00%)Overall Planning Application Performance

95.44%(90.54%)

Other Work Areas
The performance standard for this area of work is for 80% to be actioned within 21
calendar days of receipt.
Pre-Application Enquiries
Permitted Dev’t/Statutory Undertakings
General/HER Enquiries
Other Archaeological Consultations
SRDP/Forestry Casework

88.06%
86.96%
90.00%
100.00%64.58%(87.64%)(76.92%)(100.00%)(87.50%)(77.00%)Overall Other Work Performance

79.52%(83.47%)The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

22Appendix 2

WEST OF SCOTLAND ARCHAEOLOGY SERVICEINCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNTFOR THE YEAR TO 31 MARCH 20182016/17£2017/18£
Income128,095
30,874609

Contribution from participating authorities
Fees & Charges
Interest on balances

128,095
31,167449

159, 578

Total Income

159, 711

Expenditure
Employee Costs

150,841

Salaries, NI & Superannuation &Employee Related Costs

136,088

Administration Costs
140
2,145
6,700
2,900
32
0
0
1,880
13,797

Fees & Subscriptions
Travel & Subsistence
Rents
Equipment Purchase & maintenance
Catering
Building repairs and security
Purchase of services (miscellaneous)
Audit Fee

140
1,509
6,700
2,900
89
0
0
1,920
13,258

164,638

Total Expenditure

149,346(5,060)100,013

Surplus/(Deficit) for Year
Surplus Brought Forward

10,365
94,953

94,953

Accumulated Surplus

105,318

The Archaeology Service of the Councils of Argyll & Bute, East Ayrshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow City,
North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire, South Lanarkshire, West Dunbartonshire and West Lothian,and of the Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority.

23