before it diversifies too much from the interesting LOLs and even better,
SWALK (thanks michael, your sorely missed in merseyside!), a note on our
approach.
At this point in time we are not considering implementing that part of
PPS23 re DS on evry sensitive (housing site) as our method would appear
to 'nip it in the bud'.
At application stage, we use our contaminated land analysis module (common
to all merseryside LAs) to 'assess' any potential con land issues
associated with it. If there is nothing identifed in this way, then no con
land condition goes on the site.
This system works very well in what is a hugely contaminated land
Borough / area.
I would be more concerned with the sites we do identify and correctly
interpretating PPS23 in terms of assessing the site i.e. on and off site
receptors.
As many CLOs out there appear to be disregarding extentions etc on the
basis of resource issues or they are lesser risk, I do wonder whether they
would apply the same 'rules' if their borough had quite such 'heavyily'
contaminated sites as we do!
Oh, and for the benefit of our friends at leivrpol, the spull chucker has
jest faled!!
|