Roslyn,
Many thanks for your response - I totally agree we shouldn't presume no
potential contamination I just can't get this message across. I've also
stressed that we shouldn't be taking on the risk because of future
liabilities but it just doesn't wash. I also can't get agreement for a
Desk Study upfront - whether it's from a professional organisation or
prepared by the applicant. The only argument I haven't tried is best
practice so I'll definitely bring this aspect to the argument.
----- Forwarded by Tracy Hilton/AREAMANAGEMENT/RCBC on 23/07/2008 09:32
-----
Roslyn McIntosh
<roslyn.mcintosh@invercl To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
yde.gov.uk> cc:
Subject: RE: Planning Conditions
22/07/2008 15:59
In situations where for whatever reason there are no Planning Conditions, I
have referred to Building Standards 3.1. - Of course this might be
different down your way.
In any proposed development, it would be a great leap of faith to assume
there is no potential contamination within the site.
It is truly greenfield with absolutely no previous activity (including
spraying of herbicides etc), completely isolated from the possibility of
unlicensed tipping activities, confirmation that there were no unmapped
ordnance activities and at no risk of onsite migration of contaminants from
other sites? Have you robust records, PI Insurance and time to conduct
such an assessment?
It seems that PPS23 can be interpreted as you like. Could it be argued
that this is not precautionary, but best practice?
Would suggest you advise the Planning Officers that the developer should
take on the risk rather than the local planning authority and compromise
with a condition for a desk top study as you suggest - then let the
developer follow the lead of the appointed consultant (who will also have
Professional Indemnity Insurance).
Hope this is of some assistance
Roslyn McIntosh
Contaminated Land Officer
-----Original Message-----
From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
[log in to unmask]
Sent: 22 July 2008 14:58
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Planning Conditions
Dear Subscribers,
Following previous debate on the Model Planning Conditions which was very
helpful, I am now faced with a dilemma over the advice I provide to
Planning for single dwellings on sites with no previous history of
potentially contaminative activity. I tried to convince Planning that the
applicant should submit basic Desk Study information to account for the
time lapsed since the last published map and to set the site in its
contemporary setting. I justified this with paragraph 2.27 of Annex 2 of
PPS23 which states that on a precautionary basis the possibility of
contamination should be assumed where considered uses are particularly
sensitive to contamination e.g. housing etc. I also quoted paragraph 2.42
requiring the applicant to submit information to determine whether an
application can proceed due to the proposed use being particularly
vulnerable. Planning came back with the argument that PPS23 paragraph 6
states "the precautionary principle should only be invoked when there is
good reason to believe that harmful effects may occur to human, animal or
plant health, or to the environment."
Thus, if this is how we are to interpret the precautionary principle as
detailed in Annex 2, it appears that Planning are right and it is
acceptable for us to only consult the in-house records and if no
contamination is suspected we can't justify conditioning the application
for a contaminated land survey. On top of this, Planning believe that
there is currently a legal appeal at the High Court based on abuse of the
precautionary principle but unfortunately they haven't managed to find the
details yet. Can anyone shed any light on this?
Kind regards,
Tracy Hilton
Contaminated Land Officer
Tel 01287 612420
Inverclyde Council
Email Disclaimer
This document should only be read by those persons to whom it is addressed
and is not intended to be relied upon by any
person without subsequent written confirmation of its contents.
Accordingly, Inverclyde Council disclaim all responsibility
and accept no liability (including in negligence) for the consequences for
any person acting, or refraining from acting,
on such information prior to the receipt by those persons of subsequent
written confirmation.
If you have received this E-mail message in error, please notify us
immediately by telephone.
Please also destroy and delete the message from your computer.
Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification,
distribution and/or publication of this E-mail message
is strictly prohibited.
|