And talking of planning conditions: The Technoprint v Leeds case where the judge found that Phase 1 & 2 information should have been subitted up front with an application where previous potentially contaminative land use on site was known and contaminated land should have been a major consideration.
The Contaminated Land Officer (CLO) dealing reviewing the application recommended that info up front be requested, but nevertheless the application was conditioned by the Planning Officer.
Summary:
http://www.furleypage.co.uk/news-events/newsletters/contaminated-land-and-planning-conditions/
Judgement:
http://www.4-5graysinnsquare.co.uk/uploads/docs/section5/Technoprint_judgment_24-03-2010.pdf
For other CLO's that are interested I have a summary of the case that may be useful in
Regards
Ruth
Ruth Willcox
Environmental Protection Officer (Land Quality)
Plymouth City Council
Civic Centre
Plymouth
Devon
PL1 2AA
Tel: 01752 304147
Fax: 01752 226314
Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Taylor, Christopher
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 10:43 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Planning Inspectorate Appeal Decisions reg Contaminated Land
But what about the famous East Cambridgeshire maladministration case?
http://www.lgo.org.uk/complaint-outcomes/planning/planning-archive-2007-08/east-cambridgeshire-district-council-05b01966-3-ot/
The Ombudsman found that the Council had not properly considered whether a condition needed to be imposed on the planning permission to ensure that remedial work was done prior to the properties being built.
The Council has a duty to ensure that potential contamination is considered at the Planning stage. If this is over-ridden by the decision of a Planning Inspector, can we hold him liable for maladministration if contamination is found down the line?
Regards
Christopher Taylor
Enforcement Officer
Environmental Health
Environment and Culture
Brent Council
Telephone 020 8937 5159
Fax 020 8937 5150
www.brent.gov.uk
Brent Environmental Health, Brent House, 349-357 High Road, Wembley, Middlesex, HA9 6BZ
-----Original Message-----
From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gerry McGarrity
Sent: 24 May 2011 10:20
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Planning Inspectorate Appeal Decisions reg Contaminated Land
@ David E. Jackson
"Perhaps planning inspectors and proponents should be reminded that "causing or knowingly permitting" contamination (including the introduction of a sensitive receptor to complete the PPL) is an offence under Part IIA. "
Probably not relevant as Exclusion test 1 - Excluded Activities - will in all likelihood exclude a Planning authority from Part IIA liability -
The excluded activities focus on a number of scenarios... e.g. a planning authority should not become liable just because it gave permission
--
The use of Brent Council's e-mail system may be monitored and communications read in order to secure effective operation of the system and other lawful purposes.
********************************************************************************************************************************************
BEST ACHIEVING COUNCIL OF THE YEAR
PLYMOUTH - HOST CITY FOR THE AMERICA'S CUP WORLD SERIES, 10 - 18 SEPTEMBER 2011
********************************************************************************************************************************************
IMPORTANT: This e-mail (including any attachments to it) is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged, confidential or sensitive information. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy or distribute it to any other person or take any action in reliance. If you have received it in error, please notify your system manager and the sender as soon as possible and then delete it from your system.
|