Would broadly agree with this but think, in terms of small developments, that officers need to consider their areas when deciding how to address small sensitive developments (especially when creating new units associated with gardens) not associated with any obvious sources of contamination.  I am aware of areas in London (and no doubt this would be repeated in some urban areas across the country) where the usual suspects are at levels that are likely to have resulted in harm for no apparent reason… I generally ask for a simpler range of information rather than reporting.

 

Maybe a bit simplistic but, in terms of new builds which create new units with gardens, I’ve never seen the difference between 1 unit and a major dev of 10 or more.

 

Thanks

 

Robert

 

Robert Tyler
Principal Pollution Control Officer - Land, Air & Water 

 

London Borough of Hackney

Public Realm

Neighbourhoods & Housing Directorate

PO Box 70210

E8 9EJ 

Tel: 020 8356 4827 

 

For further information on Land, Water and Air issues see:  http://www.hackney.gov.uk/pollution-2.htm 

 

Sign up to be warned of Medium and High Air Pollution Events in London: http://www.hackney.gov.uk/airtext

 

Disclaimers:
1. General Environmental Information: Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of the information and data provided within this correspondence, the Council accept no liability for any loss or damage howsoever caused arising from any reliance placed by any other person upon the information and data contained herein.


2. Relating to Planning and Olympics Issues: The responsibility to properly address contaminated land issues, including safe development and secure occupancy, and irrespective of any involvement by this Authority, lies with the owner/developer of the site.

 

From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jackson, David
Sent: 15 March 2017 10:59
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Small-scale developments

 

Hi James/Danielle,

 

I’m generally against requesting reports for sites where there is no known industrial/agricultural previous use or nearby potential ground gas sources. If I required reports for all these developments I would have to spend all my time reading them where the result of a good phase I should inevitably be no SI required for contam/gas etc. (unless the developer has gone cheap and appointed a loss leader Phase I that for some reason always seem to recommend an SI). I don’t consider this the best use of my time.    

 

I triage/vet planning apps against the LA’s potentially con land sites, landfills, radon etc. layers and decide on the need or not for conditions. I can mentally write the Phase I in my head for most sites within 5 mins.

 

So in answer to James question – Yes I do consider CLO competent persons to make the above call on smaller sites with no known previous industrial/agri use. (Although I have no idea how I would prove I am competent!!).

 

I accept that I am probably in the minority of my peers on this one..

 

Kind regards

 

Dave

 

David Jackson

Land Quality Officer

 

Wakefield Council

Regeneration & Economic Growth  |  Environmental Health  

Wakefield One  |  P.O Box 700  |  Burton Street  | Wakefield  |  WF1 2EB

 

t    0345 8506506 [Contact Centre]

m   07810152565

e   [log in to unmask]

w  www.wakefield.gov.uk/landquality

 

From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of James Nelson
Sent: 14 March 2017 5:39 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Small-scale developments

 

Hi Danielle

 

Could a contaminated land officer (CLO) be classed as a competent person?  For small (low risk sites) would the CLO advising the planners be sufficient?

 

Just some thoughts.

 

Best regards

James D Nelson 
BSc MSc CSci CChem FRSC SiLC
Associate

Discovery CE Limited
The Granary
Broadwell House Farm
Broadwell
Warwickshire
CV23 8HF
Tel       01926 813909

Mob:    07974 910931
Web:   www.dce-services.co.uk

 

On 14 March 2017 at 13:50, Danielle Newnham <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Under Planning, does anyone else accept the submission of information direct from the developer/applicant to enable the discharge of conditions? We have a questionnaire template which we used to allow applicants to complete for small-scale sites (e.g. replacement dwellings, back garden developments). The purpose of this was to avoid the need for a full contaminated land investigation on small-scale sites and so keeping the costs down for the developer. The questionnaire asks for a brief site history, any on-site waste disposal, asbestos etc. In accordance with the NPPF, it is my understanding that all assessments must be undertaken by a competent person (e.g. consultant). In my view, I put the condition on to ensure that a proper risk assessment  is undertaken. Personally, I dont see any value in the questionnaire approach - the author would not be deemed a competent person under the NPPF and they arent about to reveal information which would result in more cost/work anyway. Plus if I condition the application because of a nearby potentially contaminative use, then the questionnaire won't adequately address this.  I've withdrawn it, to the horror of many a back garden developer! Just wanted to see if anyone else was of the same/differing opinion
Thanks very much

 

 

Click here to report this email as spam.

 


The WMDC Disclaimer can be found at:

http://www.wakefield.gov.uk/site/terms-and-conditions






The contents of this email are confidential to the intended recipient at the email address to which it has been addressed. It may not be disclosed to or used by anyone other than this addressee, nor may it be copied in any way. If received in error, please contact Hackney Council, www.hackney.gov.uk on 020 8356 3000 (out of hours - 020 8356 2300) quoting the name of the sender and the addressee and then delete it from your system. Please note that neither Hackney Council nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan the email and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Hackney Council by means of email communications.Please note that Hackney Council reserves the right to monitor emails for the purpose of monitoring or communications relevant to the Company’s business under the Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practice) (Interception Of Communications) Regulations 2000 (S.I. 2000/2699) ("the Regulations") for the following reasons: to investigate or detect the unauthorised use of the systems, e.g. that this policy is being observed, that no discriminatory or offensive content appears in emails; to maintain an adequate level of security for our computer systems; to detect any computer viruses; to check mailboxes of absent employees. To exercise its right under the Regulations, Hackney Council must have made all reasonable efforts to inform every person who may use the system that interception may take place and this notice to you should be regarded as such notification..