contaminated land strategy review - wakefield · 3 contaminated land strategy review october 2007...

City of Wakefield Metropolitan District Council

Environmental Protection Newton Bar Leeds Road Wakefield WF1 2TX

CONTAMINATED LAND STRATEGY REVIEW FINAL OCTOBER 2007

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT PART IIA 1990

Date of Issue: October 2007 Review Date: October 2010

Author: David Jackson Contaminated Land Officer

Authorised By: Di Widdowson Area Environmental Health

Manager

Revision Number: 1.7 Path:G:\Environment_Services\Waste_and_Environmental_Health_Services\Env Protection\Contaminated Land\Part IIA\Con Land Strategy\Strategy\Strategy Review 2007\Documents\CONTAMINATED LAND STRATEGY REVIEW2007.v1.7.doc

Status of Document: Adopted of 63

2

Contaminated Land Strategy Review October 2007

Glossary

The ‘Act’ The Environmental Protection Act, 1990

The ‘Regulations’ The Contaminated Land (England) Regulations, 2000

The ‘Guidance’ DEFRA Circular on Contaminated Land (01/2006) ‘Statutory Guidance’, which extended the former DETR Circular 02/2000 to include radioactivity

The ‘Strategy’ The Contaminated Land Strategy (Adopted January 2003)

The ‘Review’ This first Review of the Contaminated Land Strategy (2003)

Apportionment As defined by the Act, means:- Any determination by the enforcing authority under section 78F(7) (that is, a division of the costs of carrying out any remediation action between two or more appropriate persons).

Appropriate Person

As defined by section 78A(9) of the Act, means:- Any person who is an appropriate person, determined in accordance with section 78F of the Act, to bear responsibility for anything which is to be done by way of remediation in any particular case;

BGS British Geological Survey - is the world’s longest established national geological survey and the UK's premier centre for earth science information and expertise.

BVPI Best Value Performance Indicator

CLCPP Contaminated Land Capital Projects Programme

Class A Person As defined by paragraph D.5(a) of the Guidance, is a person who is an appropriate person by virtue of section 78F(2) (that is, because he has caused or knowingly permitted a pollutant to be in, on or under the land.

Class B Person As defined by paragraph D.5(c) of the Guidance, is a person who is an appropriate person by virtue of section 78F(4) or (5) (that is, because he is the owner or occupier of the land in circumstances where no Class A person can be found with respect to a particular remediation action).

Contaminant As defined by paragraph A.12 of the Guidance, is a substance that is in, on or under the land and which has the potential to cause harm, or to cause pollution of controlled waters.

Controlled Waters

As defined by section 78A(9) by reference to Part III (section 104) of the Water Resources Act 1991, which includes territorial and coastal waters, inland fresh waters, and ground waters.

Enforcing Authority

For land not designated as being a ‘special site’, the enforcing authority within Wakefield Metropolitan District is the Council. For land designated as being a ‘special site’, the enforcing authority is the Environment Agency.

3


Exclusion Any determination by the enforcing authority under section 78F(6) (that is, that a person is to be treated as not being an appropriate person) Paragraph D.5(d).

GIS Geographical Information System - a computer system for capturing, managing, integrating, manipulating, analysing, and displaying data which is spatially referenced to the Earth

GQA General Quality Assessment of controlled waters - the biological and chemical quality of rivers monitored and regulated by the Environment Agency

IPC Integrated Pollution Control - Integrated Pollution Control (IPC) controls emissions

to air, land and water from certain business processes. Processes regulated by IPC are also referred to as Part A processes.

IPPC Integrated Pollution & Prevention Control - IPPC is a regulatory system to ensure that industry adopts an integrated approach to pollution control to achieve a high level of protection for the environment and human health.

LFG Landfill Gas - a product of the degradation of biodegradable waste (any organic matter that can be broken down by micro-organisms such as paper, wood or food stuffs.)

Local Authority/Council

Wakefield Metropolitan District Council

LDF The ‘Local Development Framework’ is a series of documents, which when adopted will contain development and land use policies that will fulfil the Council's community, economic, environmental and social aims for the district in the future.

MVM Refers to the MVM Contaminated Land Database

NNR’s National Nature Reserves – areas designated by English Nature where wildlife comes first. They were established to protect the most important areas of wildlife habitat and geological formations in Britain, and as places for scientific research.

Owner As defined by section 78A(9) of the Act as being: “a person (other than the mortgagee not in possession) who, whether in his own right or as trustee for any other person, is entitled to receive the rack rent of the land, or where the land is not let at a rack rent, would be so entitled if it were so let.”

Part IIA Means Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act, 1990

Pathway As defined by paragraph A.14 of the Guidance, is one or more routes or means by, or through, which a receptor (a) is being exposed to, or affected by, a contaminant; or (b) could be so exposed or affected.

Precautionary Principle

Article 130 of the “Treaty on European Union” places the basis for environmental protection upon the ‘Precautionary Principle’. Where, in the absence of firm scientific evidence regarding the effects of a particular substance or activity, the protection of the environment should be the first concern. Furthermore, there is no need for scientific proof before preventative action is taken. In summary, the reduction of risks to the environment by taking avoiding action before any serious problem arises.

The Polluter Pays Principle

Article 130 of the “Treaty on European Union” looks to ensure that the costs of environmental damage caused by polluting activities are borne in full by the person responsible for such pollution (the polluter).

4


The principle accepts that (i) the polluter should pay for the administration of the pollution control system, UNLESS they are no longer in business; and (ii) the polluter should pay for the consequences of the pollution (e.g. compensation and remediation).

Receptor As defined by paragraph A.13 of the Guidance, is either (a)(i) in a category listed in Table A and B (see Appendix 2) as a type of receptor; and (ii) is being, or could be, harmed, by a contaminant; or (b) controlled waters which are being, or could be, polluted by a contaminant.

Register The public register maintained by the Council under section 78R of the Environmental Protection Act, 1990.

Remediation As defined by section 78A(7) of the Act, means:- • The doing of anything for the purpose of assessing the condition of (i) the

contaminated land in question; (ii) any controlled waters affected by that land; or (iii) any land adjoining or adjacent to that land;

• The doing of any works, the carrying out of any operations or the taking of any steps in relation to any such land or waters for the purpose: - (i) of preventing or minimising, or remedying or mitigating the effects of, any significant harm, or any pollution of controlled waters, by reason of which the contaminated land is such land; or (ii) of restoring the land or waters to their former state; or

• The making of subsequent inspections from time to time for the purpose of keeping under review the condition of the land or waters;

Cognate expressions shall be construed accordingly.

Remediation Action

As defined by paragraph D.5(f) of the Guidance, is any individual thing that is being, or is to be, done by way of remediation.

Remediation Package

As defined by paragraph D.5(g) of the Guidance, is all of the remediation actions, within a remediation scheme, which are referable to a particular significant pollutant linkage.

Remediation Scheme

As defined by paragraph D.5(h) of the Guidance, is the complete set or sequence of remediation actions (referable to one or more significant pollutant linkages) to be carried out with respect to the relevant land or waters.

Risk As defined by paragraph A.9 of the Guidance, is the combination of (a) the probability, or frequency, of occurrence of a defined hazard (e.g. exposure to a property of a substance with the potential to cause harm), and (b) the magnitude (including the seriousness) of the consequences.

SAC’s Special Areas of Conservation - are strictly protected sites under the EC Habitats Directive designated by English Nature

SPA’s Special Protection Areas designated by English Nature to conserve the habitat of certain rare or vulnerable birds (listed under the directive) and regularly occurring migratory birds.

Site Inspection This normally incorporates a Desktop Study, Site Walkover Survey and potentially limited sampling of a site.

5


Site Investigation This normally would include an extensive investigation of the ground conditions at a site i.e. boreholes, trail pits etc and a subsequent risk assessment based on the findings of the investigation

Special Site Land that has been designated as such by virtue of sections 78C(7) and 78D(6) of the Act, and that further defined within regulations (2), (3), and schedule (1) of the Regulations.

SPZ Source Protection Zone for groundwater’s designated by the Environment Agency to protect groundwater sources such as wells, boreholes and springs used for public drinking water supply.

SSSI’s Sites of Special Scientific Interest are designated by English Nature under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (amended 1985). The government has a duty to notify as an SSSI any land which in its opinion is of special interest by reason of any of its flora, fauna, geological or physiographical features.

Substance As defined by section 78A(9) of the Act, means any natural or artificial substance, whether in solid or liquid form or in the form of a gas or vapour.

Suitable for Use The ‘suitable for use’ approach, as defined by the Statutory Guidance, consists of three elements: 1. Ensuring that land is suitable for its current use through the identification of land where contamination is causing unacceptable risks to human health and the environment, assessed on the basis of the current use and circumstances of the land, and returning the land to a condition where such risks no longer arise. The new contaminated land regime provides the mechanism to achieve this; 2. Ensuring that land is made suitable for any new use, as planning permission is given for that new use. This is achieved by assessing the potential risks from contamination, on the basis of the proposed future use and the circumstances, before official permission is given for the development and, where necessary to avoid unacceptable risks to human health and the environment, remediating the land before the new use commences. The Town and Country Planning and Building Control statutory provisions afford the mechanism to achieve this; and 3. Limiting requirements for remediation to the work necessary to prevent unacceptable risks to human health and the environment in relation to the current use or future use of land for which planning permission is sought.

UDP The ‘Unitary Development Plan’ contains policies for the development and use of land in Wakefield District. It will be replaced by the LDF (Local Development Framework)

YAHPAC Yorkshire & Humberside Pollution Advisory Council – Land Sub Committee is a collection of local authority contaminated land representatives.

http://www.naturenet.net/law/wca.html

6


Contents Glossary 2 1 Executive Summary 8 2 Aims & Objectives of the Strategy 10 2.1 Wakefield MDC Corporate Strategy 10 2.2 The Contaminated Land Strategy & Review 11 3 The Legacy of Contaminated Land 12 3.1 The National Picture 12 3.2 The Local “Wakefield District” Picture 13 4 Overall Review of Timescales & Objectives 16 5 Information Management 18 5.1 Database Procurement 18 5.2 Scanning of Contaminated Land Files 19 5.3 Public Register 19 5.4 Information Security 19 5.5 Positional Accuracy Improvement (PAI) Programme 20 5.6 Provision of Information 20 6 Performance Management 22 6.1 BVPI Compilation & Management 22 6.2 Staff Training & Competence 23 7 Resources 24 8 Review Mechanisms 25 8.1 Ongoing Review of the Strategy 25 8.2 GIS Data Audit 25 9 Site Identification, Inspection & Remediation 27 9.1 Identification of Potentially Contaminated Land 27 9.2 Prioritisation of Potentially Contaminated Land 29 9.3 Procurement of Sampling Equipment 30 9.4 Communication of Part IIA to Major Stakeholders 30 9.5 Site Inspections 30 9.6 Reviewing Inspection Priorities 31 9.7 Reviewing Inspection Decisions 32 9.8 Remediation 32 9.9 Closed Landfill Site Monitoring 32 9.10 Public Relations 33 9.11 Insurance & Indemnity 33 10 Interaction with the Planning Regime 35 10.1 General 35 10.2 Development of Guidance for Developers 36 11 Related Reports 38 11.1 Procedural Documents 38 11.2 Policy Documents 38

7


11.3 Guidance Documents – Contaminated Land Inspections/ Investigations 38 12 Contacts 39 12.1 Contaminated Land Team 39 12.2 Internal Contacts 39 12.3 External Contacts 41 13 Consultation 43 13.1 External Consultees 43 13.2 Internal Consultees 43 13.3 Consultation Letter & Feedback Form 44 Appendices Appendix 1 – Flow Chart of Procedures for Site Inspection/Investigation 45 Appendix 2 – Insurance Certificate 48 Appendix 3 - Consultation Responses & Feedback to Consultees 51 Figures

Figure 1 Overview of Potentially Contaminated Sites Across the District 15 Figure 2 Strategy Timetable 16 Figure 2 Gantt Chart of the Strategy Timetable 17 Figure 3 BVPI Targets 22 Figure 4 GIS Datasets to be Audited 26 Figure 5 Percentage of Sites by Classification 28 Figure 6 Sites by Risk Category 29

8


1 Executive Summary 1.1 This document is the first review of the Contaminated Land Strategy adopted by the

council in January 2003. The Strategy was produced in accordance with Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (inserted by Section 57 of the Environment Act 1995) and the Contaminated Land Regulations, 2006. This review has been undertaken as part of the ongoing requirement to assess strategies to deal with the legacy of contaminated land within the district.

1.2 This report “The Review” is not intended to supersede the original strategy

“Contaminated Land Strategy (2003)” but has been written to move forward in terms of refinement on the initial strategy. No part of the original strategy has been included within this document and as such both should be viewed when referring to the revised strategy.

1.3 This review has been undertaken in line with the statutory guidance set out in the

DEFRA circular 01/2006 – Contaminated Land, as requirement to employ a strategic approach in the identification and remediation of contaminated land. This document has also been written as a continuation to review the councils statutory duty under sections s78B (1) and s78E (1) of Part IIA EPA 1990 to:

“Every local authority shall cause its area to be inspected from time to time for the purpose of:

(i) identifying contaminated land (ii) …to decide whether land……designated as a special site”

and

“…where the local authority has identified any contaminated land…the enforcing authority shall…serve a remediation notice…”

1.4 This review is intended to identify the progress made so far in implementing the

Contaminated Land Strategy since the adoption of the initial strategy in January 2003. This report is also intended to be an integrated report referencing procedures and policies for dealing with contaminated land under the Procedure & Policy Documents - Contaminated Land Series; information management systems put in place since 2003 and in addition to this the review of existent and future objectives of the contaminated land service.

1.5 The next phase of the strategy is the inspection/investigation of the potentially

contaminated sites identified so far. A Risk Assessment Model has been used to score each individual site in terms of its risk to human health and the wider environment, see Section 9.2 and Figure 6. This risk modelling has provided an Inspection Framework for land identified under Part IIA EPA1990 that will enable the higher risk sites to be inspected/investigated first. However other council

9


priorities/triggers, such as Wakefield MDC’s regeneration programme will influence the programme. The Wakefield District Regeneration Strategy 2007-2015 and the Local Development Framework’s core strategy indicate that major developments in future should be located within or close to the largest settlements. Opportunities need to be taken to re-use or redevelop vacant sites within existing industrial areas. The contaminated land service will support and assist regeneration initiatives.

The chart below demonstrates the hierarchy of the Councils priorities for dealing with contaminated land within the district.

Part IIA Site Inspections

Contaminated Land

Supporting Regeneration and Development Control

Environmental Searches

Advice to Internal Departments

Systems Development

Scanning of Contaminated Land Files

10


2 Aims & Objectives 2.1 Wakefield MDC Corporate Strategy This strategy is to be submitted in context of the:

“Developing Knowledge Communities - Wakefield District

Community Strategy” Our Vision In 25 years time Wakefield District will be a place:-

Moving forward motivated by pride and its heritage

Where our people look after themselves and each other so that they are safe and healthy, having the skills and confidence to take more control over their lives.

With places that are attractive to live, learn, work and invest in and where our diverse towns and villages work together to promote the well being of the whole District.

Where together with the younger people of the District we will ensure that the work we do now will stand the test of time.

11


2.2 The Contaminated Land Strategy & Review

.2.1 Aims

In fulfilling the Council’s responsibilities with respect to implementing environmental

2

legislation this Review in conjunction with the initial Strategy has been prepared with the main aims of:

protecting the health of the inhabitants of the District;

protecting the quality of the controlled waters within the District and beyond;

encouraging where appropriate the regeneration and redevelopment of

brownfield and contaminated sites; and,

bringing to the fore an understanding of contamination amongst landowners

2.2.2 Objectives

objectives of this revision to the initial

and potential polluters and to encourage a willingness to undertake voluntaryremediation.

The following are considered to be the main strategy:

to review and assess the original objectives set out in the first Strategy and to monitor performance

elation to changes in potential workloads to set new targets in r

to put forward an amended timetable for further review of the Strategy

elated

to demonstrate the development of a suitable Information Management System to deal with the large volume of potential sites and subsequent rinformation/data.

ntaminated land policies and procedures put in place since to inform of the coJanuary 2003

and link related reports that have been compiled in relation to

to demonstratecontaminated land.

12


3 he Legacy of Contaminated Land

have in the past allowed land to become contaminated in a manner of ways since the onset of the industrial revolution, which in Britian

3.1.2 uch

as oils and tars, heavy metals, organic compounds and soluble salts, and mining

T

3.1 The National Picture 3.1.1 All industrial societies

occurred some 350 years ago. This land includes industrial, mining and waste disposal sites. The Environment Agency has said that it expects between 5,000 and 20,000 sites in England and Wales to fall within the contaminated land regime1

Various industrial practices have led to substances being in, on or under land, s

materials that may pose a risk to human health and the wider environment. 3.1.3 rations

such as adequate precautions against leaching or the escape of landfill gases.

3.1.4 can cause

economic and financial damage. Uncertainties about remediation requirements and

3.1.5 alt with, particularly

during new development of previously used land, or in preparation for future

3.1.6 been slow to date. By 1 December 2005, of the

526 sites identified as contaminated in England and Wales, voluntary remediation

In the past, landfilling of waste took place without environmental conside

Land in this condition, if not dealt with adequately, can pose a serious threat to health or the environment, including pollution of the water environment.

As well as direct health or environmental problems, land contamination

liability for them can cause blight, deterring development of land and adding to pressures on greenfield sites, and affecting urban regeneration.

Some of the past contamination has already been found and de

development. There are very few cases within this country where land cannot be restored to some beneficial use.

Statistics show that progress has

had been agreed in only 46 cases (this figure is inflated due to multiple statements in relation to single sites) and in only 5 cases had a remediation notice actually been served2. This is perhaps not surprising. From the perspective of the regulators, primarily Local Authorities and in some instances the Environment Agency, the road from identifying contaminated land to achieving remediation is strewn with obstacles: no regulator will want to allocate significant resources to overcoming them unless there is evidence of a serious problem.

1 Dealing with Contaminated Land in England, Environment Agency, 2002) 2 Statistics for England & Wales provided by the Environment Agency

13


.2 The Local “Wakefield District” Picture

known as an administrative and industrial centre. The main business activities were agriculture, textiles, engineering and

3.2.2 he local economy over the last 20 years

with the decline of coal mining and other traditional industries. Associated with this

3.2.3 In addition to these major sites hundreds of smaller sites with contamination issues have been regulated in the same manner to ensure that the end users of the sites

3.2.4 rial sites that are likely to be redeveloped in the near future through the planning regime:

3 3.2.1 The City of Wakefield in particular is well

mining. Textile mills and factories tended to be concentrated in Wakefield itself and its suburbs to the west. The remainder of the district was and essentially still is rural peppered with distinct mining villages and small to medium sized towns. These are coal mining centres but individually they have had or have their own industrial identities: Normanton was a major rail junction and marshalling yard, Castleford had thriving pottery and glass making industries and currently produces chemicals and confectionery. Pontefract is particularly famous for its liquorice confectionery, and, Knottingley produces glass and chemicals.

There has been a dramatic restructuring of t

decline has been significant environmental degradation, dereliction and in part potential for suspected contamination. Approximately 700 hectares of the District are derelict, however many more hectares have been or are currently being transformed by reclamation and redevelopment schemes. Major sites that have had, in some instances, extensive issues with contaminated land have been regulated and cleaned up under the provisions of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 in recent years. Examples of such sites within Wakefield District are the:

Redevelopment of Pontefract Gasworks into residential housing (3 ha);

ng (17 a);

velopment of the former Prince of Wales Colliery, Pontefract into sid ntial housing/commercial premises and public open space (Planning

ld Waterfront (11 ha);

idential housing (3 ha)

Redevelopment of Lambson’s Chemical Works into residential housih Redere eDecision Pending) (245 ha); Redevelopment of the Wakefie Redevelopment of the Wultex Works, Horbury into res

are not at risk of residual contamination.

The following sites are also major indust

14


3.2.5 To date 3334 potentially contaminated sites have been identified within the District that will need to be assessed to ascertain if they meet the statutory requirements of “contaminated land”. It is extremely likely that only a small handful of these sites will

3.2.6

C6 Solutions, Castleford (Planning Application Pending), 15 ha; Sharlston Colliery, New Sharlston (Planning Approved), 62 ha;

rickley Colliery, South Elmsall (Planning Application Pending), 80 ha;

F

be contaminated to such a degree that they meet the statutory definitions of contaminated land.

Figure 1 (below) shows an overview of all potentially contaminated sites within the District.

Figure 1 – Overview of Potentially Contaminated Sites across the District

= Potentially Contaminated Sites


4 Overall Review of Time-scales & Objectives 4.1 The initial Strategy did not set any detailed timescales for its implementation other

than mid 2004 for completion of the ‘identification of potentially contaminated sites’ stage, which was actually completed in May 2006. Additional sites may be identified as and when new information is made aware to the contaminated land team.

4.2 The main reason for this delay was the lack of procurement of a data management

system that could adequately store the large amounts of data, both spatial and textual, relating to contaminated land sites. The MVM Contaminated Land Database was procured in early 2005 for this purpose. Technical problems were encountered in the implementation of the software which also caused further delays.

4.3 As part of the review process figures 2 & 3 (below) shows a timetable to reflect

changes in the workload and objectives of this strategy review and the corresponding status.

Figure 2 – Strategy Timetable

Objectives Target Date

Date Achieved

Status

Information Management Procurement of Database Scanning of Contaminated Land Files Performance BVPI Compilation & Management Staff Training/Competence Resources Internal Funding for Sampling & Equipment Internal Funding for Training/Seminars External Funding through CLCPP Review Mechanisms Strategy Review Further Strategy Review GIS Data Audit Site Identification, Inspection & Remediation Site Identification Site Prioritisation Procurement of Sampling Equipment Part IIA Communication

Mid 2004 Ad Hoc

Apr (Yearly) May 2007

Apr (Yearly) Apr (Yearly) As required

May 2007 Oct 2010

May (Yearly)

July 2005 Mar 2006 July 2007 Oct 2007

Jan 2005 Ongoing

Ongoing Ongoing

Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing

Oct 2007

n/a Ongoing

May 2006 Mar 2007 June 2007 Pending

Attained Ongoing

Ongoing Ongoing

Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing

Attained Pending Ongoing

Attained Attained Attained Pending

Commencement of Site Inspections Closed Landfill Site Monitoring Planning Development Control Development of Guidance for Developers

Dec 2007 Ongoing

Aug 2007

Pending Ongoing

July 2007

Pending Ongoing

Attained

Figure 3 – Gantt Chart of the Strategy Timetable

Milestone J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

Procurement of Database

Back Scanning of HistoricContaminated Land FilesBVPI Compilation & Management

Staff Training/Competence

Internal Funding for Sampling &EquipmentInternal Funding forTraining/SeminarsExternal Funding through CLCPP

Strategy Review

Further Strategy Review

GIS Data Audit

Site Identification

Site Prioritisation

Procurement of Sampling Equipment

Part IIA Communication

Commencement of Site Inspections

Closed Landfill Site Monitoring

Development of Guidance forDevelopers

2007 2008

YEAR

2004 2005 2006

= Milestone Pending Attainment/Ongoing = Milestone Attained

18


5 Information Management Links to Other Council Strategies, Policies & Procedures

Access to Services Strategy 2006 WMDC Website Standards, Version 1.0 WMDC Information Security Policy, Version 1.6, August 2004 Environmental Health Services Fees & Charges, 2007/8

Links to Legislation, Statutory Regulations & Guidance & EU Directives

Part IIA of the EPA 1990, Sections 78R, 78S & 78T Environmental Information Regulations 2004 Freedom of Information Act 2004 Data Protection Act 1998 ISO/IEC 17799 ‘Information Technology - Code of practice for information security management’

Links to Contaminated Land Strategies, Procedures & Policies

Contaminated Land Strategy (January 2003), Sections 6.5 & 9 Contaminated Land Public Register Procedural Document Contaminated Land 5 – Provision of Environmental Information, June 2007

Procedural Document Contaminated Land 10 – Information Management

5.1 Database Procurement 5.1.1 The central management of contaminated land information was identified in the

initial strategy as imperative to its effective implementation. The MVM Contaminated Land Module was purchased in January 2005 to store all information relating to contaminated land including sites identified for inspection under Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and sites being redeveloped under planning control. Spatial information such as the extent and boundaries of the sites are stored within the GIS component of the software.

5.1.2 The database is to be used for attaching any documents relating to a site including

incoming letter/reports, emails, photographs, file notes and any outgoing correspondence. A scanner will be available to the contaminated land team in the near future enabling paper copies of any incoming correspondence or site reports to be stored electronically on MVM.

5.1.3 The use of the MVM Contaminated Land Database should provide the following

contributions to the successful implementation of the contaminated land strategy: 1. an auditable system for reviewing and assessing contaminated land;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_17799

19


2. the systematic entry and storage of present/historic data; 3. a tool for the prioritisation of potentially contaminated sites; 4. a secure storage and password access for information that is potentially

sensitive; 5. a sustainable and updateable store of knowledge irrespective of changes in

personnel; 6. accessible data for environmental information requests and information

transfer.

5.2 Scanning of Contaminated Land Files 5.2.1 Extensive historic files exist within Environmental Protection which relate to

contaminated land that would be invaluable to the Councils statutory duty under Part IIA EPA 1990 to inspect and deal with contaminated land. At present the majority of this information is held in paper format within the Environmental Protection Section. This information will be scanned and attached electronically to the relevant record within MVM.

5.2.2 Scanning of these documents should be undertaken on ad hoc basis in line with the

staffing resources within the team at any given time. Scanning of historic documents should be de-prioritised in favour of any incoming correspondence/reports subject to the Contaminated Land Officer requesting any such back scanning.

5.3 Public Register 5.3.1 A Contaminated Land Public Register is held within the Environmental Protection

Section to record where notices have been served, or a formal remediation statement has been prepared in line with section 78R of the Act, for sites identified as contaminated land. The register will be kept at the Council’s Newton Bar Office and is available for viewing, free of charge, during normal office hours. The charge to be made for providing copies of register entries should be in line with the Sections current Fees & Charges Scheme.

5.4 Information Security 5.4.1 The security and accuracy of data is maintained through two main measures:

1. All data sets are archived in a Main Server that is backed up on a daily

basis to ensure that the data is recoverable and safeguarded against loss, damage or corruption.

2. Data sets can only be amended and updated by MVM users with admin rights.

20


5.5 Positional Accuracy Improvement (PAI) Programme 5.5.1 Ordnance Survey© is at present improving the accuracy of their 1:2500 maps

across the UK with the aim of improving accuracy from +/- 2.4m to around +/- 1.1m. The effect of this will be a subsequent shift in the background data in certain tiles in Landline/Mastermap maps of up to 10m. Consultation with the Corporate Data Mapping Services (CDMS) has indicated that the maximum inaccuracies within the background maps for Wakefield District is approximately +/- 3m. As a result data relating to contaminated land will be potentially out of alignment with the background mapping once the PAI maps are utilised by the council as background data. These datasets may have to be shifted in a corresponding manner so layers overlay each other with the desired accuracy.

5.5.2 Due to the large amounts of data it is likely that software will have to be used so

that the data can be re-aligning to the PAI Mastermap background data in a semi-automated manner. This will be managed by CDMS after the entire district has undergone the process of PAI by Ordnance Survey with GIS data holders being consulted at various stages of the process.

5.5.3 At this time the above actions are still in the development stage and are therefore

subject to change. In the event that the contaminated land datasets not being re-aligned the inaccuracy could be overcome by including a +3m buffer zone around all sites.

5.6 Provision of Information 5.6.1 The public, solicitors, consultants, owners, estate agents, developers and any other

interested parties will have access to environmental information under the Environmental Information Regulations (2004). Exclusions to the provision of such data include where the data or information is deemed commercially confidential or where a report is in an unfinished state. Contentious requests should be referred to the Information Officer (Legal Services) to make an assessment on whether information should be disclosed or not. The legislation and guidance promotes a tendency in favour of the disclosure of information.

5.6.2 Any information relating to land contamination through a planning application is

within the public domain by virtue of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. 5.6.3 Charges are levied for the provision of information in accordance with the current

fees and charges scheme.

5.6.4 Responses to requests for environmental information will be in line with the Environmental Information Regulations (2004). A response should be sent to the requester within 20 working days of a request, or 40 working days where the

21


council have to liaise with external parties or the request be sufficiently detailed and/or extensive.

5.6.5 Refer to Procedural Document Contaminated Land 5 – The Provision of

Environmental Information (June 2007) for detailed information and procedures.

22


6 Performance Management

Links to Other Council Strategies, Policies & Procedures

WMDC Corporate Performance Plans Service Improvement Plan 2007/8


Best Value Performance Indicators 216a & 216b, DCLG, 2006/7


Procedural Document Contaminated Land 6 – Performance Management

6.1 BVPI Compilation & Management 6.1.1 BVPI’s for contaminated land came into effect on the 1st April 2005 to monitor the

performance of local authorities in the implementation of their respective contaminated land strategies. The BVPI is a dual indicator that records the number of potential sites of concern within the authorities area (BVPI 216a) and the percentage number of potential sites of concern where sufficient detailed information is available to the authority (BVPI 216b). Due to a poor consensus on how this indicator is to be compiled at present the government has not set any specific performance targets. Targets may be set nationally in the future at which point it would be advisable to review the strategy.

6.1.2 Local targets have been set to monitor the performance within the contaminated

land team as indicated in figure 4 below:

Figure 4 – BVPI Targets

BVPI 216a BVPI 216b 2005/6 Outturn 2923 1 % 2005/6 Target None Set None Set 2006/7 Outturn 2948 1 % 2006/7 Target 2900 2 % 2007/8 Target 2625 3 % 2008/9 Target 2550 3 %

2009/10 Target 2475 3 % Source: WMDC Performance Management Team

23


6.1.3 All information and data relating to BVPI 216a & 216b should be collated, compiled and stored in line with Procedure Document Contaminated Land 6 – Performance Management

6.2 Staff Training/Competence 6.2.1 A commitment to implementing the requirements of Part IIA of the EPA 1990 as

presented in the initial Strategy and this Review will require an investment in providing staff with on-going training. Areas of importance should include: GIS; risk assessment; toxicology, geology, site investigations and remediation. YAHPAC are currently compiling a Contaminated Land Officer competence assessment which will be adopted by the authority when completed. Wakefield MDC has now joined the CIRIA Local Authority Contaminated Land Group, which will allow multiple delegates to go on CIRIA training courses on contaminated land.

6.2.2 The provision of sampling/monitoring equipment, expert advice and an up-to-date

library of paper and electronic reference materials are also essential to the sound operation of the service.

6.2.3 Environmental Health will be required to undertake detailed risk assessments

involving the assessment and interpretation of technical information including analytical and geological data in accordance with relevant guidance. An appropriately qualified person as having a scientific qualification at degree or equivalent level in a discipline such as geology, chemistry, biology, or biochemistry and should have at least three years experience in the assessment of contaminated sites. The Contaminated Land Officer should primarily undertake this level of work with other officers working within the team handling less complex issues or sites. These officers should consult with the Contaminated Land Officer where deemed necessary.

24


7 Resources


WMDC Corporate Performance Plans Links to Legislation, Statutory Regulations & Guidance & EU Directives

Part IIA of the EPA 1990, Section 78P Statutory Guidance DEFRA 01/2006 Circular, Annex 3, Chapter E Hampton Report ‘Reducing Administrative Burdens’, March 2005


None

7.1 General 7.1.1 During the inspection/investigation phases of the Strategy funding will be required

for any capital costs incurred. Such costs will arise mainly from:

(i) soil/water samples (ii) sampling equipment (iii) site investigation work

7.1.2 Present funding is limited and as such is likely to cover any soil/water samples that

need to be taken and any other costs associated with the effective implementation of the Strategy. Funding for site investigations and remediation work is likely to be sought by the application for Contaminated Land: Capital Projects Grants governed by DEFRA.

7.1.3 A proactive approach should be adopted by the Contaminated Land Officer in

conjunction with the direct line manager to seek alternative funding for the work detailed in section 7.1.1.

25


8 Review Mechanisms


None Links to Legislation, Statutory Regulations & Guidance & EU Directives

Statutory Guidance DEFRA 01/2006 Circular, Annex 3, Section B.13 Links to Contaminated Land Strategies, Procedures & Policies

Contaminated Land Strategy (January 2003), Section 8

8.1 Ongoing Review of the Strategy 8.1.1 This document is the first review of the initial Strategy adopted by the Council in

January 2003. It is intended that the next review should be scheduled for October 2010 and every three years after this point.

8.1.2 A Progress report will be compiled on a yearly basis to give an update on the

implementation of the strategy and to set out any changes to the inspection priorities. This is to be scheduled for April of each year in line with the BVPI’s for contaminated land.

8.2 GIS Data Audit 8.2.1 Due to changes in environmental factors; changes in current land use;

developments; infrastructure and the constant updating of this information it has been recognised that certain data within the GIS should be reviewed in May of each year primarily by the Contaminated Land Officer. Amendment to any datasets or the inclusion of new datasets should be adequately recorded in the metadata file for geographical information. Figure 5 (below) shows the various layers that are to be included in the auditing process.

26


igure 5 – GIS Datasets to be Audited F

Dataset Audit Source Aerial Photographs Local AuthorityMastermap/Landline Local Authority SSSI’s English Nature NNR’s SAC’s SPA’s RAMSAR’s

English Nature English Nature English Nature English Nature

GQA – Chemical ency GQA – Biological

Environment AgEnvironment Agency

SPZ’s Environment Agency Water Abstraction Points Environment Agency Catchment Boundaries Environment Agency Flood Environment Agency Pollution Inventory

e Abstraction

Consent DischargesIPC IPPCLicencEA Landfill

Environment Agency Environment Agency Environment Agency Environment Agency Environment Agency Environment Agency

8.2.2 eographical data of potential sources of contamination will be kept on the GIS

.2.3 A comprehensive list of all layers included within the MVM Contaminated Land

Gregardless of any changes in current land use. Any change in land use such as the development of housing on a filling station will be recorded so both datasets remain on the system. Potential site data will therefore be maintained within the system to allow for any future changes in guidance for contaminated land and for any future change of land use. If either occurs the remediated site may have to be re-inspected to ensure the site is fit for its current or intended use. In addition to this new legislation and/or guidance may come into force dictating greater conservative guideline values for contaminants warranting potential reinvestigation of some sites.

8Database can be found in Procedure Document Contaminated Land 2 – Site Prioritisation.

27


9 ite Identification, Inspection & Remediation

S


Developing Knowledge Communities - Wakefield District Community Strategy Municipal Waste Strategy, 2004

inks to Legislation, Statutory Regulations & Guidance & EU Directives L

Part IIA of the EPA 1990, Sections 78B - 78N Part IIA of the EPA 1995, Section 108 Statutory Guidance DEFRA 01/2006 Circular, Annex 3 Chapters B,C & D H66 - Protection of Workers & The General Public During the Development of

Contaminated Land, HSE, 1991

inks s, Procedures & Policies

Health & Safety At Work Act, 1974

L to Contaminated Land Strategie

Procedural Document Contaminated Land 1 – Site Identification Procedural Document Contaminated Land 2 – Site Prioritisation Procedural Document Contaminated Land 3 – Site Inspections Procedural Document Contaminated Land 4 – Inspection of Council Owned Land Procedural Document Contaminated Land 8 – Contamination Incidents & Spillages

Closed Landfill Sites Procedural Document Contaminated Land 9 – Landfill Gas Monitoring in Dwellings &

Contaminated Land Strategy, January 2003, Section 5, 6 & 7

.1 Identification of Potentially Contaminated Land

n identified as part of the site

August 2006) goes

s the number of sites in relation to the specific classifications

Contaminated Land Public Register

9 9.1.1 To date 3334 sites of potential concern have bee

identification stage of the council’s contaminated land strategy.

Procedure Document Contaminated Land 1 – Site Identification (9.1.2 into greater detail on the processes involved in the identification of sites and their storage within MVM.

Figure 6 (below) show9.1.3 within MVM. The graph demonstrates that the majority of the sites are electrical sub stations. General works, quarries, former ponds, landfills, garages/petrol filling stations, depots and collieries forming the other major types of sites within the district.

28


Figure 6 - Percentage of Sites by Classification

0 5 10 15 20 25

Animal Processing Works

Asbestos

Asphalt & Processing Works

Builders Yard

Brickw orks

Ceramics Works

Chemical Works

Colliery

Coal Yard

Depot

Dockyard

Electrical Sub Station

Engineering Works

Explosive Works

Factory

Former Farm

Fellmongers

Foundry

Fuel Tank

Garage/PFS

Gasw orks

Glassw orks

Gas Governor

Haulage & Transport

Former Hospital

Landfill - Category 1




Landfill - Undetermined

Maltings

Metal Works

Mill (General)

Mill (Food)

Milliner

Oil Refinery/Storage

Laundry

Paper & Pulp Works

Former Pond/Infilled Feature

Pow er Station

Printing Works

Quarry

Railw ay Land

Railw ay Engine Sheds

Rif le Range

Scrap Yard

Sew age Works

Sheep Dip

Unspecified Tanks

Tannery

Telephone Exchange

Textile Mill

Timber Treatment Works

Timber Products Manufacturing

% of Total Sites

Textile & Dye Works

General Works

Source: MVM Database Outputs

29


9.2 9.2.1 o

Prioritisation of Potentially Contaminated Land

The MVM Contaminated Land Database Risk Assessment Model was used tscore each individual site in terms its risk to human health and the wider environment. Figure 6 (below) demonstrates the breakdown of the sites into the corresponding risk categories ranging from ‘Category A Sites’ (high risk) to ‘Category F Sites’ (low risk). This risk modelling has provided the contaminated land team with a prioritised list of sites, an Inspection Framework, that will enablehigher risk sites to be inspected first.

Figure 6 – Sites by Risk Category

Sites by Risk Category

0.6% 8.6%

39.8%26.2%

1.6%

23.2% Category A SitesCategory B SitesCategory C SitesCategory D SitesCategory E SitesCategory F Sites

Source: MVM Database Outputs

The software is only capable of modelling a limited number of environmental parameters that may be somewhat different and more complex in the real world. Asa result some sites will have been under or over estimated in terms of their risks to both human health and the wider environment. It is not intended to take any action in this respect as inaccuracies are indicative of any model.

A decision was made prior to the prioritisation of the sites commencing that all electrical sub stations and gas governors were not to be assessed as part of this stage of the strategy. This is due to the inherently low risk of these sites and the reduction in time taken to prioritise all the sites. Subsequently all these sites fallwithin the lowest risk category (category F).

9.2.2

9.2.3

30


rioritisation (August 2007) goes into greater detail on the processes and principles involved in the prioritisation of

9.3 9.3.1

his will be essential in supporting any grant applications for site investigation through DEFRA’s Capital Projects Grants scheme.

ured. 9.3.2 oactive

9.4 9.4.1 effects

efield

, e

9.5 9.5.1 With the site identification nd p oritisa next

tentially contaminated

9.5.2

in the district. The guidance is not

9.2.4 Procedure Document Contaminated Land 2 – Site P

sites within MVM. Procurement of Sampling Equipment

The Strategy identifies the requirement for the procurement of limited sampling equipment within the contaminated land team to enable the collection of soil/water samples during any site inspections. T

This equipment has now been proc

A Landfill Gas Analyser has been procured as part of the Councils prmonitoring of landfill gas from closed landfills.

Communication of Contaminated Land Strategy to Major Stakeholders

Major stakeholders within the district will be notified in writing of the potentialof the implementation of the strategy. This is in terms of both potential liability and to advise of site inspections/investigations that may occur in the future. The letterwill also encourage the voluntary investigation/remediation of sites in line with the statutory guidance for contaminated land. The stakeholders will include: Wak& District Housing (WDH), large landowners, industry, other departments within the council, parish and town councils, utility companies, service companiesconstruction companies, garages/filling stations and major developers within thdistrict.

Site Inspections

a ri tion phases completed the Council’sphase in the implementation of the strategy is the inspection and potential investigation3 of the sites in line with the prioritised programme of work and responding to other council policies and the local regeneration programme as necessary. The main procedures relating to this phase are set out in Procedure Document Contaminated Land 3 – Site Inspections. The procedural flow diagram (Appendix 1) highlights the main steps in the inspection of poland.

‘Desk Based Reviews’ and ‘Site Walkover Guidance’ notes and templates are included within the above referenced procedural document. The main purpose of this guidance is to work towards a consistent and standardised approach in the inspection of potentially contaminated land withintended to be absolute and as such will have to be reviewed by the user to assess if they meet the individual requirements of the assessor and/or the site under

3 Refer to Glossary

31


spection. No guidance has been produced for site investigations due to the varied investigation. Such investigations will be

governed by the individual officer/consultant carrying out the work, current

9.5.3

mercial/industrial premises. Emphasis should be placed in any such communication that they are under no duty to do so

land.

s and contractors, is paramount when undertaking the inspection of potentially

9.6 9.6.1

:

inand complex nature of each particular

resources and the type of site to be investigated.

Where an appropriate person(s) can be found and a site has been identified for further investigation, the landowner should be contacted to request a ‘voluntary site investigation’ where applicable i.e. com

but the Council has powers to recover costs for any investigation work should the land in question be determined as contaminated

9.5.4 The health and safety of any personnel, both local authority worker

contaminated sites. The relevant risk assessments and safety procedures included in detail in the Procedure Document Contaminated Land 3 – Site Inspections, should be adhered to at all times.

Reviewing Inspection Priorities

There may be occasions where inspections may have to be carried out outside of the general inspection framework. Triggers for undertaking a non-routine inspection will include

1. Unplanned events Incidents may arise, for example a chemical spillage, which may introduce contamination to ground. There is a need to assess the situation and determine what, if any risk the incident presents.

2. Introduction of new receptors Land may not have previously presented a risk of significant harm due to the lack receptors. However where there are plans for example for - Housing to be built on a potentially contaminated site - Designation of a new protected ecosystem - Change of use on a site such as persistent trespass,

There will be a need to reassess the situation.

3. Supporting voluntary remediation Remediation of contaminated land is the aim of regulation. Where a potentially liable party wishes to undertake clean up before their land has been inspected by the local authority, the Council will provide support and assistance.

4. Identification of localised health effects

32


ess the situation and determine what, if any risk the incident presents.

Incidents may arise where people or ecosystems appear to be affected by a particular area of land. There is a need to ass

5. Responding to information

Information provided from other statutory bodies, owners, occupiers or other interested parties may result in the need to re evaluate the situation.

6. Regeneration priorities Wakefield MDC’s regeneration programme and strategic housing

t sites within existing industrial areas. The contaminated land service will support and assist regeneration initiatives.

.6.2 While these occurrences may trigger non-routine inspections, if the Strategy and

9.7 Reviewing Inspection Decisions 9.7.1 In ad

decis

1. Significant changes in legislation se law or other precedent.

3. an

9.7.2 All de n a consistent manner that will allow e

9.8 Remediation 9.8.1 Shou

shoul2003by the DEFRA Circular 01/2006 through either voluntary or enforcement action. All remediation notices, statements and declarations are required to be placed on the Co

9.8.2 Any no

with t and any policies therein. Remediation should be steered towards more sustainable methods such as in-situ

development will influence the programme. The Wakefield District Regeneration Strategy 2007-2015 and the Local Development Framework’s core strategy indicate that major developments in future should be located within or close to the largest settlements. Opportunities need to be taken to re-use or redevelop vacan

9

this Review are to prove effective, they must not be allowed to significantly interfere with the milestones laid down in the general inspection framework.

dition there may be occasions where the findings of previous inspection ions should be reviewed. This might occur if there were:

2. Establishment of significant caRevisions of statutory guidelines on exposure limits, risk prioritisation d risk assessment. cisions that are made should be recorded ifficient and transparent review.

ld any land be determined as contaminated land then remediation of the land d be sought in accordance with section 6.2.& 6.3 of the original Strategy, . The standard of remediation should be in line with statutory guidance issued

ntaminated Land Public Register.

tice or voluntary action of remediation of contaminated land should be in line he Council’s Municipal Waste Strategy (2004)

33


& ex-situ technologies rather than the existent trend to dispose of materials at landfil

9.9 Cl ng 9.9.1 The E

monitoyears.more toward

9.9.2 A risk asse ite is currently being compiled with the findings and

.10 Public Relations

.10.1 There are inevitably public relation issues to be taken into consideration when

of negative press in being seen to recover substantial sums from private individuals who have had the misfortune to have bought a property sited on contaminated land. Promoting fai ion/investigation and po although some bad press over the years is likely to occur given the nature of the work.

d as contaminated land. This should though be subject to clarification on an individual basis with the Press

any inspection/investigation.

9.11

.11.1 Cabinet determines the Council’s Insurance Strategy from time to time and

9.11.2

how services are run but managers should be mindful of the cover that has been affected. If an incident occurs which is outside the insurance affected or

ls.

osed Landfill Site Monitori

nvironmental Protection Section has maintained an ongoing program of ring landfill gas at closed landfill sites within the district over a number of This program is currently under review to identify priority sites and to adopt a risk based approach to monitoring i.e. to cease onsite monitoring and move s offsite monitoring between sensitive receptors and the landfill.

ssment for each srecommendations being reported in due course. Refer to Procedural Document Contaminated Land 9 – Landfill Gas Monitoring in Dwellings & Closed Landfill Sites.

9 9

either recovering costs for work in default or issuing remediation notices to members of the public. There may be potentially a great deal

rness, transparency and consistency throughout the inspecttential remediation of any site should reduce negative public relations,

9.10.2 An open and transparent approach is proposed when dealing with the press where land is going to be formally determine

Office at the time of 9.10.3 Refer to Procedural Document Contaminated Land 3 – Site Inspections, for the

detailed procedures on dealing with risk communication/public relations.

Insurance & Indemnity

9implementation of the Strategy is the responsibility of the Director of Finance.

Insurance is only one method by which the Council seeks to control its expenditure in respect of losses incurred in its day-to-day activities. Insurance does not determine

34


from the policy cover then the claim will have to om the Services budget.

9.11.3

.11.4 On the advice of the Risk and Insurance Manager, the Director of Finance will

.11.5 Any incidence or claim where insurance or indemnity is affected the Risk &

should be contacted for advice under the council’s Insurance Strategy.

the reason for the loss is excludedbe met fr

Insurance should never be used as an excuse for not doing something. The Risk and Insurance Manager will provide advice but only in exceptional circumstances will advise you that something should not be done.

9determine the most economic way to finance a risk. Insurance is usually the last resort and very often the most expensive means of financing losses.

9Insurance Manager

35


Interaction with the Planning Regime.

10


Developing Knowledge Communities - Wakefield District Community Strategy Unitary Development Plan First Alteration, January 2003 (current local development

plan the will be replaced by the LDF) Local Development Framework (LDF)

-Core Strategy Submission Document, January 2008 (Policy CS10) -Development Plan Submission Document, January 2008 (Policy D33)


Town & Country Planning Act, 1990 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, Part 4 & 8 Planning Policy Statement 23 – Anexe 2: The Development of Land Affected by

Contamination Links to Contaminated Land Strategies, Procedures & Policies

Procedural Document Contaminated Land 7 – Planning DC & Building Control Contaminated Land Strategy, 2003, Section 5.6.1 A Local Authority Guide to Submitting Planning Applications for Development Land,

Version 2.3, January 2007

10.1 General 10.1.1 In its function as the Local Planning Authority, the Council must consider the

implications of land contamination on development. The emerging (LDF) sets out proposed policies relating to the development of contaminated land in the Core Strategy and Developing Policies documents. Contaminated Land is a material consideration in the determination of individual development applications submitted for planning permission. Whenever permission for development of a site is applied for, contamination either from the site in question or from neighbouring sites is a material consideration; with remediation being carried out to satisfy imposed building regulations and planning conditions intended to render the site ‘suitable for its intended use’.

10.1.2 Where a contaminated site is undergoing redevelopment, remediation of the land

shall be taken forward under the Town and Country Planning Act (1990). However, where it appears that the remediation works will not be completed to the required standard of the agreed remediation method statement provided by the developer, and where the responsible person cannot be persuaded to submit a revised

ental proposal, a remediation notice must be served under Part IIA of the EnvironmProtection Act 1990.

36


10.1.3 ent of Land Affected by Contamination was published in 2004 to provide advice to Local Planning A th pment o la e L c al planning applications to decides whether c ion or if planning perm

10.1.4 M plication of

pb district will remain the primary mechanism for d l ironmental Protection h e land take lanning process will effectively deal with any contamination so that the land is suitable for its intended use. The following have been put into place t

w); ation and reports in relation to

(3) new planning applications for developments on potentially contaminated land or sensitive end use;

standard planning conditions; recording of developments with outstanding planning conditions on

10.2 10.2.1

The importance of guidance has been underpinned by the fact

10.2.2

taminated land.

Planning Policy Statement 23 – Annex 2: The Developm

u orities, developers and their agents to promote the sustainable redevelof nd. Reference to this guidance should be undertaken by the applicant and th

al Authority when assessing individo uontaminated land information is required in support of an applicat

ission may be granted on condition that the site is adequately remediated.

any contaminated sites have already been dealt with through the aptrols during redevelopment. It is expected that the redevelopment of lanning con

wro nfield and derelict land within the ea ing with contaminated land. Planning Services and Envav developed a working relationship to ensure that where redevelopment of

s place, the p

o help implement this process. (1) the production of the ‘Guidance for Developers’ (see section 10.2 belo(2) the review of all contaminated land inform

the redevelopment of a site by Environmental Protection; the weekly review of

(4) the production of updated (5) the

MVM for compliance purposes; (6) the provision of information, assessments and recommendations for

dealing with contaminated land during the consultation on the new LDF proposals with forward planning.

Development of Guidance for Developers

Guidance was produced for developers that are looking to redevelop brownfield land within the district in January 2006 (revised January 2007). At the moment the guidance is available on request and on the contaminated land section of the council’s website. that it is recognised that the majority of sites are likely to be remediated through the planning regime. It is essential that land is redeveloped in line with the current UK framework for contaminated land to ensure that risks to the environment and human health are acceptable.

The continual and increased promotion of this guidance will be essential in ensuring that developers and their consultants continue to meet our high standards for the redevelopment of con

37


11 11.1

Procedure Document Contaminated Land 5 – Provision of Environmental

Inf t Procedu ement (to be

written) Pr u ding Control (to

be e Pr

(to be w cument Contaminated Land 9 – Landfill Gas Monitoring in Dwellings

11.2 GI

Investigation of Potentially Contaminated

Sites‘, British Standards Institute (2001)

LR 11 – Model Procedures for the Management of Contaminated Land, Environment Agency (2004)

Related Reports

Procedural Documents

Procedure Document Contaminated Land 1 – Site Identification, August 2006, D Jackson

Procedure Document Contaminated Land 2 – Site Prioritisation, August 2007, D

Jackson

Procedure Document Contaminated Land 3 – Site Inspections (In production)

Procedure Document Contaminated Land 4 – Inspection of Council Owned Land (to be written)

orma ion, June 2007, D Jackson

re Document Contaminated Land 6 – Performance Manag

oced re Document Contaminated Land 7 – Planning DC & Buil writt n)

ocedure Document Contaminated Land 8 – Contamination Incidents & Spillages ritten)

Procedure Do& Closed Landfill Sites (to be written)

Procedure Document Contaminated Land 10 – Information Management (to be

written)

uidance Documents – Contaminated Land Inspections & nvestigations

BS 10175, Code of Practice for

BS 5930, Code of Practice for Site Investigation,, BSI (1999) C

38


Contaminated Land – A Local Authority Guide to Submitting Planning Applications minated Land, Environmental Protection, January

2007

Policy Statement 23 – Annex 2: The Development of Land Affected by Contamination, 2004

for the Development of Conta

Planning

39


12 12.1

n District Council nvironmental Protection avid Jackson - Contaminated Land Officer ewton Bar

Leeds Road akefield F1 2TX

el (01924) 306924 ax (01924) 306419

mail: [email protected]

ebsite: http://www.wakefield.gov.uk/ContaminatedLand.htm

Contacts

Contaminated Land

Wakefield MetropolitaEDN

WW

TF

E

W

12.2 ternal Contacts

nvironmental Health i Widdowson rea Environmental Health Manager ewton Bar 1924) 306945

lanning Development Control arah Bird evelopment Control Manager ewton Bar 1924) 306632

uilding Control uilding Control Manager ewton Bar 1924) 306568

ress & Communications ublic Relations Manager akefield Town Hall 1924) 305294

In EDAN(0 PSDN(0 BBN(0 PPW(0

40


Spatial Policy

Spatial Policy Manager

Manager l 5048

Allotments Officer

(01924) 305876

Property Management Land Information Office

own Hall

tion Manager 1924) 305855

set Management

et Manager

alm elopment Manager

56

egal Services

Litigation Manager

ave Hollis

Neville Ford

Newton Bar (01924) 306617 Emergency Planning Emergency Planning County Hal(01924) 30

Allotments Steve Slade

Newton Bar

Resources Dept TWakefield Estates & Evaluation Simon West Estates & Evalua(0 Strategic AsHilton Mitchell Strategic Ass(01924) 305854 Parks & Public ReParks & Public Realm Dev(01924) 3074 LIan Morse General Legal, Contracts &County Hall (01924) 305226 D

41


on Officer

ounty Hall

ocurement

pper Building 81

Manager ounty Hall

ccountant l 6430

ing Services

12.3

rea Contaminated Land Officer )

ce hoenix House

ng Road

8708 506506 [email protected]

Senior InformatiCounty Hall (01924) 305473 Land Charges C(01924) 305260 Strategic PrNewton Bar U(01924) 3067 Finance Risk & InsuranceC(01924) 306442 Senior Principal ACounty Hal(01924) 30 Corporate Data MappTown Hall (01924) 306647 External Contacts Environment Agency Local Contacts: ADavid Walmsley (Part IIAJohn Barber (Planning) Ridings Area OffiPGlobal Avenue Beeston RiLeeds LS11 8PG Telephone: 0Email: david.walm

land

Natural EngLocal Contact:

42


Buildings

awnswood T

30 3750 790

mail:[email protected]

Government Otley Road LLeeds LS16 5QTel: (0113) 2Fax: (0113) 230 3E English Heritage

7 Tanner Row

6WP el: (01904) 601901

nerships

airburn House

ter

F10 2AT

) 669431

akefield & District Housing

erefield House

Local Office: Yorkshire Region3York, YO1T English PartLocal Office: FPark Lane Allerton BywaWest Yorkshire WTel: (01977) 669430 Fax: (01977 WHead Office: MWhistler Drive Castleford WF10 5HX Tel: (01977)72444

43


13 Consultation 13.1 es External Consulte

Environment Agenc

Groundwater & Contaminated Land Section y

David Walmsley ted Land Officer Area Contamina

Wakefield & District Housing

mmunications Manager Simon LeonardCorporate Co

Kirklees CouncWendy Blakeley

il

Pollution Control Manager Ackworth Parish Council Badsworth Parish Council Crigglestone Parish Council Crofton Parish Council Darrington Parish Council East Hardwick Parish Council Featherstone Town Council Havercroft-with Cold Hiendley Parish Council Hemsworth Town Council Normanton Town Council Nostell Ryhill Parish Council Sharlston Parish Council Sitlington Parish Council South Elmsall Town Council South Hiendley Parish Council South Kirkby & Moorthorpe Town Council Thorpe Audin Parish Council Upton & North Elmsall Parish Council Walton Parish Council Warmfield-cum-Heath Parish Council West Bretton Parish Council Woolley Parish Council

13.2 Internal Consultees

Legal Section Dave Hollis Senior Information Officer

Press Office Alun Ireland

44


PR Manager Planning Development Control

Service Director of Planning Ian Thomson

Planning Spatial Policy nager

13.3 Con e including all consultation responses and

subsequent feedback to the consultee and any adopted amendments to the

Neville Ford Spatial Policy Ma

sultation Letter & Feedback Form

Please refer to Appendix 3 for the abov

strategy document

45


Appendix 1

Flow Chart of Procedures for Site Inspections/Investigations

46


Site Program ed for

Inspection m

Has the site been Investigated and/or

Remediated through other Regimes sinc 2000? e

Reduce Risk by 90% in MVM

Has the site been Investigated and/or

Remediated through other Regimes between 1995

and 2000?

Yes

Is Remediation Deemed to be effective? Yes

Reduce Risk by 50% in MVM

No

Complete Desk Top Study & Site Walkover Inspection

for the site.

Is a Site Inve igation Required?

st Reduce Risk Score in MVM to 0

No

No

Site Investigation Programmed

Could the Site be Determin as

Contaminated Land under s.78(A) EPA 1990

ed No

All Stages and Decisions

MVM

to be Well Documented and Stored in

Is a Planning Application Pending or LiSubm

kely to be itted in the Near Future?

Set Appropriate Date in MVM to Review the

Site

47


Is the Site a Special Site? Refer to the Environment Agency

Inform Appropriate Person o f the Determination

No

Yes

Serve diation

Notice Reme

Add to the Public Register

Restart Process for the Next Site in the Prioritised List

All Stages and

Decisions to be Well Document

ed and Stored in

MVM

Serve Remediation Statement

Serve Remediation Declaration

48


x 2

Insurance Certificate

Appendi

49


EMPLOYERS LIABILITY, THIRD PARTY LIABILITY, PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE, and FIRE INSURANCE

This is to certify that the following policy of insurance has been effected in respect of Employers Liability, Third Party (Public) Liability, Fire (Contractors All Risks) and Professional

Negligence. Insurer Zurich Municipal P.O Box 568 1st Floor 1 East Parade Leeds, LS1 2UA Limits of Indemnity Employers Liability: £30m Third Party Liability: £21m Renewal Date 1st April 2008 Policy Number QLA-03G039-0183 The policy has a £250,000 excess. Claims within this excess are met from an Internal Provision. The fire Insurance section provides nder most Building Contracts and in particular JCT (1980) and the JCT (1984) In rmediate Standard forms of Contract. Any further information rega sed to: City of Wakefield Metropolitan District Council Risk and Insurance, County Hall Bond Street Wakefield WF1 2QW Telephone: 01924 306442. Fax 01924 306777

cover as required ute

rding the above should be addres

50


eedback to Consultees

Appendix 3

Consultation Responses & F

51


ear

ONTAMINATED LAND STRATEGY REVIEW – DRAFT REPORT FOR

D C

ONSULTATIONC

lease find enclosed/attached a copy of Wakefield Metropolitan District Council’s raft Contaminated Land Strategy Review. I am writing to you as one of our listed onsultees for your views. We need to ensure that the content meets with the xpectations of a range of stakeholders and agencies within the District and those of urrounding Local Authorities.

would be grateful for any comments you may have on the document to enable a final ersion to be formally adopted by the Cabinet. If you could use the attached/enclosed onsultation Feedback Form’ for any comments you may have in relation to the

trategy.

he deadline for my receiving your comments is Friday 15th February 2008.

it would assist, your response can be sent via e-mail. My e-mail address is [email protected]

PDces I v‘Cs T Ifd

Thanking you in anticipation of any views you may have. Yours faithfully

David Jackson Contaminated Land Officer

52


CONSULTATION FEEDBACK FORM For comments on WMDC Contaminated Land Strategy Review Name: …………………………………………………………………………….

s: …………………………………………………………………………. one: ………………….Fax: ……………………Email: ………………..

………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………..

…………………………………………………. …………………. ………………….

………………………………………………………………….

h to be consulted in future on CL Issues?

h to be consulted in future strategy revisions? es/No

Contaminated Land Officer Wakefield Metropolitan District Council Environmental Protection Newton Bar Leeds Road Wakefield WF1 2TX

AddreselephT

Organisation or Interest ………………………………………………………... .

omments: ………C…………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………..

…………………………………… Your responses to the following will also help us with evaluation: Did you find all the information you require in the report?

es/No Y

hat additional information would you seek? W……………………………………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………….

……………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………… Do you wisYes/No Do you wisY Return to:

53


Planning Development Control Consultation Response

ve had a look at the pre-consultation draft and on behalf of DC, here are some comments. Some

‘(planning mittee

. input into

er sites

lacing on achieving a 21 day turnaround back to us on consultation responses. I have nothing to dicate that you are not doing this nor that there are any delays at present, but I think this should be

ions can also be triggered in o the conditions you ask to be imposed on planning permission?

p 33: 9.10: As the recipient of bad press in the course of our job, we are familiar with this problem. fice/Communications on this one? Is it worth

ht. rk’. Same

ion is of this

n a

from Steve Daley in DC who deals with

ning Development Control contact should be me, not John Worthington: John deals with art of our work but 3 other Team Leaders also get involved.

arah Bird

From: Bird, Sarah ent: 25 January 2008 09:23 S

To: Jackson, David Cc: Thomson, Ian Subject: Contaminated Land Strategy Review Hello David, I haare very minor, some a bit broader in scope: - p13: highlighted box: Prince of Wales Colliery: please change the text from ‘(ongoing)’ to application pending)’: this application has not yet reached the Planning and Highways Comand we need to avoid pre-judging the situation. - p21: 5.6.4: I think I understand the second sentence, but it would benefit from more clarity- p22: performance management: contaminated land consultation responses have a direct our ability to achieve BV109 targets (speed of application determination), particularly on larg(BV109a). Performance management in relation to your response times back to us is therefore elevant and I think it should be mentioned, together with a statement on the priority that you are r

pinmade explicit. - p30: 9.4.1: typo 2nd line: should read ‘effects’ not ‘affects’.

.2: Do you need to make the point that non-planned inspect- p32: 9.6esponse tr

- Is there any help or advice you could get from Press Ofconsidering getting an article in Citizen to explain why all this is so important? Just a thoug- p35: box at the top: ‘Local Development Plan’ should read ‘Local Development Framewocomment for 10.1.1. - p36: top line: this doesn’t make it clear who decides whether contaminated land informatrequired: presumably you will need to make it clear that this it your role. Delete the last linetop paragraph: the phrase ‘to the satisfaction of the local authority’ should never be used iplanning context: it is imprecise and a target for legal challenges.

p36: 10.1.4.(5): this sounds like double entry to me: is there any way you can get information- us to avoid you having to input this data? Please have a chat with

ystems stuff to see if we can help each other here. all our IT/s- p39: Planp

go, I hope this helps. There you Sarah. SDevelopment Control Manager, Planning Services [email protected]: 01924 306Fax: 01924 306

621 690

54


to Consultee

ONTAMINATED LAND STRATEGY REVIEW CONSULTATION FEEDBACK

Feedback

Dear Sarah, C

in relation to the above consultation document.

ecific feedback please refer to my comments below:

nce amended to provide more clarity lation to BVPI 109 targets, Environmental Health is not considering this

being in place between EH and Planning DC

e nue to

ate

e consultation process. An article in the Citizen was initially thought of

nning

e, at

e above matters further.

ontaminated Land Strategy Review – Final Version has been sent to the t for approval and hopeful adoption. The document will be placed on the

ebsite under Contaminated Land in the near future should you wish to

Thank you for your comments In respect to your sp p13 – amended p21 – sente

2 – In rep2to be a priority at present due to limited resources, ourselves being a non statutory consultee, no service level agreementand no funding being provided by planning for this service. Due to this I would think it prudent not to explicitly mention planning performance indicators within thstrategy document. Until I am told otherwise by my line manager we will contiattempt to provide responses within the prescribed deadline subject to resources. p30, 9.4.1 – amended p32, 9.6.2 – no need to mention this as Part IIA of the EPA 1990 is a separregime to development under the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. p33, 9.10 – Consultation with the Alun Ireland (PR manager) has been undertaken as part of thbut the Press Office advised against it. p35 – amended p36, top line – this has been amended to “Reference to this guidance should beundertaken when assessing individual planning applications to decides whethercontaminated land information is required in support of an application or if plapermission may be granted on condition that the site is remediated to thesatisfaction of the Local Authority”. This in addition to the implementation of the Contaminated Land Advice Note provided in the 1App consultation responsshould provide sufficient guidance to developers and planners as to whinformation is required and when. p36, 10.1.4 (5) – I will liaise with Steve Daly on this matter p39 - amended Please do not hesitate to contact me on 01924 306924 if you want to discuss any of th The C

abineCCouncils wview it.

55


Yours sincerely


56


ame: Sarah Mawson

Policy Group, WMDC Planning Services, PO Box 92, Newton Bar,

Email: [email protected]

Spatial Policy Consultation Response Comments on WMDC Contaminated Land Strategy Review N

ddress: SpatialAWakefield, WF1 2XS Telephone: 306641 Organisation or Interest: Planning Policy UDP/LDF

lossary: Add “UDP – The Unitary Development Plan contains policies for the evelopment and use of land in Wakefield district. It will be replaced with the Local evelopment Framework (LDF)”. It would be better to move the glossary to the ack of the document, it is more user friendly to open the cover to view the contents age first! hapter 10: The box on links to other Council strategies. ‘Local Development Plan’ incorrect, replace with

“Unitary Development Plan First Alteration, January 2003 (This is the current cal development plan which will be replaced by the LDF) Local Development ramework (LDF) Core Strategy Submission Document, January 2008; Policy S10 Development Policies Submission Document, January 2008; Policy D33.”

0.1.1: Amend first para “In its function as the Local Planning Authority, the Council ust consider the implications of land contamination on development. The merging LDF sets out proposed policies relating to the development of ontaminated land in the Core Strategy and Development Policies documents. ontaminated land is a material consideration…”

lease consult Spatial Policy Group on future strategy revisions.

arah Mawson 22/01/08

Comments: GdDbpCis

loFC 1mecC P S

57


eedback to Consultee one given but all suggested amendments adopted with the exception of the ositioning of the glossary which remains at the beginning of the strategy ocument.

FNpd

58


Crigglestone Parish Council Consultation Response CONSULTATION FEEDBACK FORM

Contaminated Land Strategy Review ll, Clerk to Crigglestone PC

1924 373487 Fax - …Email: [email protected] Organisation or Interest Parish Council Comments: The review appears to contain all aspects of contaminated land as would apply to the Parish of Crigglestone. Additional information.

For comments on WMDCName: ………Janet MitcheAddress: ……Village Institute, High Street, Crigglestone, Wakefield WF4 3EB ……………………………………………………………………. Telephone: 0

The Parish of Crigglestone has historic links with mining and to this end we supplied a comprehensive plan and schedule covering these sites to WMDC in June 2006. There are however other issues, primarily from past mining in the form of known mine shafts and adits, of which there are 109 and 84 respectively within our parish curtilage. These, as you will be aware, can leech out volumes of gas vapour, especially at times of low barometric pressure. - Crigglestone colliery suffered from such an occurrence followed by a minor explosion following its shaft filling soon after its closure. As many of the 'remaining' sites for development in Crigglestone are areas which have been sterilized by past shallow mining and deemed untouchable for development in the past, may now come into review for building - what checks will be made to safeguard these sites from 'gas contamination' in future ? Your responses to the following will also help us with evaluation: Did you find all the information you require in the report? Yes/No What additional information would you seek? See above

Do you wish to be consulted in future on CL Issues?

59


Yes Do you wish to be consulted in future strategy revisions? Yes

60


eedback to Consultee

Dear Janet,

ULTATION FEEDBACK

F

CONTAMINATED LAND STRATEGY REVIEW CONS

hank you for your comments in relation to the above document.

ation to the Parish Council’s concerns regarding mine gas I acknowledge that your concerns are valid. Wakefield Council’s Environmental Health Section, Building Control and Planning Development Control work in conjunction with developers to ensure that any risks from mine gas, landfill gas and contaminated land are suitably mitigated against. Most new developments are subject to a site investigation to determine the nature and extent of any contamination and to detect the presence of mine/landfill gas. Where significant contamination or gas is encountered developers are required (normally by virtue of planning conditions) to ensure any contamination is made safe and to incorporate adequate gas protection measures within buildings. In addition these investigations consider geotechnical issues such as subsidence from former shallow mining. If former mines are deemed a structural risk the voids are sometimes grouted up which significantly reduces the ability for mine gas to build up. Please do not hesitate to contact Environmental Health or Planning Development Control if you have any specific concerns regarding a development. I hope that I have adequately answered the concerns of the Parish Council but please do not hesitate to contact me on 01924 306924 if you want to discuss this matter further Yours sincerely

T In rel


61


Kirklees Council Consultation Response CONSULTATION FEEDBACK FORM

Contaminated Land Strategy Review ame: Wendy Blakeley……………………………………………….

le s Environmental Services, West Riding House 9 Manchester Road, , H 1 3HH….

mail: [email protected]……………….. ...

……………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………..

id you find all the information you require in the report?

For comments on WMDCNAddress: Kirk e

uddersfield DHTelephone: 01484 226417.Fax: 01484 226490 EOrganisation or Interest …Neighbouring authority……………………. Comments: A very professional and well written report, which is easy to read and it makes a very difficult and complex subject understandable.… …………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………….. Your responses to the following will also help us with evaluation: DYes/No What additional information would you seek? …………………………………………………………………………………….

………………………………………………………………………………….

…. ………………………………………………………………………………….

be consulted in future on CL Issues?

………………………………………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Do you wish to Yes/No

o you wish to be consulted in future strategy revisions? DYes/No No response required

62


rofton Parish Council Consultation Response From [email protected]] Sent: 0 February 2008 10:26 To: Metcalfe, Catherine

RE: Contaminated Land Strategy Review

atherine ollowing the meeting Parish Councillors had no comment to make

C

: Barry Riley [mailto:barry 2

Subject: CFBarry

No response required

63


CONSULTATION FEEDBACK FORM

rategy Review

………………………………. Fax: Email:[email protected]

rganisation or Interest ………Environment ……………………………………………...

ents: Page 4 Site inspection also includes 20© site investigation. 78Q(4) as this is for termination.

P35 needs CLR 11 somewhere as guidance. Your responses to the following will also help us with evaluation: Did you find all the information you require in the report? Yes What additional information would you seek? ……………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………. Do you wish to be consulted in future on CL Issues? yes Do you wish to be consulted in future strategy revisions? Yes Feedback to Consultee None given but all suggested amendments adopted.

Environment Agency Consultation Response

For comments on WMDC Contaminated Land StName: ………David Walmsley Address: Environment Agency…………………Telephone:0113 213 4680……………….. OAgency…. CommP5 Special Site delete Fig 1 needs a key