Geoenvironmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common

00028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, DIRFT II - Zone 3 Additional Land

Annie Green C/O Andrew Large Surveyors Ltd August 2012

QUALITY MANAGEMENT

Issue/revision Issue 1

Remarks Version 1

Date August 2012

Prepared by A.Jaep

Signature

Checked by K.Murray Signature

Authorised by E. Arnold

Signature

Project number 00033031

File reference G:\#Soil and Groundwater\DELTEK Projects\00033031 - Ansley Common\(10) Reporting

This report is addressed to and may be relied upon by the following party:

Annie Green. Springfield Farm Ansley Warwickshire CV10 0QU

This assessment has been prepared for the sole use and reliance of the above named parties. This report shall not be relied upon or transferred to any other without the express written authorisation of WSP Environment & Energy which will not be unreasonably withheld. No responsibility will be accepted where this report is used, either in its entirety or in part, by any other party to whom the report has not been assigned.

WSP Environment & Energy One Queens Drive Birmingham West Midlands B5 4PJ

Tel: +44 (0)121 352 4700 Fax: +44 (0)121 352 4701 www.wspenvironmental.com

1152332

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

1 INTRODUCTION 4

2 SITE LOCATION AND SETTING 5

3 HISTORICAL LAND USE AND POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION 7

4 GEOENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 11

5 PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT 13

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16

FIGURES

FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION PLAN

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A NOTES ON LIMITATIONS

APPENDIX B PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD

APPENDIX C HISTORICAL MAP EXTRACTS

APPENDIX D COAL MINING REPORT

APPENDIX E SUPPORTING INFORMATION AND APPROACH TO RISK

ASSESSMENT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Site Name & 45, Ansley Common, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0PP Address

The site comprises a small industrial warehouse building with a small area of hardstanding.

Site Use and It is understood that the site is proposed for the development of residential properties comprising of two Development semi-detached dwellings. Summary The site is bounded to the north by two dwellings which front onto Ansely Common (B4114), to the east by a local shop and west by residential properties. To the south lies open land, beyond which is a playground.

Geological mapping indicates the site to be underlain by Pennine Middle Coal Measures (Secondary A Aquifer); no superficial deposits are recorded as being present across the site.

Geoenvironmental A number of surface water features are present within 1km of the site including the Bar Pool Brook and Setting numerous drains and ponds. It is considered based on the readily available information that groundwater flows towards the East (i.e. towards Bar Pool Brook).

Overall, the environmental sensitivity of the site is considered to be Low to Medium.

The potential exists for localised residual contamination to be present, predominantly associated with the historical use of the site for a small scale engineering works. Where landscaped areas will exist in the proposed residential development site users may be exposed to residual contamination which might be present within the subsurface.

The permeable nature of the underlying bedrock geology means it is likely to easily transmit Preliminary Risk contamination. However as the current site use and proposed site use are considered to represent a low Assessment risk of contamination generation, it is considered unlikely that any significant impact on controlled waters will occur.

There is the potential for elevated concentrations of sulphate to be present in Made Ground that could impact building foundations. However, this can be managed by appropriate classification of concrete. Buildings will require appropriate concrete foundations and water supply pipes.

Based on the information contained in this report and with due regard to the re - development of the site for a residential use, it is the opinion of WSP that the site represents a low risk with respect to contaminated land liability issues.

As with any development site, an initial phase of ground investigation will be required to inform the development. The re-use of any materials from an off-site source or on-site materials would require Recommendations regulatory approval or management under the CL:AIRE code of practice, which would require the preparation of a materials management plan and the chemical and geotechnical characterisation of the materials.

Prior to any redevelopment an asbestos demolition survey will be required. In the event that the site is not redeveloped and is used for on-going operation of the site an asbestos management survey and asbestos management plan will be required.

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 3

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 AUTHORISATION WSP Environment & Energy (WSP) was commissioned by Andrew Large Surveyors Ltd on behalf of Annie Green to undertake a Geoenvironmental Desk Study of a site located at 45, Ansley Common, Nuneaton, Warwickshire. A site location plan is included as Figure 1.

1.2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES The works are required to qualitatively assess the potential geotechnical and environmental risks associated with the proposed development. This report will be used to inform the planning application process. The general limitations to the nature of the assessment are outlined in the Notes on Limitations presented in Appendix A.

1.3 DEVELOPMENT DETAILS It is understood that Annie Green considering the redevelopment of the site, it is intended that this land will be developed as two semi-detached residential dwellings with small gardens. The site is currently occupied by a small industrial warehouse building. No planning conditions or proposed development layout are currently available for the site.

1.4 SCOPE OF WORKS

Site walkover to provide a visual assessment of the site and assess potential environmental concerns both on-site and in relation to nearby receptors.

Review of historic Ordnance Survey maps - to assess the historical usage of the site.

Review of information regarding the geology, hydrogeology and hydrology of the site and surrounding area to assess ground conditions and the presence of sensitive environmental targets.

Obtain and review a Coal Mining Report.

Obtain and review Landmark Envirocheck database information regarding the presence of landfill sites and waste treatment facilities, fuel station entries, contaminated land register entries, pollution incidents to controlled waters, discharge consents and abstraction licenses etc.

Liaison with the relevant regulatory authorities (if deemed necessary) following the review of the Envirocheck data to obtain further details on any nearby past and present waste disposal sites, licensed water abstractions and pollution incidents.

Prepare a qualitative conceptual site model to assess whether any sources of contamination (if any) pose a significant risk to the investment and future redevelopment. This will be undertaken in accordance with current UK guidance on risk assessment, and will review the presence of source - pathway – receptor relationships (pollution linkages) in the context of the site and surrounding area.

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 4

2 SITE LOCATION AND SETTING

2.1 SITE DETAILS

Table 2.1 – Site Details

Site Address 45 Ansley Common, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0PP

Ordnance Survey Grid Reference 431910, 293350

Planning Application Boundary 0.03 hectares

The site is rectangular in shape and is located approximately 4km northwest of Site Location Nuneaton Town Centre in a predominantly residential area.

Current Use The site is currently occupied by a small industrial warehouse building.

The site is bounded to the north by two dwellings which front onto Ansley Common Surrounding Land Use (B4114), to the west by residential properties, to the east by a local shop and to the south by open land, beyond which lies an allotment and a playground.

The boundary of the site area is presented on Figure 1.

2.2 SITE RECONNAISSANCE 2.2.1 General A walk over survey of the site was carried out by Kerry Murray of WSP on Thursday 2nd August 2012. All external and internal areas of the site were accessible. Selected photographs of the site are presented in Appendix B.

2.2.2 Topography and Surface Cover The topography of the area is generally flat. The site is covered completely by the warehouse building with no external areas. The adjacent roadway to the east and south comprise a hardstanding shared access. We understand that the shared access falls outside the proposed planning application boundary.

2.2.3 Site Use and Buildings The subject site comprises a 0.03 hectare plot of land which is accessed from the adjacent Ansley Common Road. The site is roughly rectangular and comprises a single storey brick warehouse with steel frames supporting the roof. Anecdotal evidence provided by the client suggests that the warehouse has been previously used for small scale engineering of metal parts, a butchers and window manufacturing. The warehouse is currently used for storage of goods including suntan cream, washing powder, cleaning fluids (e.g. bleach) and electrical kitchen goods. Two smaller rooms are present in the north of the warehouse building and are currently used for an office and a toilet. A battery powered forklift truck is used to transport the goods around the warehouse. The site appears to be heated by gas boiler and blower, the site contact confirmed that the heating was not currently in use. During the site walkover, no back-up generator or oil storage was noted during the site walkover.

2.2.4 Waste and Fly Tipping Based on the site walkover, no significant waste streams are currently being produced at the site. Evidence of some fly tipping (approximately four bags of general household waste) was noted within the southern boundary of the site, located on the shared access driveway.

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 5

2.2.5 Observations of Contamination No evidence of contamination was noted during the site inspection (e.g. staining, vegetation distress).

2.2.6 Bulk Fuel Storage No evidence of either above or below ground tanks (e.g. concrete bases, vent pipes etc) were observed during the site inspection.

2.2.7 Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) Based on the age of the building (Pre 1994) and a visual inspection of the property, the presence of asbestos within the fabric of the building cannot be discounted. No asbestos report or asbestos management plan (AMP) was available for inspection on-site, although suspected asbestos corrugated roof sheeting was observed during the site inspection. This report has not constituted a formal inspection survey in accordance with Regulation 4 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012. It should be noted that, under Regulation 4 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 the duty holder must not only establish whether ACMs are present and what condition they are in, but also manage the ACMs on an on-going basis (using a suitable asbestos management plan (AMP)). It should also be noted that the presence of asbestos may lead to increased asset management costs.

2.2.8 Surroundings The site is bounded to the east and south by a shared access driveway, beyond which a local shop is present to the east and open land to the south including allotments with a public park beyond to the south. To the north and west of the site lies residential properties, the property immediately to the north is owned by the subject site owners.

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 6

3 HISTORICAL LAND USE AND POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION

3.1 SITE HISTORY A study of historical Ordnance Survey maps provided as part of an Envirocheck Report (a database of environmental information) obtained for the development site (Ref: 40512112_1_1) has been undertaken to identify any potential contaminative former land uses and other potentially contaminative historical events. The available map information, extracts of which are included within Appendix C, indicate that the site comprised agricultural land up until 1914, by which time the site had been developed comprising two unnamed buildings. The site use remained unchanged until 1994 by which time the current site configuration, consisting of a single storey warehouse unit was present.

3.2 HISTORICAL USES IN SURROUNDING AREA Historical map dating back to 1914 indicate that the site has been surrounded by residential and agricultural land throughout its history. Table 3.1 provides a summary of the pertinent available map information relating to the area within 500m of the site.

Table 3.1 – Summary of Pertinent Land Uses within Vicinity of the Site

Surrounding Features Approximate Direction Dates Distance

Substation 70m South Pre 1977 – Post 1996 Railway Line 80m North Pre 1887 – Pre 1975 Then Dismantled Railway Pre 1975 - Present Globe Works and Mineral Railway Sidings 190m North Pre 1925 – Pre 1955 Then Disused Quarry Pre 1955 – Pre 1966 Then Woodland Pre 1966 – Present Allotment Gardens 320m West Pre 1925 – Present Reservoir 380m Northeast Pre 1904 - Pre 1966 Then Woodland Pre 1966 – Pre 2006 Then Residential Properties Pre 2006 - Present Quarries 460m North Pre 1904 – Pre 1921 Then Disused Quarries Pre 1921 - Pre 1966 Then Woodland Pre 1966 - Present Brick Works 450m Northeast Pre 1904 – Pre 1921 Then Disused Brick Works Pre 1921 – Pre 1966 Then Open Land Pre 1966 – Pre 2006 Then Residential Properties Pre 2006 - Present

3.3 REGULATORY INFORMATION The land use data detailed in Table 3.2 has been obtained from a summary of publicly available information in the Envirocheck Database.

Table 3.2 – Regulatory Information

Land Use 0 – 250m 250 – 1,000m Details

Environment Agency Records

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 7

Land Use 0 – 250m 250 – 1,000m Details

A single local authority recorded landfill site is located approximately 280m north of the site; no further information regarding the current landfill site has been provided to WSP.

In addition three historical landfills are recorded within 1km of the site. The nearest is located approximately 190m to the north of the site, (associated with the current operational landfill site in this area) used for the disposal of deposited waste including industrial waste and was operational from 1961 until 1979. The licence Historic and Local Authority Recorded 1 1 holder has not been supplied. Landfill Sites The second nearest historical landfill site is located approximately 380m north of the site for the disposal of inert and commercial waste. The site was operational from 1993 to 1994. The supplied license holder was Mr D Wilkinson.

The third nearest historical landfill site is located approximately 415m east of the site for the disposal of deposited waste including inert waste and was operational from 1939 – 1992. The supplied license holder was Charcon Products Limited.

Registered/closed waste 0 0 N/A management/treatment facilities

Authorised industrial processes 0 0 N/A (LAPPC/IPC/IPPC)

Eight active entries are recorded within 1km of the site. The closest is located approximately 310m to the Contemporary trade directory entries 0 8 northwest of the site and is associated with the servicing and repair of caravans.

Fuel station entries 0 0 N/A

Planning Hazardous Substance 0 0 N/A Consents or Enforcements

Control of Major Accident Hazards 0 0 N/A Sites (COMAH)

Notifications of Installations Handling 0 0 N/A Hazardous Substances (NIHHS)

Registered Radioactive Substances 0 0 N/A and Explosive Sites

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 8

Ecology

Classification recognised by DETR Circular on Contaminated Land, 2006:

Local Nature Reserves, Marine The Illing’S Trenches have been designated as a SSSI Nature Reserves, National Nature 0 1 owing to geological reasons and are located Reserves, Ramsar Sites, Sites of approximately 980m northeast of the site. Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Special Areas of Conservation or Special Protection Areas.

Other Classifications:

Areas of Adopted Green Belt, Areas of Unadopted Green Belt, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, 1 0 The site is located within a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone. Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Forest Parks, National Parks, Nitrate Vulnerable Zones or Nitrate Sensitive Areas.

3.4 ENVIRONMENTAL DATABASE SEARCH INFORMATION Publicly available contaminated incident data in Table 3.3 has been summarised from the information provided in the Envirocheck Report.

Table 3.3 – Reported Contamination Incidents

Issue and Regulatory Body 0 – 250m 250 – 1,000m Details

Environment Agency Records

Contaminated land register entries and notices or enforcement and prohibition 0 0 N/A notices

The nearest incident was recorded approximately 325m east of the site and involved the release of crude sewage. The incident occurred in September 1997 and Pollution incidents to controlled waters 0 4 was classified as a minor incident by the Environment Agency and was not related to the subject site.

All remaining incidents occurred within 400m from the site and were classified as minor.

Prosecutions relating to controlled 0 0 N/A waters or authorised processes

Substantiated pollution incidents 0 0 N/A register

Water industry act referrals 0 0 N/A

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 9

3.5 LOCAL AUTHORITY LIAISON Building Control Officer The Building Control Officer for North Warwickshire Council was contacted regarding the proposed redevelopment of the subject site, who indicated that the site would require a ground investigation as part of any proposed redevelopment. No records were available for the current development, although it was indicated that current foundations at the site most likely comprise of strip and pad foundations. Characterisation and investigation of site soils would be required to determine foundation type for the proposed development. Contaminated Land Officer The Contaminated Land Officer for North Warwickshire Council was contacted regarding the proposed redevelopment of the subject site, who indicated that the historic Moorwood quarry located approximately 190m north of the site was a potential source of ground gas. Basic ground gas monitoring has been undertaken at the old landfill site by the Council, recording maximum concentrations of 0.1%v/v for methane and 0.4%v/v for carbon dioxide. The Contaminated Land Officer indicated that any proposed redevelopment would need to take into account potential ground gas issues within the area and that ground gas monitoring at the subject site would most likely be required prior to any redevelopment.

3.6 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY (EA) LIAISON No issues have been identified that warrant further consultation with the EA.

3.7 PLANNING A search of Warwickshire County Councils planning database was undertaken on 15th August 2012, no information relating to the subject site was present.

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 10

4 GEOENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

4.1 HYDROLOGY 4.1.1 General Table 4.1 presents those surface water features on or within the potential influence of the subject site.

Table 4.1 – Surface Water Features

Surface Water Feature Approximate Direction River Basin Management Plan* Distance

Bar Pool Brook 510m North & East N/A

Drains 210m and up to in All Directions N/A excess of 1km

Small Ponds 550m and up to in All Directions N/A excess of 1km

* Chemical water quality chemical water quality under the Water Framework Directive River Basin Management Plan.

The Bar Pool Brook flows generally from east to west before flowing in a southerly direction before entering the Coventry Canal approximately 3km southeast of the subject site. A number of other drains, and small ponds have been identified from the available mapping within a 1km radius of the site. These features appear to drain into Bar Pool Brook or nearby ponds.

4.1.2 Surface Water Discharge Consents The Envirocheck Report indicates that three surface water discharge consents are active within 1km of the site. The closest discharge consent is located 550m south of the site and is associated with the Sewage Works to the south of the site. The discharge involves the discharge of Storm Sewage Overflow and Sewage Discharges into the Bar Pool Brook.

4.1.3 Surface Water Abstractions No surface water abstractions have been identified within a 1km radius of the site.

4.1.4 Floodplain

The Environment Agency state that the site is not located within a flood zone.

4.2 GEOLOGY

Geological Map Sheet 169, Coventry, scale 1:50 000, Solid & Drift edition (1994), and online BGS (British Geological Society) published geological data at www.bgs.ac.uk shows the following geological sequence.

The entire site is underlain by the Pennine Middle Coal Measures Formation, which is described as Interbedded grey mudstone, siltstone, pale grey sandstone and commonly coal seams, with a bed of mudstone containing marine fossils at the base, and several such marine fossil-bearing mudstones in the upper half of the unit.

No superficial deposits are recorded either across the site or within the immediate vicinity of the site.

4.2.1 Coal Mining and Mineral Extraction WSP was provided a copy of the Coal Authority Report for the site and this is included in Appendix D. The key information is summarised below:

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 11

The site is not within the zone of influence from any past underground workings. However the property is in an area where the Coal Authority believe there is coal at or close to the surface. This coal may have been worked at some time in the past.

The site is not located within an area which the Coal Authority is determining whether to extract coal in the future. However, reserves of coal do exist within the vicinity of the site which maybe worked at some time in the future.

There are no known coal entries within the site or within 20m of the site boundary.

The Coal Authority are not aware of any damage arising due to the presence of geological faults or other lines of weakness caused by coal mining.

The site is not located within a boundary of an opencast site.

The coal authority has no records of any mine gas emissions on-site. The site is in a coal mining referral area, and may need a coal mining risk assessment.

4.3 HYDROGEOLOGY 4.3.1 General The Environment Agency has designated the bedrock (Pennine Middle Coal Measures) as a Secondary A Aquifer, defined as, “permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale, and in some cases forming an important source of base flow to rivers”. These are generally aquifers formerly classified as minor aquifers. The site is not located within an Environment Agency designated groundwater Source Protection Zone (SPZ).

4.3.2 Groundwater Abstractions A single EA licensed groundwater abstraction has been identified within a 1km radius of the site, located approximately 640m southeast of the subject site, used for construction process water. .

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 12

5 PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT

5.1 CONTAMINATED LAND RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACH The approach to this risk assessment is presented in Appendix E. The approach follows the principle of assessing pollutant linkages by considering Source-Pathway- Receptor relationships.

5.2 PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

Sources (Potential Contaminants) Receptors Pathways Potential Pollutant Linkage?

On-site: The current site use is considered unlikely to represent a widespread source of Human Health: Residential site end users, construction and Direct contact, inhalation of Yes contamination. maintenance workers. dusts, vapour and ground gases. Ingestion of soils and Historically, the site has comprised agricultural land and then commercial / industrial land grown produce. prior to its current use as warehouse storage. Anecdotal evidence provided by the client suggests that the warehouse has been previously used for small scale engineering of metal Controlled Waters: Secondary A aquifer and Bar Pool Brook Leaching via gravity or flushing Yes parts, a butchers and window manufacturing. Such historical uses are not considered to to the north and east of the site. Given the distance to the from rainwater or leaking have resulted in any significant contamination. non-potable abstractions, they are considered unlikely to be drainage. impacted from any residual sources on-site. Off-site: A historic landfill site is located approximately 190m to the north of the site for the disposal of industrial waste and was operational from 1961 until 1979. The CLO confirmed Buildings: Sulphate attack on concrete foundations, ground Direct contact with impacted Yes that the off-site landfill may represent a source of ground gas. gas accumulation and possible risk to potable water supply. soils, gas accumulation via Historical industrial uses in the wider surrounding area include a quarry, a brick works and a cracked slab or service entry railway track. Additionally the property is located within an area where coal seams may have points. been worked in the past, therefore providing a potential source of hazardous ground gas Third Party Land: Adjacent all sides. Residential to the north Migration via permeable Yes (e.g. methane). and west. bedrock.

Ecology: A single SSSI has been identified, located None – no significant ecological No approximately 980m northeast of the site and is designated for receptors identified. geological reasons and is therefore unlikely to be impacted from the subject site.

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 13

5.3 PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT Having evaluated the information gathered during this study and described in the previous sections, an assessment of potential risk with respect to contaminated land issues and the different active receptor groups based on redevelopment of the site for a residential development is presented below. The assessment of risk has considered the terms describing ‘Probability and Consequence’ as described in CIRIA C552 (Appendix E).

Table 5.1 – Summary of Likely Significance of Risks to Identified Receptor Groups

Receptor Preliminary Risk Assessment Discussion Group

Significant historical sources of contamination have not been identified; however given the small scale industrial and commercial historical uses at the site historically, localised residual sources of historical contamination may represent a low risk to human health during any construction and/or enabling works. Ground gas associated with the historic landfill located approximately 190m north of the site has the potential to accumulate within buildings, Human Health potential risks posed from ground gas include asphyxiation, suffocation and explosion. A limited ground investigation is recommended to better understand any risks. Post development, potential risks are considered to be low given the likely management of localised potential existing contamination sources during construction works and the provision of ground gas protection measures, if necessary.

Significant historical sources of contamination have not been identified; however given the small scale industrial and commercial historical uses at the site historically, localised residual sources of historical contamination may have resulted in localised residual impact to site soils which may represent a localised risk to controlled waters.

As the current site use and proposed site use are considered to represent a low risk of contamination generation, Controlled it is considered unlikely that any significant risks to controlled waters exist. However, redevelopment of the site Waters may increase the mobility of any residual contamination in site soils during the construction and demolition phases. Post development, the presence of landscaped areas within the site (e.g. gardens) will increase surface water infiltration and could potentially mobilise any residual contamination that might be present within the subsurface. It is recommended that a limited ground investigation is undertaken to better characterise the site condition.

The property is located within an area where coal seams may have been historically worked, therefore providing a potential source of methane generation and an off-site landfill which may represent a source of ground gas. However, this can be managed by ground gas monitoring and the adoption of ground gas protection measures (if necessary).

Buildings and There is the potential for elevated concentrations of sulphate to be present in Made Ground that could impact Services building foundations. However, this can be managed by appropriate classification of concrete.

As for all developments, consideration of the most appropriate water supply pipe material will be required.

A limited scope ground investigation will be required to better characterise ground conditions and provide design parameters.

Residual contamination (if any) from historical localised sources may migrate off-site via the underlying Third Party permeable geology or via windblown dusts during construction; however, such occurrences will likely be Land managed during the construction phase. Any contamination, if present, is likely to be localised.

A single SSSI is located within the vicinity of the site, related to geological features, it is therefore considered Ecology unlikely to be impacted from the subject site due to the distance from the site.

Bearing the above in mind, the site has been classified as an overall low risk as no significant historical sources Overall of contamination have been identified within the subject site. Given the small scale industrial and commercial Classification historical uses at the site, localised historical residual contamination may be present.

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 14

5.4 GEOTECHNICAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT On review of the information gathered during the desk study which is presented in the above sections, information below provides an assessment of the potential risks with respect to geotechnical conditions.

Table 5.2 – Geotechnical Hazard Assessment Summary

Issue Discussion

The site has been subject to limited historical redevelopment and therefore, there Potential for variable depth of is considered to be a low risk that any Made Ground will be encountered across Made Ground and high walls the site at significant depth.

Given the historical use of the site, there is considered to be a moderate risk that Potential for residual foundations residual foundations and buried structures are likely to be encountered. This may and other obstructions include former basements from previous buildings on the site.

The topography of the area is generally flat. The site is covered completely by the Slopes and uneven ground warehouse building with no external areas. The risks associated with slope stability are considered to be negligible.

Retaining Walls No retaining walls are present on the site.

Based on available data, drift deposits are not expected across the site. It is considered by the Building Control Officer for North Warwickshire Council that shallow pad foundations located beneath each column and strip foundations

Presence of variable quality

e beneath the walls will be suitable for the proposed development (subject to u superficial deposits s

s confirmation by investigation). Based on existing information there is considered I

a to be a low risk that any superficial deposits of variable quality will be encountered c i n

h across the site. c e t o

e Based on available information there is a low risk that shallow deposits with high

G Presence of soils with a high moisture contents will be encountered at the site; however this would require moisture content confirmation by investigation.

The site is completely covered by the warehouse building with no external areas, Semi-mature/mature trees no semi-mature or mature trees were identified directly adjacent to the site during the walkover.

A low to moderate potential exists with respect to damage to property from potential geotechnical hazards providing suitable designs are adopted in the construction of future structural elements (including floor slabs etc.). The primary Risk of future damage to property hazards are likely to relate to the presence of Made Ground, obstructions, deep structures (e.g. former basement) and the engineering of any fill materials used on the site.

Once the master plan for the site is known, supplementary limited ground Implications for development investigation would be necessary in order to spatially characterise the soil profile across the site and inform foundation design.

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 15

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 CONCLUSIONS 6.1.1 Project Brief WSP Environment & Energy (WSP) was commissioned by Andrew Large Surveyors Ltd on behalf of Annie Green to undertake a Geoenvironmental Desk Study of 45, Ansley Common, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0PP. The report highlights geo-environmental considerations, predominantly with respect to ground conditions, and is required as part of the proposed redevelopment of the site for two residential dwellings and gardens.

6.1.2 Anticipated Ground Conditions The topography of the site is generally level and in keeping with the topography of the surrounding area. The underlying geological sequence is expected to comprise the Pennine Middle Coal Measures. The presence of former foundations, structures or possible backfilled material should be anticipated.

6.1.3 Environmental Setting The current site use (warehouse storage facility) is considered unlikely to have resulted in significant widespread contamination. Historical activities (agricultural, and commercial / industrial) are considered unlikely to have resulted in contamination in shallow soils however it is possible that localised residual sources of soil contamination are present in relation to the historical use of the site as a former small scale engineering works, butchers and window manufacturer. Groundwater is likely to be present within the underlying Pennine Middle Coal Measures. Given the presence of the underlying permeable geology, there is the potential for contamination (if present) to leach or migrate by gravity from shallow soils into the underlying Secondary A aquifer.

6.1.4 Preliminary Conceptual Model It is understood that the site is proposed for the development of two semi-detached residential dwellings. The preliminary conceptual model developed for the site has identified potential pollutant linkages requiring further consideration. The following should be considered as part of the proposed development:

The potential for residual shallow soil contamination in relation to historical industrial uses to be present which may represent low risks to human health and controlled waters;

The potential for the migration of ground gases on-site from the landfill present to the north;

The underlying geology is likely to be water bearing and is classified as a Secondary ‘A’ aquifer, however as the current site use and proposed site use are considered to represent a low risk of contamination generation, it is considered unlikely that any significant impact on controlled waters will occur. As with any site, localised pockets of residual contamination from former site uses may be encountered, however, the risk of significant contamination being identified is considered to be low.

6.1.5 Geotechnical Constraints The Geotechnical constraints requiring consideration at the point of redevelopment are mainly associated with the presence of below ground obstructions (potentially former basements), however the Building Control Officer has recommended that future ground investigation will be necessary for foundation design.

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 16

6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS The site was identified to have historically been used as agricultural / residential land. Based on the information contained within this report and with due regard to the proposed residential land use, it is the opinion of WSP that the site represents a low risk with respect to contaminated land liability issues, whilst in its current use. Prior to any redevelopment works across the site, limited intrusive ground investigation is recommended to further characterise the ground conditions, risks to human health and controlled waters. In addition limited investigation will be required to provide detailed information on ground and groundwater conditions, inform foundation design and assess the potential risk posed by the migration of ground gas to the site. It is likely that should any residual contamination be identified be present, then appropriate mitigation measures may be required to limit any risk posed to human health and controlled waters. A detailed remediation strategy is unlikely to be required unless significant contamination is encountered during the ground investigation; however, it will be necessary to ensure that any areas of contamination identified during the ground investigation are appropriately managed. Under Regulation 4 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 appropriate asbestos surveys will be required on all buildings to be demolished or refurbished as part of the development to establish whether ACMs are present and what condition they are in. Where ACMs are identified they will require management on an on-going basis (using a suitable asbestos management plan (AMP)). Furthermore, it is recommended that the suitability of materials for re-use onsite or off-site is confirmed. The re-use of materials from either an off-site source or onsite materials would require regulatory approval or management under the CL:AIRE code of practice. WSP Environment & Energy

00033031-R01 Geo-environmental Desk Study, 45 Ansley Common 17

KEY

Site Boundary

TITLE

45 ANSLEY COMMON

FIGURE No

FIGURE 1 50 m

FIGURES

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

APPENDIX A – NOTES ON LIMITATIONS

General WSP Environmental Limited has prepared this report solely for the use of the Client and those parties with whom a warranty agreement has been executed, or with whom an assignment has been agreed. Should any third party wish to use or rely upon the contents of the report, written approval must be sought from WSP Environmental Limited; a charge may be levied against such approval.

WSP Environmental Limited accepts no responsibility or liability for: a) the consequences of this document being used for any purpose or project other than for which it was commissioned, and b) this document to any third party with whom an agreement has not been executed.

Phase I Environmental Audits The work undertaken to provide the basis of this report comprised a study of available documented information from a variety of sources (including the Client), together with (where appropriate) a brief walk over inspection of the site and meetings and discussions with relevant authorities and other interested parties. The opinions given in this report have been dictated by the finite data on which they are based and are relevant only to the purpose for which the report was commissioned. The information reviewed should not be considered exhaustive and has been accepted in good faith as providing true and representative data pertaining to site conditions. Should additional information become available which may affect the opinions expressed in this report, WSP Environmental Limited reserves the right to review such information and, if warranted, to modify the opinions accordingly.

It should be noted that any risks identified in this report are perceived risks based on the information reviewed; actual risks can only be assessed following a physical investigation of the site.

Phase II Environmental Audits The investigation of the site has been carried out to provide sufficient information concerning the type and degree of contamination, and ground and groundwater conditions to allow a reasonable risk assessment to be made. The objectives of the investigation have been limited to establishing the risks associated with potential human targets, building materials, the environment (including adjacent land), and to surface and groundwater.

The amount of exploratory work and chemical testing undertaken has necessarily been restricted by the short timescale available, and the locations of exploratory holes have been restricted to the areas unoccupied by the building(s) on the site and by buried services. A more comprehensive investigation may be required if the site is to be redeveloped as, in addition to risk assessment, a number of important engineering and environmental issues may need to be resolved.

For these reasons if costs have been included in relation to site remediation these must be considered as tentative only and must, in any event, be confirmed by a qualified quantity surveyor.

The exploratory holes undertaken, which investigate only a small volume of the ground in relation to the size of the site, can only provide a general indication of site conditions. The number of sampling points and the methods of sampling and testing do not preclude the existence of localised "hotspots" of contamination where concentrations may be significantly higher than those actually encountered.

The risk assessment and opinions provided, inter alia, take in to consideration currently available guidance values relating to acceptable contamination concentrations; no liability can be accepted for the retrospective effects of any future changes or amendments to these values.

Geo-environmental Investigations The investigation of the site has been carried out to provide sufficient information concerning the type and degree of contamination, geotechnical characteristics, and ground and groundwater conditions to provide a reasonable assessment of the environmental risks together with engineering and development implications.

If costs have been included in relation to site remediation these must be confirmed by a qualified quantity surveyor.

The exploratory holes undertaken, which investigate only a small volume of the ground in relation to the size of the site, can only provide a general indication of site conditions. The opinions provided and recommendations given in this report are based on the ground conditions apparent at the site of each of the exploratory holes. There may be exceptional ground conditions elsewhere on the site which have not been disclosed by this investigation and which have therefore not been taken into account in this report.

The comments made on groundwater conditions are based on observations made at the time that site work was carried out. It should be noted that groundwater levels will vary owing to seasonal, tidal and weather related effects.

The scope of the investigation was selected on the basis of the specific development proposed by the Client and may be inappropriate to another form of development or scheme.

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

APPENDIX B – PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD

PLATE 1: Battery powered forlikft

PLATE 2: Battery in forklift

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

. PLATE 3: Gas blower and heating unit for gas blower

. PLATE 4: Materials stored in warehouse

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

PLATE 5: Materials stored in warehouse

PLATE 6: Possible asbestos containing material panel damaged

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

PLATE 7: South-West corner of warehouse

PLATE 8: View of warehouse looking North

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

PLATE 9: Access to road to east of warehouse

PLATE 10: Rear elevation and shared access route

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

APPENDIX C – HISTORICAL MAP EXTRACTS

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

Historical Mapping Legends

Ordnance Survey County Series and Ordnance Survey Plan, Additional SIMs and Large-Scale National Grid Data 1:2,500 and Ordnance Survey Plan 1:2,500 Supply of Unpublished Survey Information 1:1,250 1:2,500 and 1:1,250 Historical Mapping & Photography included:

Mapping Type Scale Date Pg Warwickshire 1:2,500 1888 2 Warwickshire 1:2,500 1903 3 Warwickshire 1:2,500 1914 4 Warwickshire 1:2,500 1938 5 Ordnance Survey Plan 1:2,500 1960 6 Ordnance Survey Plan 1:1,250 1973 7 Supply of Unpublished Survey Information 1:1,250 1973 8 Ordnance Survey Plan 1:2,500 1977 9 Additional SIMs 1:1,250 1988 - 1990 10 Additional SIMs 1:2,500 1990 11 Large-Scale National Grid Data 1:1,250 1994 12 Large-Scale National Grid Data 1:2,500 1994 13 Large-Scale National Grid Data 1:1,250 1994 - 1995 14 Large-Scale National Grid Data 1:1,250 1995 15 Large-Scale National Grid Data 1:2,500 1996 16 Large-Scale National Grid Data 1:1,250 1996 17

Historical Map - Segment A13

Order Details Order Number: 40512112_1_1 Customer Ref: 33031 National Grid Reference: 431910, 293350 Slice: A Site Area (Ha): 0.04 Search Buffer (m): 100 Site Details 45 Ansley Common, NUNEATON, Warwickshire, CV10 0PP

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v47.0 30-Jul-2012 Page 1 of 17 Warwickshire Published 1888 Source map scale - 1:2,500 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas and by 1896 it covered the whole of what were considered to be the cultivated parts of Great Britain. The published date given below is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Segment A13

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v47.0 30-Jul-2012 Page 2 of 17 Warwickshire Published 1914 Source map scale - 1:2,500 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas and by 1896 it covered the whole of what were considered to be the cultivated parts of Great Britain. The published date given below is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Segment A13

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v47.0 30-Jul-2012 Page 4 of 17 Ordnance Survey Plan Published 1960 Source map scale - 1:2,500 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas and by 1896 it covered the whole of what were considered to be the cultivated parts of Great Britain. The published date given below is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Segment A13

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v47.0 30-Jul-2012 Page 6 of 17 Ordnance Survey Plan Published 1977 Source map scale - 1:2,500 The historical maps shown were reproduced from maps predominantly held at the scale adopted for England, Wales and Scotland in the 1840`s. In 1854 the 1:2,500 scale was adopted for mapping urban areas and by 1896 it covered the whole of what were considered to be the cultivated parts of Great Britain. The published date given below is often some years later than the surveyed date. Before 1938, all OS maps were based on the Cassini Projection, with independent surveys of a single county or group of counties, giving rise to significant inaccuracies in outlying areas.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Segment A13

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v47.0 30-Jul-2012 Page 9 of 17 Large-Scale National Grid Data Published 1994 Source map scale - 1:2,500 'Large Scale National Grid Data' superseded SIM cards (Ordnance Survey's 'Survey of Information on Microfilm') in 1992, and continued to be produced until 1999. These maps were the fore-runners of digital mapping and so provide detailed information on houses and roads, but tend to show less topographic features such as vegetation. These maps were produced at both 1:2,500 and 1:1,250 scales.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Segment A13

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v47.0 30-Jul-2012 Page 13 of 17 10k Raster Mapping Published 2012 Source map scale - 1:10,000 The historical maps shown were produced from the Ordnance Survey`s 1:10,000 colour raster mapping. These maps are derived from Landplan which replaced the old 1:10,000 maps originally published in 1970. The data is highly detailed showing buildings, fences and field boundaries as well as all roads, tracks and paths. Road names are also included together with the relevant road number and classification. Boundary information depiction includes county, unitary authority, district, civil parish and constituency.

Map Name(s) and Date(s)

Historical Map - Slice A

Order Details Order Number: 40512112_1_1 Customer Ref: 33031 National Grid Reference: 431910, 293350 Slice: A Site Area (Ha): 0.04 Search Buffer (m): 1000 Site Details 45 Ansley Common, NUNEATON, Warwickshire, CV10 0PP

Tel: 0844 844 9952 Fax: 0844 844 9951 Web: www.envirocheck.co.uk

A Landmark Information Group Service v47.0 30-Jul-2012 Page 19 of 19

APPENDIX D – COAL MINING REPORT

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

Issued by: The Coal Authority, Property Search Services, 200 Lichfield Lane, Berry Hill, Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, NG18 4RG Website: www.groundstability.com Phone: 0845 762 6848 DX 716176 MANSFIELD 5

LANDMARK INFORMATION GROUP Our reference: 51000134412001 LIMITED Your reference: 40512112 SOWTON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE Date of your enquiry: 30 July 2012 ABBEY COURT Date we received your enquiry: 30 July 2012 UNIT 5/7 EAGLE WAY Date of issue: 30 July 2012 EXETER DEVON EX2 7HY

This report is for the property described in the address below and the attached plan. Non-Residential Coal Authority Mining Report SITE AT: 45 ANSLEY COMMON, NUNEATON, WARWICKSHIRE, This report is based on and limited to the records held by, the Coal Authority, and the Cheshire Brine Subsidence Compensation Board's records, at the time we answer the search. Coal mining See comments below Brine Compensation District No Information from the Coal Authority Underground coal mining Past According to the records in our possession, the property is not within the zone of likely physical influence on the surface from past underground workings. However the property is in an area where the Coal Authority believe there is coal at or close to the surface. This coal may have been worked at some time in the past. Present The property is not in the likely zone of influence of any present underground coal workings. Future The property is not in an area for which the Coal Authority is determining whether to grant a licence to remove coal using underground methods. The property is not in an area for which a licence has been granted to remove or otherwise work coal using underground methods. The property is not in an area that is likely to be affected at the surface from any planned future workings. However, reserves of coal exist in the local area which could be worked at some time in the future. No notice of the risk of the land being affected by subsidence has been given under section 46 of the Coal Mining Subsidence Act 1991.

All rights reserved. You must not reproduce, store or transmit any part of this document unless you have our written permission. -- © The Coal Authority -- Non-Residential Coal Authority Mining Report - 51000134412001 Page 1 of 4 --

Mine entries There are no known coal mine entries within, or within 20 metres of, the boundary of the property. Records may be incomplete. Consequently, there may exist in the local area mine entries of which the Coal Authority has no knowledge. Coal mining geology The Authority is not aware of any evidence of damage arising due to geological faults or other lines of weakness that have been affected by coal mining. Opencast coal mining Past The property is not within the boundary of an opencast site from which coal has been removed by opencast methods. Present The property does not lie within 200 metres of the boundary of an opencast site from which coal is being removed by opencast methods. Future The property is not within 800 metres of the boundary of an opencast site for which the Coal Authority is determining whether to grant a licence to remove coal by opencast methods. The property is not within 800 metres of the boundary of an opencast site for which a licence to remove coal by opencast methods has been granted. Coal mining subsidence The Coal Authority has not received a damage notice or claim for the subject property, or any property within 50 metres, since 31st October 1994. There is no current Stop Notice delaying the start of remedial works or repairs to the property. The Authority is not aware of any request having been made to carry out preventive works before coal is worked under section 33 of the Coal Mining Subsidence Act 1991. Mine gas There is no record of a mine gas emission requiring action by the Coal Authority within the boundary of the property. Hazards related to coal mining The property has not been subject to remedial works, by or on behalf of the Authority, under its Emergency Surface Hazard Call Out procedures. Withdrawal of support The property is in an area for which a notice of entitlement to withdraw support was published in 1945. The property is not in an area for which a notice has been given under section 41 of the Coal Industry Act 1994, revoking the entitlement to withdraw support. Working facilities orders The property is not in an area for which an Order has been made under the provisions of the Mines (Working Facilities and Support) Acts 1923 and 1966 or any statutory modification or amendment thereof. Payments to owners of former copyhold land The property is not in an area for which a relevant notice has been published under the Coal Industry Act 1975/Coal Industry Act 1994.

Comments on Coal Authority information In view of the mining circumstances a prudent developer would seek appropriate technical advice before any works are undertaken. Therefore if development proposals are being considered, technical advice relating to both the investigation of coal and former coal mines and their treatment should be obtained before beginning work on site. All proposals should apply good engineering practice developed for mining areas. No development should be undertaken that intersects, disturbs or interferes with any coal or mines of coal without the permission of the Coal Authority. Developers should be aware that the investigation of coal seams/former mines of coal may have the potential to generate and/or displace underground gases and these risks both under and adjacent to the development should be fully considered in developing any proposals. The need for effective measures to prevent gases entering into public properties either during investigation or after development also needs to be assessed and properly addressed. This is necessary due to the public safety implications of any development in these circumstances. Information from the Cheshire Brine Subsidence Compensation Board The property lies outside the Cheshire Brine Compensation District. Additional Remarks This report is prepared in accordance with the Law Society's Guidance Notes 2006, the User Guide 2006 and the Coal Authority and Cheshire Brine Board's Terms and Conditions 2006. The Coal Authority owns the copyright in this report. The information we have used to write this report is protected by our database right. All rights are reserved and unauthorised use is prohibited. If we provide a report for you, this does not mean that copyright and any other rights will pass to you. However, you can use the report for your own purposes.

Location map

Approximate position of property

Enquiry boundary

Key Approximate position of enquiry boundary shown

APPENDIX E – SUPPORTING INFORMATION AND APPROACH TO RISK ASSESSMENT

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

Regulatory Information Sources Reference has been made to a Landmark Envirocheck Report. This includes information and data collated from several organisations, including the Environment Agency (EA), Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA), Health & Safety Executive (HSE), the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), and the British Geological Survey. A copy of this report can be made available on request.

Groundwater Classification Systems In accordance with the Water Framework Directive, the Environment Agency’s Groundwater Protection Policy designates aquifers with respect to their importance as a resource for drinking water supply as well as their influence(s) on surface water flows and wetland ecosystems. The designations are based on geological mapping provided by the British Geological Survey and divide the underlying superficial and bedrock strata of England and Wales into Principal Aquifers, Secondary Aquifers and Unproductive Strata.

Principal Aquifers are described as ‘…deposits that have high intergranular and/or fracture permeability – meaning they usually provide a high level of water storage. They may support water supply and/or river base flow on a strategic scale’.

Secondary Aquifers are subdivided into three types, described as follows:

- Secondary A: ‘permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale, and in some cases forming an important source of base flow to rivers’;

- Secondary B: ‘predominantly lower permeability layers which may store and yield limited amounts of groundwater due to localised features such as fissures, thin permeable horizons and weathering’; and,

- Secondary Undifferentiated: assigned where Secondary A or Secondary B classification has not been possible.

Unproductive Strata are described as ‘…deposits with low permeability that have negligible significance for water supply or river base flow’.

Source Protection Zones Source Protection Zones (SPZ) have been established by the Environment Agency for the protection of groundwater used for potable water supplies. Source Protection Zones have been classified as follows:

A Zone I (Inner Protection Zone) is defined by “a travel time of 50-days or less from any point within the zone at, or below, the water table. Additionally, the zone has as a minimum a 50-metre radius”. It is based principally on biological decay criteria and is designed to protect against the transmission of toxic chemicals and water-borne disease.

A Zone II (Outer Protection Zone) is defined by the 400-day travel time, or 25% of the source catchment area, whichever is larger. The travel time is derived from consideration of the minimum time required to provide delay, dilution and attenuation of slowly degrading pollutants.

A Zone III (Total Catchment) is defined as the total area needed to support the abstraction or discharge from the protected groundwater source.

Environment Agency General Quality Assessment Scheme (GQA) The Environment Agency measures the quality of Rivers within England and Wales at over 7,000 locations. The General Quality Assessment Scheme considers four broad categories for rivers including chemistry, biology, nutrients and aesthetics. The GQA describes quality in terms of chemical measurements which detect the most common types of pollution. It allocates one of six grades (A to F) to each stretch of river, using the same, strictly defined procedures. The grades are as follows:

A – Very Good B - Good C – Fairly Good D - Fair E – Poor F - Bad

The data collected by the Environment Agency is used to monitor the improvement or otherwise of watercourses over time.

Legislative context

Contaminated Land Regime: Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990

The Contaminated Land Regime in Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (Part 2A) was introduced specifically to address the historical legacy of land contamination. Part 2A includes a statutory definition of “contaminated land”:

“ any land which appears to the local authority in whose area it is situated to be in such a condition, by reason of substances in, on or under the land, that:

(a) significant harm is being caused or there is a significant possibility of such harm being caused; or

(b) pollution of controlled waters is being, or is likely to be caused”.

The statutory guidance does not however provide any absolute measurable criteria. Determining whether any land is “contaminated land” is likely to involve local authorities making a judgement in each case based on an assessment of the risks. Part 2A aims to ensure the identification and remediation of sites that, in the context of their current use, and the relevant circumstances of the land, pose “unacceptable risks” to human health or the wider environment.

The approach to “unacceptable risk” is based on the principles of risk assessment, including the concept of a contaminant, a pathway and a receptor, which if combined form a pollutant linkage. These and other key terms are defined in Part 2A and in statutory guidance set out in Annex 3 to DEFRA Circular 01/2006 (DEFRA 2006a).

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

Planning and Part 2A

Planning Policy Statement 23 is clear that the standard of remediation to be achieved through the grant of planning permission for new development, including permission for land remediation activities, is the removal of unacceptable risk and making the site suitable for its new use. As a minimum, after carrying out the development and commencement of its use, the land should not be capable of being determined as contaminated land under Part 2A.

DEFRA Circular 01/2006 (DEFRA 2006a)

Annex 3 to DEFRA Circular 01/2006 provides, in five Chapters, the detailed framework for Part 2A. The definition and identification of contaminated land are set out in Chapters A and B respectively.

The definition of contaminated land is based upon the principles of risk assessment. For the purposes of this guidance, “risk” is defined as the combination of:

(a) the probability, or frequency, of occurrence of a defined hazard (for example, exposure to a property of a substance with the potential to cause harm); and

(b) the magnitude (including the seriousness) of the consequences.

There are two steps in applying the definition of contaminated land. The first step is for the local authority to satisfy itself that a “contaminant”, a “pathway” (or pathways), and a “receptor” have been identified with respect to that land.

A contaminant is a substance which is in, on or under the land and which has the potential to cause harm or to cause pollution of controlled waters.

A receptor is either:

(a) a living organism, a group of living organisms, an ecological system or a piece of property which

(i) is in a category listed in DEFRA 2006a, Table A as a type of receptor (this includes Human Beings, specified ecological receptors and Property (see below)); 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; or

A pathway 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.

The identification of each of these three elements is linked to the identification of the others. A pathway can only be identified if it is capable of exposing an identified receptor to an identified contaminant. That particular contaminant should likewise be capable of harming, or, in the case of controlled waters, be capable of polluting that particular receptor.

The second step in applying the definition of contaminated land is for the local authority to satisfy itself that both:

(a) such a pollutant linkage exists in respect of a piece of land; and

(b) that pollutant linkage:

(i) is resulting in significant harm being caused to the receptor in the pollutant linkage,

(ii) presents a significant possibility of significant harm being caused to that receptor,

(iii) is resulting in the pollution of the controlled waters which constitute the receptor,

(iv) is likely to result in such pollution,

(v) is resulting in harm so far as attributable to radioactivity being caused to any person in the pollutant linkage, or

(vi) presents a significant possibility of harm so far as attributable to radioactivity being caused to any person in the pollutant linkage.

Section 78A(4) defines “harm” as meaning “harm to the health of living organisms or other interference with the ecological systems of which they form part and, in the case of man, includes harm to his property”. Section 78A(5) provide that what harm is to be regarded as “significant” and whether the possibility of significant harm being caused is significant shall be determined in accordance with this guidance.

The local authority should regard as significant only harm which is both:

(a) to a receptor of a type listed in DEFRA 2006a, Table A as a type of receptor (this includes Human Beings and Property), and

(b) within the description of harm including death, disease, serious injury, genetic mutation, birth defects or the impairment of reproductive functions (as detailed in Table A).

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

The authority should disregard any receptors which are not likely to be present, given the “current use” of the land or other land which might be affected. For the purposes of this guidance, the “current use” means any use which is currently being made, or is likely to be made, of the land and which is consistent with any existing planning permission (or is otherwise lawful under town and country planning legislation).

This definition is subject to the following qualifications:

(a) the current use should be taken to include any temporary use, permitted under town and country planning legislation, to which the land is, or is likely to be, put from time to time;

(b) the current use includes future uses or developments which do not require a new, or amended, grant of planning permission;

(c) the current use should, nevertheless, be taken to include any likely informal recreational use of the land, whether authorised by the owners or occupiers or not, (for example, children playing on the land); however, in assessing the likelihood of any such informal use, the local authority should give due attention to measures taken to prevent or restrict access to the land; and

(d) in the case of agricultural land, however, the current agricultural use should not be taken to extend beyond the growing or rearing of the crops or animals which are habitually grown or reared on the land.

The guidance on determining whether a particular possibility is significant is based on the principles of risk assessment, and in particular on considerations of the magnitude or consequences of the different types of significant harm caused. The term “possibility of significant harm being caused” should be taken as referring to a measure of the probability, or frequency, of the occurrence of circumstances which would lead to significant harm being caused.

The local authority should take into account the following factors in deciding whether the possibility of significant harm being caused is significant:

(a) the nature and degree of harm;

(b) the susceptibility of the receptors to which the harm might be caused; and

In considering the timescale, the authority should take into account any evidence that the current use of the land will cease in the foreseeable future.

Ecological Receptors Ecological receptors are limited to any ecological system, or living organism forming part of such a system, within a location which is:

an area notified as an area of special scientific interest under section 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981;

any land declared a national nature reserve under section 35 of that Act;

any area designated as a marine nature reserve under section 36 of that Act;

an area of special protection for birds, established under section 3 of that Act;

any European Site within the meaning of regulation 10 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats etc) Regulations 1994 (i.e. Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas);

any candidate Special Areas of Conservation or potential Special Protection Areas given equivalent protection;

any habitat or site afforded policy protection under paragraph 6 of Planning Policy Statement (PPS 9) on nature conservation (i.e. candidate Special Areas of Conservation, potential Special Protection Areas and listed Ramsar sites); or

any nature reserve established under section 21 of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949.

Property as a Receptor The following are considered potential receptors under statutory guidance:

Crops, including timber;

Produce grown domestically, or on allotments, for consumption;

Livestock;

Other owned or domesticated animals;

Wild animals which are the subject of shooting or fishing rights.

Property in the form of buildings. For this purpose, “building” means any structure or erection, and any part of a building including any part below ground level, but does not include plant or machinery comprised in a building.

The migration of contaminants onto third party land may not necessarily cause ‘harm’ to the listed receptors but may still represent a potential liability.

Tiered Assessment Approach The approach to risk assessment with respect to risks to human health from contaminated land in the UK is set out in the publication Guidelines for Environmental Risk Assessment and Management (DETR 2000). This sets out a tiered approach:

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton

Tier 1: Risk screening (e.g. establishing potential pollutant linkages) (Preliminary Risk Assessment);

Tier 2: Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment (GQRA) (e.g. the comparison of contaminant concentrations against Soil Guideline Values); and

Tier 3: Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment (DQRA) (e.g. the comparison of contaminant concentrations against site specific assessment criteria).

This report includes a Tier 1 Screening Exercise (Preliminary Risk Assessment)

Risk Assessment Approach With respect to contaminated land, within this report, CIRIA C552 has been used to provide an estimate as to the potential severity of risk associated with any potential pollutant linkages identified. The following tables have been reproduced from CIRIA C552 and have been used within the risk assessment in this report.

Table 6.3 Classification of consequence

Classification Definition Examples

Severe Short-term (acute) risk to human health likely to result in “significant High concentrations of cyanide on the surface of an harm” as defined by the Environment Protection Act 1990, Part 11A. informal recreation area. Short-term risk of pollution (note: Water Resources Act contains no scope for considering significance of pollution) of sensitive water Major spillage of contaminants from site into controlled resource. Catastrophic damage to buildings/property. A short-term water. risk to a particular ecosystem, or organism forming part of such ecosystem (note: the definitions of ecological systems within the Draft Explosion, causing building collapse (can also equate Circular on Contaminated Land, DETR, 2000). to a short-term human health risk if buildings are occupied).

Medium Chronic damage to Human Health (“significant harm” as defined in Concentrations of a contaminant from site exceed the DETR, 2000). Pollution of sensitive water resources (note: Water generic, or site-specific assessment criteria. Resources Act contains no scope for considering significance of pollution). A significant change in a particular ecosystem, or organism Leaching of contaminants from a site to a major or forming part of such ecosystem (note: the definitions of ecological minor aquifer. systems within Draft Circular on Contaminated Land, DETR, 2000). Death of a species within a designated nature reserve.

Mild Pollution of non-sensitive water resources. Significant damage to Pollution of non-classified groundwater. crops, buildings, structures and services (“significant harm” as defined in the Draft Circular on Contaminated Land, DETR, 2000). Damage to Damage to building rendering it unsafe to occupy (e.g. sensitive buildings/structures/services or the environment. foundation damage resulting in instability).

Minor Harm, although not necessarily significant harm, which may result in a The presence of contaminants at such concentrations financial loss, or expenditure to resolve. Non-permanent health that protective equipment is required during site works. effects to human health (easily prevented by means such as personal protective clothing etc.) Easily reparable effects of damage to The loss of plants in a landscaping scheme. buildings, structures and services. Discoloration of concrete.

Table 6.4 Classification of probability

Classification Definition

High Likelihood There is a pollution linkage and an event that appears either very likely in the short term and almost inevitable over the long term, or there is evidence at the receptor of harm or pollution.

Likely There is a pollution linkage and all the elements are present and in the right place, which means that it is probably that an event will occur

Circumstances are such that an event is not inevitable, but possible in the short term and likely over the long term.

Low likelihood There is a pollution linkage and circumstances are possible under which an event could occur.

However, it is by no means certain that even over a longer period such event would take place, and is less likely in the shorter term.

Unlikely There is pollution linkage but circumstances are such that it is improbable that an event would occur even in the long term.

00033032-R0100028970-R01 Geoenvironmental Desk Study, Site A Ryton