PART 2A Environmental Protection Act 1990 Contaminated Land

Home , Mendip District, Mendip Rail, Oakhill, Somerset coalfield

PART 2A Environmental Protection Act 1990

Contaminated Land Strategy 2018

Environmental Protection

For information on the Contaminated Land Register, potentially contaminated land and advice on Environmental Searches please use the contact details below:

Telephone: 0300 303 8588

Email: [email protected]

Address: Contaminated Land Officer Mendip District Council Cannards Grave Road Shepton Mallet BA4 5BT

Contents 1.0 Introduction ...... 6 1.1 Background ...... 6 1.2 Scope ...... 6 1.3 Consultations ...... 7 1.4 Aims, objectives and priorities ...... 7 1.4.1 Aims ...... 7 1.4.2 Objectives (key considerations) ...... 8 1.4.3 Priorities ...... 8 2.0 About Mendip District ...... 9 2.1 Demography ...... 9 2.2 Geology ...... 9 2.3 Ecology ...... 10 2.4 Hydrology ...... 11 2.5 Past use ...... 12 2.5.1 Mining and quarrying ...... 12 2.5.2 Mills...... 13 2.5.3 Tanning and leather works ...... 15 2.5.4 Fuelling Stations...... 15 2.5.5 Landfills ...... 16 2.5.6 Railways ...... 16 2.5.7 Others ...... 17 2.6 Current use ...... 18 3.0 Strategic Inspection ...... 19 4.0 Detailed Inspection ...... 21 4.1 Prioritisation of Sites and Remediation ...... 22 5.0 Approaches to dealing with land contamination ...... 23 5.1 Approaches under Part 2A ...... 23 5.2 The planning system ...... 24 5.2.1 Standard Conditions ...... 26 5.2.2 Gas Conditions ...... 27 5.2.3 Naturally occurring contamination and lead contamination ...... 28 5.2.4 Informatives ...... 29 5.3 Encouraging polluters/owners of land to deal with contamination ...... 29 5.4 Regeneration work ...... 31

6.0 Minimising unnecessary burdens on taxpayers, businesses and individuals ...... 32 7.0 Future Commitments ...... 32 7.1 Contaminated Land Strategy Review ...... 33 BIBLOGRAPHY ...... 34 GLOSSARY ...... 36 APPENDIX A ...... 38 APPENDIX B ...... 44 APPENDIX C ...... 45

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Background

This Mendip District Council 2018 Contaminated Land Strategy reviews and replaces the June 2007 Version 2.0. It is available on the Council’s Contaminated Land website.

In April 2012, a revision to the Statutory Guidance by the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) was published with the aim to clarify the approach for identifying and determining contaminated land. It encouraged Local Authorities to set out its approach as a formally adopted strategy which should be updated or replaced to reflect the new guidance.

The contaminated land regime deals with protecting health and the environment from potential harm from historical contamination. There is also regulations to cover current issues, this can include where historic contamination has been mobilised.

1.2 Scope

This strategy sets out how Mendip District Council (‘the Council’) identifies and manages potentially contaminated land in the district. It reaffirms the Council’s intended approach to the fulfilment of its statutory duties going forward. It takes into account important changes in Statutory Guidance, National and Council Policy, as well as developments in the science and policy issues that lie behind the risk assessment of potentially contaminated land.

Issues relating to planning, planning policy, ground stability and structural matters are not covered by this strategy and advice from the relevant departments should be sought.

Included within this strategy:

Section 1 – The Council’s aims, objectives and priorities, taking into account the characteristics of its area (e.g. history and geology);

Section 2 – A description of relevant aspects of its area;

Section 3 – The Council’s approach to strategic inspection of its area or parts of it;

Section 4 – The Council’s approach to the prioritisation of detailed inspection and remediation activity;

Section 5 – How the Council’s approach under Part 2A fits with its broader approach to dealing with land contamination; and

Section 6 – Broadly, how the Council will seek to minimise unnecessary burdens on the taxpayer, businesses and individuals.

1.3 Consultations

A consultation draft was produced in August 2017 and sent for consultation with Internal Consultees, as well as the Statutory and Regulatory Authorities and external groups and organisations. The details of which are included in Appendix A, along with copies of the consultation responses.

1.4 Aims, objectives and priorities

The following list identified in 1.4.1 are the four key aims that the Council strives towards through its regulation of contaminated land issues (taking into account the local characteristics).

In order to achieve the aims section 1.4.2 identifies the key considerations or objectives.

Finally, 1.4.3 details the priorities, which are the key activities needed to be carried out in order to fulfil the objectives.

These are the Council’s current aims, objectives and priorities. They may be reviewed and revised as the Strategy is implemented, targets are achieved, and in light of changes in Council policy, Government guidance or legislation, taking into consideration best practice.

It is not intended that these aims will be achievable solely through the implementation of the Part 2A legislation. Delivery of other Mendip District Council’s strategies and statutory functions may also contribute.

1.4.1 Aims

1) To improve and protect the environment and health of residents, as well as the controlled waters, ecosystems and property in the district;

2) To fulfil the Council’s responsibilities with respect to implementing environmental legislation such as Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990;

3) To encourage regeneration and redevelopment with sustainable remediation methods as appropriate; and

4) To raise awareness and promote the understanding of the causes and effects of land contamination, in order to prevent further contamination.

1.4.2 Objectives (key considerations)

 To ensure that a strategic approach is used for dealing with contaminated land;

 To identify and remove unacceptable risks to human health and the environment;

 To ensure that the planning process deals effectively with any land contamination so that land is suitable for its proposed use and that the re-use and remediation of brownfield land is in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework;

 To ensure that remedial action is reasonable, practicable, effective and durable;

 To ensure that the burdens faced by individuals, companies and society as a whole are proportionate, manageable and compatible with the principles of sustainable development;

 To help, encourage and support voluntary remediation as far as it considers reasonable and practicable or where necessary using enforcement action;

 Ensure wherever possible that the original polluter pays for land remediation; and  To maintain a public register of contaminated land.

1.4.3 Priorities

 Continue with the identification and prioritisation of contaminated land sites in a rational, ordered and efficient manner which reflects any local circumstances;  Be proportionate to the seriousness of any actual or potential risks, inspecting any sites that come to light as a matter of urgency where there is a risk to human health;  Ensure that resources are concentrated on investigating areas where the authority is most likely to identify contaminated land;  To take into consideration options from the landowner (or other interested parties) in providing information to help resolve the status of the land;

 To ensure that development on potentially contaminated land will not be permitted unless evidence has been submitted to show that the possibility, nature and extent of contamination has been properly investigated and assessed and that any remediation measures necessary to deal with the contamination will be effective; and

 Ensure that there is no long term detrimental effect on the environment or unacceptable risks to the health and safety of the local population as a result of the disturbance of contaminants during and after development.

2.0 About Mendip District

2.1 Demography

Mendip is a district of Somerset located in the South West covering an area of 738 square kilometres. Mendip District is predominately rural but with the five population centres of Frome, Glastonbury, Street, Shepton Mallet and Wells. From the Somerset Intelligence website, the district had an estimated population in 2016 of 112,545, with around two thirds living in the five main centres. Frome is the largest town while Glastonbury is the smallest.

There are in excess of 100 smaller rural settlements, varying in size from the largest villages like Coleford and Chilcompton (population circa 2,000) through to the smallest of hamlets which may consist of a dozen or so houses.

Image 1: Map of Mendip District within Somerset

2.2 Geology

The Mendip Hills are the most southerly Carboniferous Limestone upland in Britain and are one of the UK’s principal sources of high quality hard Carboniferous Limestone rock and the district contains several active quarries. Most of these lie between Shepton Mallet and Frome, providing around 12 million tonnes of stone per year, and indirectly employ 1,500 people across varied sectors.

Mendip’s geological structure is dominated by the Mendip Hills with the folded and uplifted Carboniferous and older Devonian and Silurian rocks. Ongoing erosion has exposed the rocks as seen in the Mendip Hills today. Mineralisation of the rocks resulted in the formation of veins of lead, zinc, barites and manganese.

Jurassic rocks and the subsequent Cretaceous deposits are mainly found in the north east of the district but isolated outliers of Jurassic limestones cap the East Pennard and Ivythorn ridges and form the distinctive feature of Glastonbury Tor.

The Somerset Levels, where peat deposits can reach over 4m in thickness, also extend into part of the Mendip District. Peat has been extracted from the low-lying peat moors since the Middle Ages or earlier. Its early use was as a fuel but now it is used only for horticultural purposes.

Image 2: Glastonbury Tor

The Somerset coalfield extends into the north eastern area of the district where there is a Coal Mining Development Referral Area in the Coleford and Holcombe area. The Coal Authority is the government organisation which works to protect the public and the environment in past coal mining areas.

For further information on geology the British Geological Survey is the most authoritative source of information together with universities.

The geology of the Mendip District also gives rise to potentially concerning levels of radon gas. Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas which is emitted by certain rocks and soils. Some of the largest emissions in the country originate from rocks present in the south west of England. Radon only becomes hazardous to health when it builds up in enclosed spaces. The Public Health England UK radon website provides additional information and services.

2.3 Ecology

The district is one of ecological importance with Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), National Nature Reserves, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and County Wildlife Sites. Natural England currently manages the ‘MAGIC’ website, which can be used to identify such areas. Image 3: Historic slag heaps, Priddy within Mendip Hills AONB 10

Image 4: Designated Landscapes and Wildlife Sites across Mendip District

2.4 Hydrology

The Environment Agency is the lead regulator on controlled waters and hence it holds information on water quality.

The online Groundwater Source Protection Zones Map produced by the Environment Agency shows the Mendip District to contain a large major aquifer area of intermediate groundwater vulnerability. In the Carboniferous limestone area the major aquifer of high vulnerability is particularly susceptible to pollution either by swallet holes, caves or direct infiltration.

There are a number of private water supplies in the Mendip District, these are water supplies which are not provided directly by a water company e.g. a well, spring or borehole, stream, river, lake or pond. The supply may serve just one property or several properties. All private water supplies that are intended for human consumption must be registered with the Council, which provide a chargeable service to test the water supply. The service checks compliance with prescribed concentrations or values for microbiological and chemical parameters to ensure that the water is safe to drink/use. Details of which can be found on the Mendip District Council website.

2.5 Past use

Mendip is predominantly a rural area with an important agricultural history but also with a number of industrial processes. The industrial history of Mendip District has left a legacy of land that may be contaminated due to the accidental or deliberate release of substances that are potentially harmful to human health and the environment. Unacceptable levels of naturally occurring substances may also be present.

Analysis of past use can help inform the possible contamination present. The former Department of Industry profiles detail the typical range of contaminants found on historic sites, those that are most relevant are discussed separately in the following sections and include:

 Mining and quarrying;  Mills;  Tanning and leather works;  Petrol Filling Stations;  Landfills;  Railways; and  Others (brewing, metal-working, gas works).

2.5.1 Mining and quarrying

The district’s rich mineral resources have been exploited since prehistoric times. Coal, lead, zinc, manganese, iron, copper, barites and calamine have all been mined in the past. Today the principal minerals extracted are limestone, basalt and peat.

Stone quarrying is a long-established industry with some quarries dating from the Middle Ages and earlier; the cluster of large quarries in the east Mendip area being one of the primary producers of limestone aggregate in the UK.

The name Mendips itself was believed to be derived from the mediaeval term ‘Myne- deepes’. Lead could have been mined on the Mendips since the Bronze Age and it has also been suggested that the Roman invasion may have been inspired in part due to the Mendip mines and in particular the potential for silver extraction.

The peak known recorded lead output from the Mendips was in the 17th century and again its importance was based on the precious metals, in particular the levels of silver, as the galena lead ore has been recorded as containing up to 7% silver.

The richest lead ore deposits were believed to be originally located near the villages of Priddy and Charterhouse. These ‘mineries’ locations were important water holding areas, where a number of mining processes were known to have taken place in these across the centuries.

Unlike the great mining regions in Cornwall, Mendip was found to be too flat to drive off the water and the flooded mines became unworkable, which was one of the reasons believed to have caused the decline of the mines.

Image 5: Smitham Chimney, the last lead-smelting chimney in Mendip

The Coal Mining reporting area as defined by the Coal Authority is located generally between Litton and Buckland Dinham and extends south to Stoke St Michael. Most coal was extracted from a large number of generally small mines between Chilcompton and Mells, which worked the thin coal seams in the lower and middle coal measures. Up to nine named coal seams were exploited in the lower coal measures.

2.5.2 Mills

Mills have been an important part of Mendip’s industrial past. Many places already had a mill by Domesday; these were grist mills (for grinding grain). From the 12th century the cloth industry made use of fulling mills, where great wooden stocks were used for beating cloth until it was felted. New water mills were built to power the fulling stocks and in some cases existing corn mills were converted for fulling.

Water mills were built in almost every parish. Water and waterpower were also vital for papermaking and the purity of the fast flowing Mendip water made it a centre for papermaking from at least the 16th century. Paper mills operated at Wookey Hole and nearby at St

Cuthbert’s Mill and Dulcote. Some water mills were used in edge-tool manufacture, notably the Fussells operation in and around Mells, Chantry and Stoke St Michael.

There were a huge number of mills in Mendip in the 18th and 19th centuries. For example, there is evidence of a least 25 mills along the course of the Mells Stream and its tributaries between Great Elm and Gurney Slade.

The wealth of Mendip’s towns throughout the later Middle Ages, and for the post-medieval period, was based on the thriving cloth industry. Wool was produced on the Mendip Hills and cloth was processed in the many fulling mills that were situated along the rivers and fast- flowing streams.

Textile production was a mainstay of the Mendip economy from the Middle Ages until the 19th century. Wool, silk, velvet, crêpe, moleskin and tweed were all produced, but the area was primarily known for wool, particularly in the towns of Frome and Shepton Mallet. With the decline of the industry some mills were demolished, converted to grist mills or converted into other industrial processes. Mills frequently changed their function to meet the need of the moment, their power being turned to corn grinding, cloth fulling, silk spinning, edge-tool grinding and so on as required. Wallbridge Mills in Frome was the last working cloth mill, closing in 1965.

Image 6: Wookey Hole Paper Mill

2.5.3 Tanning and leather works

Leather-working has a long history in the area, with its main impact from the 19th and 20th centuries when the small village of Street grew on the leather-working and shoe-manufacturing process, as well as at Glastonbury where leather-working and sheepskin was processed at the Morland’s factory. John Morland who bought a tannery in Glastonbury, was apparently attracted by the unusual purity of the water. Minor tanneries also existed at North Wootton, Pilton, Baltonsborough and potentially other locations.

Image 7: Shoe Museum, Street

2.5.4 Fuelling Stations

The number of active fuelling stations in the district has been decreasing with the growth of supermarket fuelling stations. Due to the difficulty or expense of removing the number of underground storage tanks, redundant fuelling stations are often left or developed into other commercial uses such as car washes and car sales.

With regards to storage of petroleum hydrocarbons, the petroleum licensing officer at Devon and Somerset Trading Standards can provide details of any recorded disused and decommissioned tanks if they were used for fuel.

The Environment Agency can provide guidance with regards to making tanks safe. Where sites are redeveloped the underground tanks are removed during the regeneration process and regulated through development control.

Image 8: Former fuelling station 15

2.5.5 Landfills

Waste disposal has been the final use for the majority of inactive and historic quarries. Other areas that have been in-filled include former land-drains, ponds, pits and railway cuttings.

The fill material in former landfill or in-filled sites is often unknown (or cannot be fully verified) since many of the sites operated before the controls enforced under the Control of Pollution Act 1974.

With regards to unlicensed sites, it is not always clear what was deposited without analysis and even then given the amount and variety of waste, there may be pockets of certain contaminants that still may not be identified. Landfill sites not only contain contaminated waste but can also produce gases and liquid leachate.

2.5.6 Railways

From the 1850s a railway network of some complexity developed in the Mendip area, eventually being simplified to operate as the Great Western and the Somerset and Dorset Joint, with a number of small mineral lines serving the collieries and quarries. Stone is still carried by Mendip Rail; with the other railways in the area closing in the 1960s. The numerous disused railway lines are now mainly agricultural land, landfill or the routes of roads.

Along with the potential contamination associated with railways including the goods and material carried, the historical treatment of railway sleepers has left them and the associated land with a potential for metal contamination.

Image 9: East Somerset Railway 16

2.5.7 Others

Brewing, cider and perry-making have been important in Mendip’s industrial history. There is evidence of the brewing industry as early as the sixteenth century, peaking after 1800. Breweries were founded at Holcombe, Wells and Shepton Mallet including the large Anglo- Bavarian brewery built in 1864. By 1889 there were 17 in the Mendips. The most enduring was Oakhill, founded in 1767 and was served by the only brewery light railway in England, built in 1904.

Image 10: Former Anglo-Bavarian brewery, Shepton Mallet

Metal-working was an important industry with the likes of Fussell’s ironworks of Mells, who were significant edge-tool manufacturers in the 19th century. In addition, Singers art metal works was one of Frome’s major employers. Their castings and statuary still exists across England and they were also an important munitions supplier during both world wars. There was also often unrecorded wartime use of engineering businesses.

Gas works were located in the major populated areas but there were also a number of works serving industrial sites (Mells steel and ironworks), hospitals and asylums (Old Wells Mental Hospital), manor houses and abbeys.

The Somerset Historic Environment Record is a database of information on archaeological sites, monuments and buildings in the current county of Somerset.

2.6 Current use

One of the most important features of the District is that of tourism and the economic benefits it brings to the district. Visitors are attracted by the historical, ecological features, as well as events such as those held at the Bath and West Showground and Glastonbury Festival.

The district is mainly agricultural with industrial estates associated with the towns.

Quarrying for aggregates is now the major extractive industry, particularly in eastern Mendip.

Peat extraction on the Somerset Levels and Moors has taken place since medieval times. Large scale commercial extraction first began in 1870, supplying peat for fuel and animal bedding markets, and more recently horticulture.

For more details please refer to the Local plan 2006 - 2029, which is periodically updated and available on the Council’s website.

Image 11: Royal Bath and West Show

3.0 Strategic Inspection

Historically, there has been few controls on the use of industrial land until the early 1990’s, when the Government proposed a regime of identifying and dealing with contaminated land under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

Further new regulations came into force on 1st April 2000 (Environmental Protection Act 1990: Part IIA, hereafter referred to as Part 2A), requiring local authorities to inspect their land for the purpose of identifying and remediating contaminated land. The legislation also requires that local authorities prepare, implement and keep under periodic review a Contaminated Land Strategy.

Revised statutory guidance to local authorities on the implementation of Part 2A in England in 2012 stated that:

2.3. The local authority should take a strategic approach to carrying out its inspection duty under section 78B(1). This approach should be rational,

ordered and efficient, and it should reflect local circumstances.

In carrying out its Part 2A duties in a strategic manner, the Council has to date paid due regard to: its own local circumstances; the level of detailed information on the district currently available; and the accessibility of internal/external funding.

Reflecting on local circumstances has identified a number of key characteristics:

Almost 2,000 potentially contaminated sites of varying size and type Rich and Detailed varied historic uses biodiversity

Key Local Large number of Characteristics Larger scale sites developed industries through planning mainly in the 4 and remediated towns and 1 to standards of city the time Strategically Complex important water geology creating resource area contamination containing large from mining proportion of fallout or groundwater natural deposits vulnerable to contamination

With these local circumstances in mind, the Council’s approach to strategic inspection of the district has highlighted the significant past land uses and their likely spread within the towns and city, as well as across the whole district.

The widespread historic activity in both rural and urban areas indicates the need for an assessment and inspection methodology. The interests of designated sites and landscapes in the district have also been considered in the preparation of this Strategy. The Council adopts a rational approach to inspect all areas of potentially contaminated land across the district. With further information gathered, the sites can then be ordered and prioritised based on potential risks from contamination.

The Council has developed a geographical information system (GIS) and an associated database to store and manage the information, which has enabled potentially contaminated land to be identified.

Under Part 2A, risks should be considered only in relation to the current use of the land.

Part 2A Statutory Guidance 2012 s.3.5 - “Current use” means:

a) The use which is being made of the land currently; b) Reasonable likely future uses of the land that would not require a new or amended grant of planning permission; c) Any temporary use to which the land is put, or is likely to be put, from time to time within the bounds of current planning permission; d) Likely informal use of the land, for example children playing on the land, whether authorised by the owners or occupiers, or not; and e) In the case of agricultural land, 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 starting assumption of Part 2A is that land is not contaminated land unless there is reason to consider otherwise.

The Council’s list of almost 2,000 potentially contaminated sites is always being updated as new information comes to light. However, it should be emphasised that only a small proportion of these sites are likely to meet the legal definition of contaminated land.

In the first instance, of the list of potentially contaminated sites, a number can be discounted from further investigation as the source type was unlikely to produce gross pollution and/or there are no receptors to be impacted under the pollutant linkage detailed in section 4.0. Therefore, even though these sites remain on the Council’s list of potentially contaminated sites, they are considered unlikely to be contaminated under the Part 2A legislation. The remaining sites of interest can then be prioritised. This involves individual site assessments including a desk study initially, site history, a walk over and a risk ranking based on a source – pathway – receptor model. This process results in a list of high, medium and low risk sites. Where, in the first instance, the higher priority sites would then require detailed inspection.

4.0 Detailed Inspection

To ensure potentially contaminated areas are identified quickly and resources targeted efficiently, the Council adopts a systematic risk-based approach to dealing with potentially contaminated land.

This is carried out by a more detailed analysis on a site by site basis. This inspection identifies the locations and characteristics of the receptors, in order to enable the confirmation of the presence or absence of a significant pollutant linkage.

In order to define land as contaminated it must not only have contamination present in, on or under it but there must also be an exposure route for the pollutant to cause significant harm to the receiving body. This will rely on there being a source of pollution, a receptor that could be harmed by the pollutant and a pathway for the pollutant to reach the receptor. Where these three conditions exist this is defined as a pollutant linkage. This is depicted in following figures.

Pollutant linkage examples

Sources Pathways Receptors Lead (rifle ranges) Direct contact Humans Methane (landfills) Gas ingress to buildings Buildings Petrol (fuel stations) Migration into Groundwater Controlled waters Uptake by plants Plants/Ecosystems Property (other, inc livestock and pets)

All three elements of a pollutant linkage must exist in relation to a particular site and a ‘significant pollutant linkage’ must be identified for land to be considered as contaminated land, under Part 2A. This would be on the basis that significant harm is being caused to a relevant receptor, or that there is a significant possibility of such harm being caused. For example, harm to humans could be death; life threatening diseases; other diseases likely to have serious impacts on health; serious injury; birth defects; impairment of reproductive functions; and others.

Image 12: Potential Exposure Pathways (EA, 2009)

4.1 Prioritisation of Sites and Remediation

Following strategic and detailed inspection, there will be some sites where there is potential for a significant pollutant linkage and these can be prioritised.

The Council then carries out further inspections using a robust, appropriate, scientific and technical assessment of all the relevant and available evidence. The Council can then determine whether or not a site meets the legal definition of contaminated land under Part 2A. The Council aims to encourage voluntary remediation and therefore sites shown to have a significant pollutant linkage may not always be determined as contaminated land under Part 2A. However, if no alternative solutions can be reached, then the site will be determined to ensure it is dealt with accordingly, usually in the form of remediation action.

Remedial actions should reduce or remove the significant pollutant linkage. This may involve cleaning up the contamination, breaking the pathway, or modifying the receptor. The overall aim of remediation is to remedy harm/pollution and to ensure that risks are reduced to an acceptable level.

The Council is required to maintain a public Contaminated Land Register that provides a full and permanent record of all regulatory action taken by the Council in respect of remediation of contaminated land, as required by s.78R (EPA 1990 Part IIA).

The Contaminated Land Register can be obtained electronically or viewed in person by prior arrangement at the Shepton Mallet Council offices during normal office hours. Reasonable charges will be made to cover any photocopying costs.

5.0 Approaches to dealing with land contamination

5.1 Approaches under Part 2A

The statutory guidance states that the enforcing authorities should seek to use Part 2A only where no appropriate alternative solutions exists. It has introduced a number of tools to aid the Part 2A risk assessment process and consequently the decisions on whether land should be determined as contaminated or not.

The statutory guidance not only introduced the consideration of naturally occurring contamination, which as detailed in section 5.1.3 has an impact on the Mendip District. It also presents the requirements for Risk Summaries. These are produced after detailed inspection but prior to formal determination. They should be understandable to the layperson, including the owners of the land and members of the public who may be affected by the decision. Risk Summaries should include the risks, uncertainties, the risks in context (locally and nationally) and possible remediation options.

In the event where there are no alternative solutions and a site is determined under Part 2A, then remediation would be required to the best practicable technique. The remediation approach should be proportionate taking into account social-economic factors and be in line with sustainable development.

Under Part 2A Authorities should use their judgement to strike a reasonable balance between:

a) Dealing with risks from contaminants and the benefits of remediation; and b) The potential impacts including financial costs, health and environmental impacts, property blights and burdens on affected on affected people. The broad aim should be to manage or remediate land in such a way that risks are minimised as far as is reasonably practicable. That is, for example, there may cases where after all considerations it is concluded that a land management system is more beneficial than removing and replacing soils.

One of the three overarching objectives of the Government’s policy on contaminated land and the Part 2A regime is to ensure that the burdens faced by individuals, companies and society as a whole are proportionate, manageable and compatible with the principles of sustainable development. This is therefore also one of the Council’s objectives as listed in section 1.4.2.

5.2 The planning system

The Part 2A regime also enables regulators to take action where development has already occurred but remediation has not taken place or has been unsuccessful. This places a stronger emphasis on the importance of addressing contaminated land through the planning process. Ensuring that contaminated land is dealt with during development reduces potential future liabilities and potentially more costly remediation once a site has been developed.

National Planning Policy is set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which seeks to encourage a strong, competitive economy. Its Core Planning Principles prioritise the reuse of brownfield sites (previously developed land) for development, which is supported by the Council.

The Council actively encourages the development of brownfield sites and the local plan states that since 2006, the District has been successful in securing 2,131 of the total 3,201 new homes (67%) on brownfield sites to 2013. Land supply data considered in the local plan also suggests that brownfield sites will continue to play a part in delivering a substantial number of new homes in the period to 2029.

Land affected by contamination (or the possibility of it) is a material planning consideration to be taken into account to ensure that land is made suitable for use when it is redeveloped. The development or redevelopment during the planning or building control processes will continue to be the primary mechanism for ensuring remediation of contaminated sites within Mendip. This means that the Local Planning Authority (LPA) has to consider the potential implications of contamination both when it is developing Local Plans and when it is considering individual applications for planning permissions. This results in the majority of contaminated land being dealt with through the planning process, with only a small amount having to fall under the Part 2A regime.

Within the Local Plan there are a number of local Development Policies that are used to consider development proposals. Under ‘Protecting Distinctive Character and Promoting Better Development’, consideration for contaminated land comes under ‘Development Policy 8 – Environmental Protection’, reproduced in Appendix B.

The Local Plan works within, alongside and takes account of, the National Planning Policy Framework, which sets out the Government’s policies on different aspects of planning.

NPPF s121: Planning policies and decisions should also ensure that:

- the site is suitable for its new use taking account of ground conditions and land instability, including from natural hazards or former activities such as mining, pollution arising from previous uses and any proposals for mitigation including land remediation or impacts on the natural environment arising from that remediation;

- after remediation, as a minimum, land should not be capable of being

determined as contaminated land under Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990; and

- adequate site investigation information, prepared by a competent person, is presented.

For all new developments, it is the responsibility of the developer to carry out any necessary site assessments and remediation, in order to ensure the site will be made suitable for its proposed future use and that there are no unacceptable risks to human health, the environment, property and/or controlled waters. This is detailed within NPPF s.120: Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.

In most cases, the enforcement of any remediation requirements will be through planning conditions, rather than through a Remediation Notice issued under Part 2A.

However, failure to appropriately satisfy the requirements of the planning condition may result in a future contaminated land investigation, taking into account the strategic objectives.

The types of planning conditions and informatives recommended through the consultation process when considering potentially contaminated land are listed in Appendix C, discussed in the following sections and include:

5.1.1 Standard conditions; 5.1.2 Gas conditions; 5.1.3 Lead conditions and naturally occurring contamination; and 5.1.4 Informatives.

There may also be additional conditions relevant to the specific site in question that may have particular characteristics.

5.2.1 Standard Conditions

The four standard conditions are attached to a planning approval to ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems. As well as to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.

Failure to appropriately investigate, remediate (where necessary) and subsequently to verify the works would be in breach of a planning condition.

The conditions are discharged in the order of: Site Characterisation, Remediation, Verification and Watching Brief and are discussed separately below.

Site Characterisation –

An investigation and risk assessment, must be completed to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The NPPF stated decisions should ensure that - adequate site investigation information, prepared by a competent person, is presented.

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination’, Contaminated Land Report CLR 11’ (subject to this being superseded).

During investigations, analysis of a number of contaminants can be undertaken including (but not limited to): heavy metals, inorganics, organics, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), BTEX, total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs - aromatic and aliphatic) and asbestos. Additional analysis can also be requested specific to previous site uses or other potential concerns.

Remediation –

A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared. The scheme must ensure that the site, as a minimum, will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation.

Verification –

Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme and prior to occupation, a verification report (or validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced.

CLR11 provides a technical framework for structural decision making about contamination and identifies verification as a key part of the risk management process.

Where appropriate, there are British Standards which detail the specifications for imported topsoil, this includes that the suppliers of topsoil should avoid the spread of sharps, plastics and non soil forming materials.

Of particular importance is that the verification report is produced and approved prior to occupation. Otherwise the situation may arise, for example, where residential gardens have to be remediated whilst the properties are already occupied.

Reporting of Unexpected Contamination –

In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment should then be undertaken and where necessary the subsequent remediation and validation as with the previous conditions.

5.2.2 Gas Conditions

The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995 (GDPO) requires the planning authority to consult with the Environment Agency before granting planning permission for development within 250 metres of land which is being used for the deposit of waste (or has been at any time in the previous 30 years) or has been notified to the planning authority for the purposes of that provision.

The Environment Agency has therefore developed ‘standing advice’ to enable LPAs to make decisions on planning applications within 250 metres of a ‘licensed’ or ‘permitted’ landfill without consulting the Environment Agency. The standing advice should therefore be a material consideration in determining the planning application.

Before such a development commences, the applicant must either investigate for landfill gas or install gas protection measures as precautionary measure without investigating.

There are a variety of different gas resistant membranes available on the market, many of which only offer protection from the denser gases such as radon and carbon dioxide rather that those that are lighter than air such as methane. It is therefore important to ensure that the membrane selected is appropriate and is designed to resist the gases in question.

Typically, membranes are used in conjunction with other gas mitigation components, for example a concrete slab or gas-venting layer. The performance of the membrane as a gas barrier is significantly reduced if the membrane is punctured, torn or not adequately overlapped and sealed during construction. The selection of membrane and sealing techniques should therefore be carefully considered and it is strongly advised to introduce quality control procedures throughout the installation of the membrane and incorporate third party integrity testing where appropriate. Please note that this may also be a requirement of planning. 27

The British Standard 8485:2015 ‘Code of practice for the design of protective measures for methane and carbon dioxide ground gases for new buildings’, currently includes guidance for the selection of appropriate membranes.

Image 13: Venting Arrangements example (NHBC, 2007, Guidance on Methane and Carbon Dioxide)

5.2.3 Naturally occurring contamination and lead contamination

The Part 2A regime was introduced to deal with land that posed an unacceptable level of risk. It was not intended to apply to land with contaminant concentrations that are commonplace and widespread in particular areas, for example in areas with normally high ‘background’ contaminant concentrations and for which in the very large majority of cases there is no reason to consider that there is an unacceptable risk.

Part 2A Statutory Guidance 2012 s.3.23 – “Normal” levels of contaminant in soil may result from

a) The natural presence of contaminants (e.g. caused by soil formation processes and underlying geology) at levels that might reasonably be considered typical in a given area and have not been shown to pose an unacceptable risk to health or

the environment.

b) The presence of contaminants caused by low level diffuse pollution and common human activity other than specific industrial processes.

As discussed in section 2.4.1 the Mendips contain areas of naturally elevated concentrations of lead and therefore there are conditions recommended on certain planning applications.

The Council is in the process of developing a guidance document relating to lead contamination which aims to assist developers with their proposals in certain areas.

There is also information being gathered on natural arsenic elevations and developments are also being considered on a site by site basis.

5.2.4 Informatives

Watching brief informatives are recommended on developments where there is little to no ground disturbance or minimal risks from potential contamination, i.e. conversions of agricultural barns.

If any unforeseen contamination is found during excavations Environmental Health must be notified immediately. This may include obvious visual or olfactory residues, asbestos, buried drums, interceptors, tanks or any other unexpected hazards that may be discovered during site works.

Asbestos is a common contaminant which is not restricted to only potentially contaminated sites, as it was also a common material for agricultural roofing and others. Specific advice should be sought and various agencies are involved in its safe removal, including the HSE, EA, planning and Environmental Health, who will all have an interest in ensuring asbestos is removed and disposed without causing harm. In addition, PHE are also involved in providing guidance and advice should actual or potential public exposure be identified.

5.3 Encouraging polluters/owners of land to deal with contamination

The statutory guidance states that enforcing authorities should seek to use Part 2A only where no appropriate alternative solution exists. Therefore, Part 2A should not be used where existing legislation may be enforced or where contamination has arisen due to a breach of an existing license or permit. Remediation of contaminated land should be enforced preferentially through these means, with enforcement through Part 2A only when no appropriate alternative solution exists.

There are a number of other legislative regimes which can be used without the need for Part 2A to be used directly. These include (subject to being superseded); Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) Regulations 2009, Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010, Water Resources Act 1991 (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2009, and Statutory Nuisance (Environmental Protection Act 1990).

In accordance with statutory guidance, the Council will look to ensure ‘the polluter pays principle’ is applied wherever possible. This is when the person/business who caused or

knowingly permitted the contamination will be the appropriate person to cover the cost of remediation. However, if it is not possible to find such a person, then the statutory guidance states that the cost may fall to the owner or occupier of the land. It is an intention that voluntary remediation is secured as a first option as specified in the legislation.

Building Regulations

In addition to the planning regime, there is a provision within the building regulations (made under the Building Act 1984) requiring developers to take measures to protect new buildings and their future residents from the effects of contamination. An example of this would be the installation of ground source gas protection measures into properties.

There is also guidance within the Building Regulations 2010 document: ‘Approved Document Part C (Site Preparation and Resistance to Contaminants and Moisture)’.

Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) Regulations 2009

The Regulations aim to prevent and remedy damage to land, water and biodiversity. Obligations are placed on businesses (or 'operators' of commercial 'activities' in the words of the Regulations) to put in place precautionary measures to avoid environmental damage and to take remedial action if it occurs. It compliments Part 2A in dealing with current contamination created on site and can also deal with historical contamination which may have been mobilised on sites, including during remediation.

The Regulations aim to create an incentive to operators of activities that are likely to cause environmental damage to take steps to avoid environmental damage, and to possess adequate funds (e.g. insurance) to pay for the remediation or clean up of any environmental damage they cause. Existing legislation with provisions for environmental liability remains in place.

Environmental Permitting Enforced by Local Authorities

Through the provisions of the Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) Regulations 2009 and Environmental Permitting regimes there are powers to deal with land contamination resulting from breaches of permits, authorisations and licences and other environmental incidents. Operators of permits also have a closing duty to restore the land to an agreed condition after use. The Environment Agency are the regulator of the larger permits including active landfills.

Brownfield Land Register

During the life of this Strategy the Government has made a commitment to develop a Brownfield Land Register. The Register will list all available brownfield land suitable for housing, or what proportion of suitable sites have planning permission. It aims to enable progress to be measured against the Government’s target for obtaining planning permission

on 90% brownfield land identified as being suitable for housing by 2020. This Strategy may be of interest in that regard and equally the Register may inform how this Strategy moves forward.

5.4 Regeneration work

Under Development Policy 20: ‘Reuse of Employment Sites’, it is detailed that ‘in determining any application for planning permission for such a proposal, the Council will balance the application of this policy against the need to secure wider regeneration objectives in that area and the need to overcome any local environmental impacts… as considered under DP8 and 9’.

DP8 was discussed in section 5.1 and is replicated in Appendix B.

The Council encourages problematic land to be dealt with as wider regeneration work. An example of this is the old Morlands factory in Glastonbury. Once the largest brownfield site in the south west, the 31 acre site of lay empty for 15 years, before undergoing a major regeneration to be redeveloped into a new business park.

Image 14: Morlands factory site, Glastonbury, before regeneration

More recently, from the 2010 Mendip Town Centres study described in the Local Plan, it was indicated that there would be plenty of spending capacity to support town centre

regeneration in all the towns within the non-food sector. For example, Shepton Mallet Town Centre remains the weakest economic district centre and new efforts to encourage regeneration of the town centre are proposed through a Neighbourhood Plan being advanced by the Town Council which intends to encourage key landowners to work more closely to reshape the offer of the town.

The relocation of the town’s main foodstore from a peripheral location on Fosse Lane to the Townsend Retail Park to the south of the town centre in 2007, was seen as a means to deliver regeneration to a derelict employment site and help to boost trade in the centre.

6.0 Minimising unnecessary burdens on taxpayers, businesses and individuals

Mechanisms to reduce burdens include:

 Encouraging voluntary action to deal with land contamination issues as far as reasonable and practicable;  Continuing to ensure that contaminated land is dealt with appropriately through the planning system;  Maintaining that the responsibility of safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner;  Ensuring that the cost burdens of undertaking remediation are proportionate, manageable and economically sustainable; and  Securing ongoing management preferable to expensive remediation.

7.0 Future Commitments

The actions identified for the implementation of the Contaminated Land Strategy are:

 To continue to respond to the Council’s strategic management priorities;  To progress the inspection and remediation of any sites identified as potentially contaminated, in order of priority; within the constraints of available resources; and  To continually review progress to ensure that the Council’s objectives and strategic priorities are being fulfilled.

The Environment Agency historically ran the projects which investigated and remediated Part 2A sites on behalf of DEFRA. In December 2013, it was confirmed that DEFRA will no longer be supporting the costs of investigating and remediating contaminated land under Part 2A through the Contaminated Land Capital Grants Scheme.

In the likelihood that central government funding is not reinstated, any future investigations would therefore need to be funded through existing budgets and this will severely limit the extent/ability to actively progress site investigations. In addition, any remediation costs will need to be met by the appropriate persons, when applicable.

7.1 Contaminated Land Strategy Review

The Council has a duty under Part 2A to keep its Contaminated Land Strategy under periodic review. The main reasons why the Council will carry out a review are:

 to see how the Council are progressing, i.e. to determine whether we are achieving our objectives and priorities;  to revise and improve procedures;  to take account of changes in legislation;  to take into account emerging evidence-base information;  to take account of the establishment of significant case law or precedent;  to take account of changes in guidance for dealing with land contamination (in particular, risk assessment techniques, guideline values, etc.); and  to reflect changes in Council policies and strategies.

It is considered appropriate to carry out a review of this Contaminated Land Strategy within five full years of implementation, i.e. before 2023. Thereafter, reviews will be carried out on a five yearly basis or less where necessary.

This is considered to be the most efficient and effective way of not only making sure the Contaminated Land Strategy is up to date and reflects current best practice, but also that it is realistic and achievable.

The review will be carried out by those implementing the Strategy, who will also consult with other services across the Council as considered necessary. Consultation with external organisations and other interested parties will also be carried out as deemed necessary. Discussions will also be held with the Environment Agency which, as part of its statutory duty under Part 2A, has to assess each local authority Contaminated Land Strategy and its effectiveness in its report on the state of Contaminated Land. Any suggested changes to the Strategy will then be reported, for approval, to the Council.

Details of all significant proposed changes will be sent to the various statutory and public authorities listed in Appendix A for consultation.

Following the consultation period, the Contaminated Land Strategy document will be revised and re-published. The changes to the Strategy will then be reported to the Council for adoption and implementation.

BIBLOGRAPHY

 Code of practice for the design of protective measures for methane and carbon dioxide ground gases for new buildings. British Standards Institute (BS8485:2015)

 Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010. Statutory Instrument (SI 2010/676)

 Environmental Protection Act 1990: Part IIA Contaminated Land. Department of the Environment, Transport & the Regions (2000)

 Environmental Protection Act 1990: Part 2A Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (April 2012)

 Estimating a ‘normal’ level of lead concentrations in soils on the Mendips, Somerset. Osman, S. (2013)

 Industry Profiles. Department of the Environment (DOE) (1995/1996/2006)

 Lead mines may be older than thought. Wells Journal. (25.04.13)

 LFTGN 03: Guidance on the Management of Landfill Gas. Environment Agency (2014)

 Mendip District Local Plan 2006 – 2029. Part I: Strategy and Policies. Mendip District Council (adopted December 2014)

 Mendip Hills An Archaeological Survey of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. English Heritage and Somerset County Council (1992)

 Mendip Hills Natural Area profile. English Nature (1998)

 Mendip’s Past: A Shared Inheritance. P Stokes (1999)

 Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination (CLR 11). Environment Agency; London (2004)

 National Planning Policy Framework. Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) (2012)

 Normal Background Concentrations of contaminants in English soils. British Geological Society (2012)

 R&D Publication 66. Guidance for the Safe Development of Housing on Land Affected by Contamination. Environment Agency and National House Building Council (2008)

 The Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) Regulations 2009. Statutory Instrument (SI 2009/153)

 The Mines of Mendip. J W Gough (1967)

 The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995. Statutory Instrument (SI 1995/419)

 Updated Technical background to the CLEA Model. Environment Agency (2009)

 Water Resources Act 1991 (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2009. Statutory Instrument (SI 2009/3104)

GLOSSARY

Aquifer A body of permeable rock which can contain or transmit groundwater.

Brownfield land Previously developed land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure (does not include agricultural buildings and, since 2010, domestic gardens)’.

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

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;

• Significant harm is being caused, or there is significant possibility of such harm being caused; or

• Significant pollution of controlled waters is being caused or there is a significant possibility of such pollution being caused.

Controlled Waters In relation to England has the same meaning as in Part 3 of the Water Resources Act 1991 (includes territorial and coastal waters, inland fresh waters and ground waters), except that “ground waters” does not include waters contained in underground strata but above the saturation zone.

Harm 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.

Pathway A route by which a receptor is being/could be exposed to, or affected by a source of contamination.

Possibility of significant A measure of the probability, or frequency, of the harm occurrence of circumstances which would lead to significant harm being caused.

Potentially Contaminated Where there is a likely source of contamination but it is not Land known whether a significant pollutant linkage will exist without further investigation.

Receptor A living organism, a group of living organisms, an ecological system, property or controlled waters which could be adversely affected by a contaminant.

Remediation As defined by section 78A(7) of the Act as:

• the doing of anything for the purpose of assessing the condition of – (i) the contaminated land in question; or (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 for the purpose – (i) of preventing or minimising, or remedying or mitigating the effects of, any significant harm (or significant 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.

Remediation Notice Defined in Section 78E(1) as a notice specifying what an appropriate person is to do by way of remediation and the periods within which he is required to do each of the things so specified.

Risk A combination of:

• The likelihood that harm, or pollution of water, will occur as a result of contaminants in, on or under the land; and

• The scale and seriousness of harm or pollution if it did occur.

Significant pollutant linkage A pollutant linkage which forms the basis for a determination that a piece of land is contaminated land.

Sustainable Development Development which meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

Unacceptable Risk A risk of such nature that it would give grounds for land to be considered as contaminated land.

APPENDIX A

Consultees

Bath and North East Somerset Council Campaign to Protect Rural England Lewis House National Office Manvers Street 5-11 Lavington Street Bath London BA1 1JG SE1 0NZ DEFRA Environmental Agency Nobel House Rivers House 17 Smith Square East Quay London Bridgewater SW1P 3JR Somerset BA6 4YS English Heritage Food Standards Agency The Engine House Aviation House Firefly Avenue 125 Kingsway Swindon London SN2 2EH WC2B 6NH Natural England North Somerset Council County Hall Town Hall Spetchley Road Walliscote Grove Road Worcester Weston-Super-Mare WR5 2NP BS23 1UJ Public Health England Sedgemoor District Council 2 Rivergate Bridgwater House Temple Quay King Square Bristol Bridgwater BS1 6EH TA6 3AR Somerset Archaeological & Natural Somerset County Council History Society County Hall Somerset Heritage Centre Taunton Brunel Way Somerset Norton Fitzwarren TA1 4DY Taunton TA2 6SF South Somerset District Council Wiltshire County Council Brympton Way Bythesea Road Yeovil Trowbridge BA20 2HT Wiltshire BA14 8JN

Mendip District Council Internal Consultees

Consultations received

Public Health England

Natural England

APPENDIX B

Development Policy 8: Environmental Protection

All development proposals should minimise, and where possible reduce, all emissions and other forms of pollution.

1. Development (either cumulatively or individually) will be required to demonstrate that it does not give rise to unacceptable adverse environmental impacts on:  ambient noise levels; air quality; the quality of water resources, whether surface river or groundwater; biodiversity; light pollution; land quality and ground stability; residential amenity; and public health and safety.

2. Development proposals must include an assessment appropriate to the type and extent of impact and any associated risks to the satisfaction of the relevant environmental body. Any proposed solutions or mitigation measures should comply with relevant EU and British Standards, Environment Agency guidance and national limits or guidelines and take account of any locally adopted standards and supplementary guidance.

3. Development proposals, particularly those in a rural setting and especially those in designated Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs), should make all reasonable efforts to minimise noise and light pollution impacts.

4. Development proposals which are on or adjacent to land which may have been subject to contamination or impact from existing sources of noise will need to demonstrate that measures can be taken effectively to mitigate the impacts on public health, environmental quality, the built environment and amenity. Proposals will only be permitted where the impact and risks are, or can be mitigated appropriately for the proposed use. Appropriate mitigation and remediation will be secured through planning conditions on the development.

5. Development will not be permitted within Sewage Treatment Works Consultation Zones unless it is demonstrated that the environment provided for future users will not be adversely affected.

APPENDIX C

STANDARDS CONDITIONS

Unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority, development other than that required to be carried out as part of an approved scheme of remediation must not commence until conditions 1 to 4 have been complied with. If unexpected contamination is found after development has begun, development must be halted on that part of the site affected by the unexpected contamination to the extent specified by the Local Planning Authority in writing until condition 4 has been complied with in relation to that contamination.

1. SITE CHARACTERISATION An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include:

(i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: (iii) Human health, (iv) Property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, adjoining land, groundwater’s and surface waters, ecological systems, archaeological sites and ancient monuments; (v) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s).

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’.

2. SUBMISSION OF REMEDIATION SCHEME A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation (NPPF s.121).

3. IMPLEMENTATION OF APPROVED REMEDIATION SCHEME The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works.

4. REPORTING OF UNEXPECTED CONTAMINATION In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 1, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition 2, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason (common to all): To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.

NPPF s.120: Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.

GAS CONDITIONS

Before the development hereby permitted commences the applicant must either:

Investigate the site for landfill gas to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, to ascertain whether gas protection measures are required. No works shall be undertaken on site unless this has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Three copies of all documents relating to this requirement shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the details so approved. In the event of any unforeseen circumstances requiring additional or alternative measures to remediate the site, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified. The developer shall not proceed with additional/alternative measures unless written approval has been first obtained from the Local Planning Authority.

In the event that ground remediation is required by virtue of condition (a), three copies of a Completion Report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority providing a validation of the remediation work carried out and the measures taken to manage any risks for the development. In addition three copies of a Remediation Certificate shall be provided to the Local Planning Authority, signed by the developer, confirming satisfactory remediation of the site on completion of all remedial works under the same time scale arrangements. No dwelling shall be occupied (unless agreed otherwise by the Local Planning Authority) unless the Local Planning Authority has confirmed in writing its acceptance of the Completion Report and Remediation Certificate.

Reason: In order to safeguard the development from pollution.

Or;

The applicant shall install gas protection measures as a precautionary measure without first investigating the site. The details of these measures shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority. No works shall be undertaken on site unless this has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Three copies of all documents relating to this requirement shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the details so approved. In the event of any unforeseen circumstances requiring additional or alternative measures to remediate the site, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified. The developer shall not proceed with additional/alternative measures unless written approval has been first obtained from the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to safeguard the development from pollution.

NPPF s.120: Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.

LEAD CONDITIONS

As there are areas of naturally elevated concentrations of lead in the area, I suggest that the soil is tested to ensure that this site is not affected. The following two paragraphs may be included in any planning approval:

a) No works shall be undertaken unless the soil on the site has been tested for lead (Pb) in order to establish its suitability for the proposed end use. No works shall be undertaken on site unless this has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Three copies of all documents relating to this requirement shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. In the event of any unforeseen circumstances requiring additional or alternative measures to remediate the site, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified. The developer shall not proceed with additional/alternative measures unless written approval has been first obtained from the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to safeguard the development from naturally elevated concentrations of lead.

b) In the event that ground remediation is required by virtue of condition (a), three copies of a Completion Report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority providing a validation of the remediation work carried out and the measures taken to manage any risks for the development. In addition three copies of a Remediation Certificate shall be provided to the Local Planning Authority, signed by the developer, confirming satisfactory remediation of the site on completion of all remedial works under the same time scale arrangements. No dwelling shall be occupied (unless agreed otherwise by the Local Planning Authority) unless the Local Planning Authority has confirmed in writing its acceptance of the Completion Report and Remediation Certificate.

Reason: In order to safeguard the development from naturally elevated concentrations of lead.

NPPF s.120: Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.

INFORMATIVE

It would be advised to keep a watching brief for potential hotspots of contamination and assess for visual/olfactory evidence of contamination during any groundworks.

If any unforeseen contamination is found during excavations Environmental Health must be notified immediately. This may include obvious visual or olfactory residues, asbestos including asbestos containing materials such as roofing, buried drums, drains, interceptors, additional fuel storage tanks or any other unexpected hazards that may be discovered during site works.

NPPF s.120: Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.

Mendip District Council, Cannards Grave Road, Shepton Mallet, Somerset. BA4 5BT Customer Services 0300 303 8588 www.mendip.gov.uk