The Sub-Committee will receive a presentation on the contaminated land in the borough.
Minutes:
The Sub-Committee received a presentation on Contaminated Land in the borough. Officers outlined the legislation and the legal definition of what contaminated land was.
It was noted that there was no land declared as contaminated in Havering, however there were sites that could potentially be affected by contamination. Areas that were more likely to be affected by contamination were predominately in the south of the borough. Contamination could come from old landfill sites or old factory site of anything from 30 to 150 year old.
Havering had three main responsibilities under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part 2a. These included Land Quality Reports, Contaminated Land Inspections and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
Land Quality Reports – These reports can be provided to potential buyers of land, whilst they give no definitive answers they provide as much information as is available. The landowner is also able to test the land themselves.
Contaminated Land Inspections – The Council have a legal obligation to investigate sites. There had been four investigations made in recent years. The sites are generally those that have the biggest potential risk to properties either close to or on the potentially contaminated land.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) – It was essential that the service was consulted on planning issues so that where potential contamination may be present; conditions can be attached to the planning application. Officers stated that if conditions were not attached the liability would then move from the developer to the council.
Members asked how residents that may live close to potential sites were informed. Officers stated that for a formal investigation, a letter is sent out to all residents in the area informing them that there would be no significant possibility of significant harm to their health. It is encouraged that this information is passed on if the property is sold.
Officers stated that when investigations were carried out that these were in depth. It was extremely difficult to prove that the contaminated land was a risk to health and the investigations relies upon DEFRA funding.
The Sub-Committee were able to see photographs of the investigations carried out. These include accessing people’s gardens to take samples. Some show a change in the colour of the soil at approximately 2-3 metres deep. If there is no evidence that this has not travelled, then this is left as it is as there is no potential risk. The change in colour could be attributed to tar, ash, or other substances due to the industries that were present on site in the 1950 and 1960’s.
Officers explained to the Sub-Committee how the prevention and management of contaminated land from current waste disposal practices was monitored. The example given was Veolia at Rainham and the waste leachate from the site. The leachate is vacuumed into pipes which are treated and discharged into closed sewers. Surface water is treated differently, and is in a separate gully.
A member asked if there was a specific condition that could be attributed to particular contaminants. Officers explained that there were 30 to 40 different contaminants and there would more than likely need to be long term exposure before any health risks could possibly be attributed. The most susceptible group would be females aged 0-6 years old and the most common illness that may be attributed are wide ranging such as skin irritants, asthma and cancer. However this would only be after long term exposure. Public Health was involved with any investigations from the start. Drop-in sessions were held in areas where investigations were being carried out and all GP’s in the area were briefed.
The Sub-Committee thanked officers for a very informative presentation.