Preliminary Risk Assessment as required by Planning Dept.
Discussion
Can someone point me in the right direction. I am trying to discharge planning conditions and need a Preliminary Risk Assessment carrying out on the site. I am in Manchester and the plot in question is a very small back garden on which I intend to build a 2 bed bungalow. Anyone on here carry out these? Planning has been granted subject to discharging these conditions.
I've submitted an environmental report on the site dating to when the house was bought but they want something more.....
straight from the planning letter...
The submitted report provides useful information that can be included within a Preliminary Risk Assessment (PRA) however the Environmental Search does not constitute a PRA as required by Planning Policy Statement (23) PPS23. Factual information only has been provided. A PRA is an interpretive report which must include a site model which identifies any potential risks from contamination, risks to future site users must also be considered.
The term 'burning hoops' springs to mind
straight from the planning letter...
The submitted report provides useful information that can be included within a Preliminary Risk Assessment (PRA) however the Environmental Search does not constitute a PRA as required by Planning Policy Statement (23) PPS23. Factual information only has been provided. A PRA is an interpretive report which must include a site model which identifies any potential risks from contamination, risks to future site users must also be considered.
The term 'burning hoops' springs to mind
Had a similar condition on a site for new build. Basicly they want the history of the site to show its past use so they can assess any risk posed to the new build.
Discharge the condition by getting past OS maps back to the early 1800's which showed that apart from the house / street the garden area had never been built on
Hope that helps.
Discharge the condition by getting past OS maps back to the early 1800's which showed that apart from the house / street the garden area had never been built on
Hope that helps.
mike325112 said:
Phase 1 desk study is not a site investigation. OP you might want to speak to a small geo-environmental consultantcy, should cost you less than say £1500
'site investigation' informally as in investigating the history of the site as ref'd by the post above mine (as I stated). As opposed to a formal 'Site Investivation' including sample taking to establish actual ground conditions.
Thnaks for everyones input. A bit more research and your comments have given me a better idea of what's needed. Anyone on here do these reports and would like to quote? I already have an environmental report running to 20 odd pages which from what I gather covers some of the leg work involved.
Evo141n said:
We use these guys at work (well our Geo-Environmental group do).Dr Rick
mike325112 said:
mk1fan said:
'site investigation' informally as in investigating the history of the site as ref'd by the post above mine (as I stated). As opposed to a formal 'Site Investivation' including sample taking to establish actual ground conditions.
Thats a desk study! Pistonheads - pedantry matters. :handbag smiley:
MOTORVATOR said:
Or does a desktop ground investigation form part of phase 1 of the site investigation.
Pistonheads - pedantry matters. :handbag smiley:
I was going to try to out pedant you but looking up where this is stated I realised I could actually help the OP so decided against it. Pistonheads - pedantry matters. :handbag smiley:
OP Look up CLR11 on google it will direct you to the EA document where a PRA is outlined and hopefully direct you as to what to do!
mike325112 said:
I was going to try to out pedant you but looking up where this is stated I realised I could actually help the OP so decided against it.
Anything touched by Prescott and we could play that game all day. 
OP, I would firstly be asking the LA why they felt it appropriate to utilise PPS23 on this site in the first place.
If as you say it's a back garden development they shouldn't really be applying it unless they are aware of an issue that has prompted them.
It's not the case that LA's are meant to view every piece of land as contaminated and unfit for use until you prove otherwise. But they may well have valid reasoning and it helps to know that beforehand.
MOTORVATOR said:
Anything touched by Prescott and we could play that game all day.
OP, I would firstly be asking the LA why they felt it appropriate to utilise PPS23 on this site in the first place.
If as you say it's a back garden development they shouldn't really be applying it unless they are aware of an issue that has prompted them.
It's not the case that LA's are meant to view every piece of land as contaminated and unfit for use until you prove otherwise. But they may well have valid reasoning and it helps to know that beforehand.
MOTORVATOR, I have suspicions that they've approved this development 'under protest' and they are applying every bit of legislation possible to make it difficult. I've not even mentioned their request for a tree survey by a qualified Arboricultural Consultant to BS5837 2005 OP, I would firstly be asking the LA why they felt it appropriate to utilise PPS23 on this site in the first place.
If as you say it's a back garden development they shouldn't really be applying it unless they are aware of an issue that has prompted them.
It's not the case that LA's are meant to view every piece of land as contaminated and unfit for use until you prove otherwise. But they may well have valid reasoning and it helps to know that beforehand.
Edited by mickylee on Thursday 21st April 21:07
mickylee said:
MOTORVATOR said:
Anything touched by Prescott and we could play that game all day.
OP, I would firstly be asking the LA why they felt it appropriate to utilise PPS23 on this site in the first place.
If as you say it's a back garden development they shouldn't really be applying it unless they are aware of an issue that has prompted them.
It's not the case that LA's are meant to view every piece of land as contaminated and unfit for use until you prove otherwise. But they may well have valid reasoning and it helps to know that beforehand.
MOTORVATOR, I have suspicions that they've approved this development 'under protest' and they are applying every bit of legislation possible to make it difficult. OP, I would firstly be asking the LA why they felt it appropriate to utilise PPS23 on this site in the first place.
If as you say it's a back garden development they shouldn't really be applying it unless they are aware of an issue that has prompted them.
It's not the case that LA's are meant to view every piece of land as contaminated and unfit for use until you prove otherwise. But they may well have valid reasoning and it helps to know that beforehand.
I'd say ask for the justification for PPS23 consideration first before instructing soils engineers. A planner will give full disclosure as they would not want to leave themselves open.
My bet is not that they are being awkward but rather some offsite issues or historic use that they are aware of.
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff