Core Strategy Preferred Options document - Amazon Web Services

Strategies, Activities and Actions – Environmental Issues
Who is responsible for
the cost of dealing with
contaminated land?
The legislation seeks
to use the ‘polluter
pays’ principle, where
the cost of dealing with
contamination rests
with the orignal
polluter, where they
can be found, or the
landowner/occupier
when the polluter no
longer exists.
We do not wish to
resist the development
of appropriate sites
solely because of land
contamination, as
contaminated land can
be remediated and
made ‘fit for purpose’.
ENV10 Contaminated Land – Preferred Option
The presence of contaminated land on a site will not, in itself, be seen
as a reason to resist its development.
We will require applicants who wish to develop suspected
contaminated land to undertake a thorough investigation of the site
and determine any risks. Relevant remediation and mitigation
measures will need to be built into development proposals to ensure
safe, sustainable development of the site.
ENV10 – Alternative Options
Option Why is it not preferred?
Prevent development
on contaminated land
64
Given that contaminated land can be
remediated, such an approach would
unnecessarily restrict opportunities to
develop previously developed land in
potentially appropriate locations, thus
necessitating greater loss of
greenfield land.