These are the questions.

1. How does the Council ensure that detailed remediation plans are fulfilled when the developer has appointed its own building inspector?
2. What steps are taken by Public Health to ensure the safety of residents when contaminants are being removed from brownfield sites?
3. What powers does the Council's Environmental Service have regarding the safety of residents and businesses near to a brownfield site where contaminants, that are potentially dangerous to both residents nearby and those working on the site, are being removed?

Cllr Andrew Pinnock and Cllr John Lawson are asking the questions. We will get a written response as the meeting begins at 17.30. There is an opportunity to ask a further question to each of them when we get to the question slot on the agenda. What we ask will depend on the answers given!

And the more detailed response:

1. "As the minister has outlined, Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 does place a number of duties on Local Authorities in relation to Contaminated Land. There are a number of technical guidance notes to support these duties. Part 2A can be seen as separate to but linked to the planning process.
2. Part 2A is around identifying risks posted by potentially contaminated land sites, based on historic uses posing a risk to existing receptors, i.e. current site users. A good analogy for this is a housing estate, built in the 70s, on a chemical works and due to the standards in the 70s, remediation may not have been completed and therefore the risks from contamination from the historic use may now be affecting the sites users, i.e. the residents.
3. Contaminated Land within the contexts of the Planning Process is different, that is about a proposal to introduce a new receptor to a potentially contaminated site, so the planning process requires investigation, remediation and verification – to often higher standards than those required by Part 2A.
4. The guidance on site investigation, remediation etc are common between the planning and Part 2A and the principles of these DEFRA/EA guidance has and is being followed at Westgate.
5. So, although the ministers answers is correct in one sense, it isn’t directly related to the site in question as it isn’t being considered under Part 2A but under the planning process.
6. It is also the case that, those working on the site are protected by Health and Safety law as well."

Here is the answer I received from Baroness Hayman of Ullock

"The Government recognises the importance of managing land contamination to protect human health and the environment. Under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, local authorities have a statutory duty to inspect their areas to identify contaminated land and, where necessary, require its remediation. A risk-based approach is used to define contaminated land, with regulators required to intervene in cases where land poses an unacceptable risk to human health, property or the environment.

The Contaminated Land Statutory Guidance sets out the legal framework for risk assessment and decision-making under Part 2A, and the Land Contamination Risk Management framework, recently updated by the Environment Agency, provides technical guidance on assessing, managing and remediating land contamination in line with current best practice."

HOUSING APPROVED 2023

Strata Homes were given permission for 180 units on the site in Ocober 2023. The Decision Notice - (details can be seen on the Kirklees Council planning portal application number 2021/62/93567/E) -includes details of agreed essential work to remediate the site. Condition 7 itemises a Phase 11 Intrusive Site Investigation Report; condition 8 ensures that remediation work identified in the Report is completed; condidion 8 is that the developer will carry out the remediation in accordance with the Remediation Strategy. This last condition includes what must happen if contamination of a different sort which is that the Planning Service has to be notified and work halted.

Work started on the site in May this year following grant funding being made available for the remediation work.

DUST, ASBESTOS, CONTAMINANTS

 The following is an extract from the Detailed Site Specific Risk Assessment made by Lithos and dated DEcember 2020.

"Health

3.2.1 Made Ground across all 4 Areas yielded elevated concentrations of a number of inorganic determinants, including arsenic, copper, lead, nickel and zinc, as well as sporadic fragments of asbestos containing materials and trace amounts of free asbestos fibres.

3.2.2 Given the volume of made ground, it would not be possible to simply isolate made ground below areas of hardstanding. Therefore, it was recommended in the Geoenvironmental Appraisal (Lithos Report 3043/2B) that a 1,000mm soil cover, underlain by a minimum 150mm thick “hard dig” layer be placed immediately beneath in all garden and landscaped areas. Alternatively, a high visibility contaminated ground warning / marker barrier, such as Lotrak Alarm18, could be placed beneath the soil cover.

3.2.3 The inclusion of a break layer and clean cover in garden and landscaped areas effectively breaks the direct contact pathways (ingestion, dermal contact & inhalation of dust). 

3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 Cyanide was also detected in Area A at very low concentrations and may indicate the use of spent oxide within the manufacture of sulphuric acid. Cyanide does not have a generic screening value as it is an acute toxin as well as a presenting long term exposure risks. However, whilst cyanide can present an exposure risk via inhalation, it is not volatile. Precautions are recommended to protect site works during earthworks and construction phase, but once made ground is isolated below the clean cover, cyanide would not present a risk to future site users. With the exception of PAH and metals, the indicator compounds identified in Section 3.1.9 above are all potentially volatile and only indoor and outdoor inhalation pathways have been considered further within this assessment for human health."

The above is a relevant extract - but only an extract - from 1 15 page report which can also be read online with the other many documents included on the planning portal.

The 149 page Remediation Strategy can also be found at the same place as other planning documents.

QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED

1. Is the Remediation Strategy being fulfilled to the letter? Who is responsible for making that assessment?

2. What particular assessment was made for the need to protect the health of the local community? The answer to this is clear that residents' heakth has not been properly considered otherwise there would not be asbestos fibres in homes as well as accumulation of dust which may contain contaminants.

3. Is the safety of workers on the site being protected? The HSE has visited the site and it has been allowed to continue work.

4. What assessment is being made of the health consequences for residents who have experienced dust and asbestos in their homes and gardens?

There are many more questions to be asked, and answered.

Meanwhile ward councillors will continue asking the questions, meeting relevant council officers, and seeking both answers and solutions.

Residents have had dust samples taken from their homes analysed by a qualified analyst and are alarmed to find that the dust contains asbestos.

Your councillors have arranged a DROP IN MEETING  on WEDNESDAY 6 AUGUST from 4 - 7 at ST LUKES CHURCH. This is the big church at MOORBOTTOM  before the hill towards the PACKHORSE.

Martin Wood and Judith Stones from the public health protection team in the council will be there to answer questions and provide information. 

Please go if you can and let them know your concerns.