An investigation has been carried out on land proposed for development in Chippenham after residents raised concerns over “contamination” in the area.
The safety of land at Swallow Falls on Rowden Lane has been at the centre of a dispute over plans for eight new homes.
Historical maps show that the site in question contains a disused sandpit, which was filled with an unknown material after the location was reportedly used as a brickworks in the 1800s.
An investigation from July 20 concluded there was a "low to moderate risk" from the old sandpit, but some residents claim that development on the land would be a risk to human health.
The residents refer to a contamination report carried out for a nearby Redcliffe Homes application in 2007, which revealed chemicals such as arsenic, cyanide, lead and mercury within the soil.
The report was carried out by a firm called Robson Liddle and appears to note that “unacceptable risks are associated with the site”.
However, when asked about this report, a representative of Redcliffe Homes provided a different report published the following year, also by Robson Liddle, which concluded that “there is no significant risk to human health from levels of contaminants recorded across the site”.
According to Companies House, Robson Liddle was dissolved more than six years ago, and contact details are not available.
A Wessex Water preliminary risk assessment from 2007 described Rowden Lane as medium to high risk, stating that contamination was “known or suspected”.
Regarding Redcliffe Homes’ recent plans for the area, Cllr Nick Botterill, cabinet member for development control and strategic planning, said: “The outline planning permission for the development at Rowden Park was granted subject to conditions.
“There are a number of separate approvals and applications relating to the detailed site layout and design for each relevant phase of the development.
“One of the conditions of the outline planning permission relates to the ground condition; with further investigations, risks assessments and, if necessary, remedial works to be carried out in the event of any contamination being found from previous uses.”
Meanwhile, on the Swallow Falls application, a recent Environment Agency report indicated that it would be “possible to manage the risks posed to controlled waters”.
Nevertheless, the Public Protection team requested that an investigation and risk assessment be completed to assess the nature and extent of any contamination.
Resident John Heselden said: “Arsenic, cyanide, lead, selenium, hydrocarbons, mercury and phenols are all highly toxic and associated with loss of life and if disturbed will be harmful to the health of existing residents and cause an environmental disaster.”
Rosemary Ayres added: “Any development would pose another serious risk to many nearby homes.”
Cole Thornton argued that the application “should have been declared invalid from the outset and refused long ago on public safety grounds in the wider public interest.”
The Swallow Falls applicants, Mr and Ms Fortune, responded: “As with previous planning applications on adjacent and surrounding land, concerns about contamination were raised and were seen to be of no concern after extensive research as shown in the Robson Liddle report.
“Consequently, this land has been developed.
“In the interest of public health and safety, in accordance with the Public Protection Team and Environment Agency requirements, we can confirm that a specialist consultant has been instructed to carry out the required investigations."
This investigation was carried out on July 20 by Oakshire Environmental and concluded that there was a "low to moderate risk" from the old sandpit.
It stated that the contamination is “highly localised to a small area of shallow made ground” and that excavating and removing this from the site during the development would “sufficiently break the identified contaminant linkage, through removal of the contamination source.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel