advisory report to local planning department highlighting 3 most important SuDs mitigation measures for the Canal Side development

“Write a short advisory report to the local Planning Department highlighting the three most important SuDS mitigation measures you suggest for the Canal Side development”;
you should write from the point of view of a consultant providing advice to the local Planning Department, (rather than providing advice to the developer)

The water quality of runoff from the site will need to be very carefully controlled during construction; suggest three important water quality protection actions that you would implement on site either before the build or at the time of the build, if you were the Site Manager.
You will not be allowed to discharge surface water to a foul sewer in the answer to this question. If you wish to use crates for attenuation and porous pavements, you must conduct additional research on these mitigation approaches.

Read the documents and the planning conditions very carefully to understand the full meaning. In the case of the Planning Permission (PP) from the Planning Authority ), although the PP has been granted, the drainage is considered to be a “dischargeable condition”. That means that full planning approval will not be granted until all the drainage conditions have been met. No development can commence until agreement is gained in writing from the Planning Authority.

A few other SuDS measures have not been covered in lectures, so will require your own research if you wish to use these:
a.Porous paving
b.Attenuation crates; constructed below ground as storage facilities for peak flows; this is a relatively cheap SuDS option to install;
c.Green roofs also provide attenuation and some storage for peak rainfall.
Please use your own novel approaches , if you feel that you have an innovative proposal that is a good solution;

I was asked why it makes a difference to answer part 2) from the point of view of a consultant to the Planning Department. My answer is that, in a planning application, environmental dispute or public inquiry etc, each of the opposing sides in the case, may employ their own environmental consultant.
So, it is important always to be aware about who wrote the EIA and who is paying the consultants’ fees.
You will then need to assess for yourselves, whether the information in the EIA written by the developer’s consultants, was selectively chosen from a wider range of environmental evidence. In this way, you can check whether either or both the applicant and the authority provided selective evidence.

“Do we have to find a specific mitigation method for the canal side development only or can it be a method that was adopted by other construction development projects before as long as we give a clear explanation of the appropriateness of the method we have chosen?”
Answer;
Almost certainly any method that you propose might have been proposed and/or used for a previous development somewhere in the vicinity of a canal or riverside. As you say, it is the appropriateness of the method chosen that is important. Views about appropriateness often differ so you may need to justify your considered method and costs to other member of your group.

Question about detention ponds;
Answer;
In principle it is acceptable to specify detention ponds for the Canal Side development. However, please remember the pond(s) will need to be small in size because the development site is constrained within a relatively small area. Also, the developer will wish to build as many houses as possible on the site.
This will limit the capacity of the detention pond(s), so you need to be sure that you can achieve sufficient water storage in the small pond(s).

Essential references for the assignment, :
1. Ecology Report (EIA), Environmental Statement: Main Text, Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment, MVV Environment Devonport Ltd., June 2011.
2. Woolcock J, Planning Inspectorate Appeal Decision, Appeal Ref: APP/J1155/A/12/2185633, Whitecleave Quarry, Devon, TQ11 0DQ. Decision date 17 October 2013.
3. Flood Risk Assessment: Canal Side Development, Local Planning Department, 2013.
4. Lismore City Council, The Use of Reed Beds for the Treatment of Sewage and Wastewater from Domestic Households, 2003.

“Write a short advisory report to the local Planning Department highlighting the three most important SuDS mitigation measures you suggest for the Canal Side development”;
you should write from the point of view of a consultant providing advice to the local Planning Department, (rather than providing advice to the developer)

The water quality of runoff from the site will need to be very carefully controlled during construction; suggest three important water quality protection actions that you would implement on site either before the build or at the time of the build, if you were the Site Manager.
You will not be allowed to discharge surface water to a foul sewer in the answer to this question. If you wish to use crates for attenuation and porous pavements, you must conduct additional research on these mitigation approaches.

Read the documents and the planning conditions very carefully to understand the full meaning. In the case of the Planning Permission (PP) from the Planning Authority ), although the PP has been granted, the drainage is considered to be a “dischargeable condition”. That means that full planning approval will not be granted until all the drainage conditions have been met. No development can commence until agreement is gained in writing from the Planning Authority.

A few other SuDS measures have not been covered in lectures, so will require your own research if you wish to use these:
a.Porous paving
b.Attenuation crates; constructed below ground as storage facilities for peak flows; this is a relatively cheap SuDS option to install;
c.Green roofs also provide attenuation and some storage for peak rainfall.
Please use your own novel approaches , if you feel that you have an innovative proposal that is a good solution;

I was asked why it makes a difference to answer part 2) from the point of view of a consultant to the Planning Department. My answer is that, in a planning application, environmental dispute or public inquiry etc, each of the opposing sides in the case, may employ their own environmental consultant.
So, it is important always to be aware about who wrote the EIA and who is paying the consultants’ fees.
You will then need to assess for yourselves, whether the information in the EIA written by the developer’s consultants, was selectively chosen from a wider range of environmental evidence. In this way, you can check whether either or both the applicant and the authority provided selective evidence.

“Do we have to find a specific mitigation method for the canal side development only or can it be a method that was adopted by other construction development projects before as long as we give a clear explanation of the appropriateness of the method we have chosen?”
Answer;
Almost certainly any method that you propose might have been proposed and/or used for a previous development somewhere in the vicinity of a canal or riverside. As you say, it is the appropriateness of the method chosen that is important. Views about appropriateness often differ so you may need to justify your considered method and costs to other member of your group.

Question about detention ponds;
Answer;
In principle it is acceptable to specify detention ponds for the Canal Side development. However, please remember the pond(s) will need to be small in size because the development site is constrained within a relatively small area. Also, the developer will wish to build as many houses as possible on the site.
This will limit the capacity of the detention pond(s), so you need to be sure that you can achieve sufficient water storage in the small pond(s).

Essential references for the assignment, :
1. Ecology Report (EIA), Environmental Statement: Main Text, Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment, MVV Environment Devonport Ltd., June 2011.
2. Woolcock J, Planning Inspectorate Appeal Decision, Appeal Ref: APP/J1155/A/12/2185633, Whitecleave Quarry, Devon, TQ11 0DQ. Decision date 17 October 2013.
3. Flood Risk Assessment: Canal Side Development, Local Planning Department, 2013.
4. Lismore City Council, The Use of Reed Beds for the Treatment of Sewage and Wastewater from Domestic Households, 2003.

“Write a short advisory report to the local Planning Department highlighting the three most important SuDS mitigation measures you suggest for the Canal Side development”;
you should write from the point of view of a consultant providing advice to the local Planning Department, (rather than providing advice to the developer)

The water quality of runoff from the site will need to be very carefully controlled during construction; suggest three important water quality protection actions that you would implement on site either before the build or at the time of the build, if you were the Site Manager.
You will not be allowed to discharge surface water to a foul sewer in the answer to this question. If you wish to use crates for attenuation and porous pavements, you must conduct additional research on these mitigation approaches.

Read the documents and the planning conditions very carefully to understand the full meaning. In the case of the Planning Permission (PP) from the Planning Authority ), although the PP has been granted, the drainage is considered to be a “dischargeable condition”. That means that full planning approval will not be granted until all the drainage conditions have been met. No development can commence until agreement is gained in writing from the Planning Authority.

A few other SuDS measures have not been covered in lectures, so will require your own research if you wish to use these:
a.Porous paving
b.Attenuation crates; constructed below ground as storage facilities for peak flows; this is a relatively cheap SuDS option to install;
c.Green roofs also provide attenuation and some storage for peak rainfall.
Please use your own novel approaches , if you feel that you have an innovative proposal that is a good solution;

I was asked why it makes a difference to answer part 2) from the point of view of a consultant to the Planning Department. My answer is that, in a planning application, environmental dispute or public inquiry etc, each of the opposing sides in the case, may employ their own environmental consultant.
So, it is important always to be aware about who wrote the EIA and who is paying the consultants’ fees.
You will then need to assess for yourselves, whether the information in the EIA written by the developer’s consultants, was selectively chosen from a wider range of environmental evidence. In this way, you can check whether either or both the applicant and the authority provided selective evidence.

“Do we have to find a specific mitigation method for the canal side development only or can it be a method that was adopted by other construction development projects before as long as we give a clear explanation of the appropriateness of the method we have chosen?”
Answer;
Almost certainly any method that you propose might have been proposed and/or used for a previous development somewhere in the vicinity of a canal or riverside. As you say, it is the appropriateness of the method chosen that is important. Views about appropriateness often differ so you may need to justify your considered method and costs to other member of your group.

Question about detention ponds;
Answer;
In principle it is acceptable to specify detention ponds for the Canal Side development. However, please remember the pond(s) will need to be small in size because the development site is constrained within a relatively small area. Also, the developer will wish to build as many houses as possible on the site.
This will limit the capacity of the detention pond(s), so you need to be sure that you can achieve sufficient water storage in the small pond(s).

Essential references for the assignment, :
1. Ecology Report (EIA), Environmental Statement: Main Text, Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment, MVV Environment Devonport Ltd., June 2011.
2. Woolcock J, Planning Inspectorate Appeal Decision, Appeal Ref: APP/J1155/A/12/2185633, Whitecleave Quarry, Devon, TQ11 0DQ. Decision date 17 October 2013.
3. Flood Risk Assessment: Canal Side Development, Local Planning Department, 2013.
4. Lismore City Council, The Use of Reed Beds for the Treatment of Sewage and Wastewater from Domestic Households, 2003.