Enquirer

From: "Joseph Field"
Organisation: Staffordshire University
Date 7th April 1999
Subject: Short questionnaire on Contaminated Land

?

Request

?

.

.

.

[Return to Top]
[Go to Bottom]
> Breadcrumbs >

Dear Micky,

I am a third year Building Surveyor at Staffordshire University and I am currently in the process of gathering information for my dissertation. I would be extremely grateful if you could post up this this short questionnaire on Contaminated Land.

Yours faithfully

Joseph Field

If after you have read the Questionnaire below, you would like to fill it out, then please contact who will email it to you.

Rather than filling it out as a Form on the site (which would have involved Dr Hackenbush doing some CGI programming, to which he has a pathological aversion ever since he singed his eyebrows with an errant Zippo) it is easier to have Joseph Field email you the questionnaire.

That way you also can mail it straight back to him using your "Reply" button.

?

Questionnaire

?

.

.

.

[Return to Top]
[Go to Bottom]
> Breadcrumbs >

.

.

.

[Return to Top]
[Go to Bottom]
> Breadcrumbs >

Questionnaire

Q1. Economic viability is the way of determining the possible options of contaminated sites. It considers the cost of remediation, the environmental/health risks and the possible uses of the land if any. Once all of these factors been considered you can decide whether it is the correct decision to develop on the site.

Q2. If it is not economically viable to develop on a contaminated site, then is it feasible to leave it in it's current state if it is not causing an immediate environmental health risk?

Q3. If the above statement is correct then the following questions have to be considered:

1. Who has the legal liability to clean up the site, the previous owner or the pollutant?
2. Does the contaminate pose an immediate threat to the surrounding environment?
3. Is the development required immediately for the treatment of the site or should long term treatments be considered?
4. If longer treatment are considered are there any economic savings to be made, which would justify a delay in the project.

Q4: All of these problems would not necessarily be solved, even if the site is developed on. As the contaminate does not have to taken away. All that needs to be taken away are the pathways. So we still have a potential problem if we decide to develop on the site in the future. Even though in some cases it is not viable to completely decontaminate a site. It would be more viable in the long run to totally decontaminate sites instead of partially. This would be even more viable if we had more cost effective methods of assessing sites and remediation methods.

I appreciate the time taken to complete this questionnaire and thank you for you input.