Site suitability for WW treatment system

We've been asked for further information on our planning and were asked to contact someone in environment in the council to discuss issues they had with drainage on the site. When we finally got the person who initially inspected the site they said they couldn't give us any information as they weren't qualified to say what was required, they just referred us to the EPA guidelines on wastewater treatment for one off housing.

How much detail should we put in our reply? We've already submitted a percolation test and a site suitability report from the suppliers of a treatment system. The water table is quite high (about 1m below the current site level) so would a raised percolation area definitely be required? Do we need to employ an engineer or are the reports above enough already?

did your further info simply state, contact the environmental section to discuss issues with drainge??? if so then you do not yet know the issues tha need to be dealth with... and until you do know there is no point engaging anyone....

a raised bed would definately be required.... plus an effluent treatment system...

there is no guarantee that this situation will be acceptable to the council, they may deem the water table to be too high to safely dispose of the treated effluent....

i would phone the enviro section again, quote the planning ref and ask to speak to whatever engineer prepared the report for the planning file..... the person who inspected the site would generally not be an engineer......

The request for information said to liase with environment re reasons they had recommended refusal. The guy we spoke with was the person that wrote the report on behalf of environment and submitted it to planning. He admitted he visited the site during very wet weather and he would go and look at the holes again this week. To be honest I'm starting to think he doesn't fully know what he's talking about.

In our application we stated that an Oakstown BAF system would be used and the engineer that did the perc test said it would be suitable with a raised bed due to the high water table. This was all stated in the initial application.

seems like a very amateurish situation by the council..... if the council official was going to recommend refusal, what could possible be achieved by further information requesting you to contact him... do they think you can change his mind??? if he is an executive engineer that does not bode well for his job prospects.... is this the same guy who admitted to you that hes not really qualified to say what is required for a site to be acceptable for percolation.... but maybe they are just trying to give you every opportunity to resolve the issues... personally i think you need to engage a suitabily qualified professional (a hydrogeologist or someone who has FAS qualification to carry out EPA testings) and get them to write up a report based in the EPA guidelines... they would be best to advise you of the next steps...... raised bed percolation definately seems necessary, they may also recommend a sand polishing filter bed or reed bed as tertiary treatment. but at the end of the day the council have the last say, and in this day and age of groundwater pollution and health hazards, they make the easy decision of refual in the vast majority of cases....

He went out to the site again yesterday and now says the site is acceptable, however I can't imagine he'll make himself look bad by overwriting his original report. His last visit was in July when we encountered 60 consecutive days of rain in the local area, and surprisingly he found the ground to be soft !

He suggested getting an agent to write up our proposal for wastewater treatment on the site for our reply to ensure all areas are covered so I think it's the best route to go.

good luck with it bartbridge..... and maybe you can less us know how you got on after the decision??

Will do, fingers crossed it's good news!