Environmental Management

In 1985 the EIA Directive (EU legislation) on Environmental Impact Assessment of the effects of  projects on the environment was introduced. It was amended in 1997. The requirements of the Directives are incorporated within UK law through “The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999″ and their equivalents for other parts of the country. Not all real estate development projects are covered by the regulations. In particular the regulations do not apply to most small scale development projects. I regularly receive questions from developers who want to know if their project is covered by the regulations and in this article I will describe the process to determine if the regulations apply to a particular project.

As an example we consider a new fifteen storey office block on a 0.4 ha site that currently comprise a non-listed Victorian four storey building and situated in close proximity to a number of grade II and grade II * listed buildings.

The 1999 EIA regulations distinguish between two different categories of development that will require or potentially require to undergo an environmental impact assessment. These developments are described in schedule 1 and schedule 2 of the regulations. Development proposals that would fit any of the descriptions in schedule 1 always require an environmental impact assessment. Schedule 1 developments are generally large infrastructure projects or development that is generally regarded as having a high potential for pollution. Examples of the latter development types include waste management sites and power stations. The proposed development in my example does not match any of the development types described in schedule 1.

Development that is classed as ’schedule 2 development’ only requires an EIA to be carried out when it is likely that a significant environmental impact will occur as a result of the development. To determine whether a development is a schedule 2 development is more complex than it is to determine a schedule 1 development. There are three aspects that require to be considered:

The descriptions of development categories in schedule 2. The threshold mentioned in schedule 2 for the development category. The presence of any sensitive areas as defined in the regulations.

The development matches the description in Schedule 2, 10(b) Urban development projects, including the construction of shopping centres and car parks, sports stadiums, leisure centres and multiplex cinemas. This category covers a wide variety of development types including office, retail and residential development projects.

For a development in this category to become a schedule 2 development its area needs to exceed 0.5 ha, or it needs to be situated in a sensitive area. The footprint of the development area in my development, taken as the red line planning application boundary, is less than 0.5 ha. Therefore, based on this criterion, the development would not be a schedule 2 development.

As I mentioned the next test is whether the development is proposed to take place in a sensitive site. The regulations define a sensitive site as any of the following sites:

Sites of Special Scientific Interest Land to which sub-section (3) of section 29 (nature conservation orders) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 applies Areas to which paragraph (u)(ii) in the table in article 10 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995 applies National Parks The Broads Properties appearing on the World Heritage List Scheduled Ancient Monuments Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty European sites within the meaning of regulation 10 of the Conservation (Natural  Habitats etc) Regulations 1994

There are a number of public register available that can be used to determine if the location is a sensitive site. In my experience the “Multi-Agency Geographical Information” database is a very useful starting point to establish this. It can be found on the internet and is commonly know under its acronym Magic.

Assuming that our research has demonstrated that development is not proposed to take place in a sensitive site, it follows that it is unlikely that the proposed development is a schedule 2 development and therefore it is not likely that an EIA is required.

There are two further issues that I need to address here. Firstly, certain activities that are proposed on a particular development have much lower thresholds in schedule 2. I have assumed that these activities do not form part of the current proposed development. It is particularly worth to verify that no fuel is stored in a structure exceeding an area of 0.05ha.

Secondly, in exceptional cases the Secretary of State has the power to direct that a development requires undergoing EIA even when the threshold is not exceeded and the site does not lie in a sensitive area. An example of this was the development of the London Eye. The height, its prominent location within London and the potential to attract large numbers of visitors were all factors that were considered to likely lead to a significant environment impact and therefore an EIA was required, even when the footprint of the development did not exceed the threshold and it is not situated in a sensitive site. This is a rare event, but it should be taken into consideration nevertheless.

Even if the development would be a schedule 2 development it would not necessarily be required that an EIA be carried out. The development would then be screened to determine if a significant environmental impact would likely occur. I will not consider this further here.

Even though it appears that the proposed development does not require an EIA and environmental statement, there are other pieces of legislation that may require the submission of adequate environmental information before a planning decision is made. In particular the legislation around species that are protected at European level, such as bats and great crested newts, can be onerous. This may for instance become an issue where demolition of existing buildings forms part of the development proposals.

Finally the local planning authority has a duty to take into account many other environmental and sustainability issues.  The authority may therefore require a number of studies, statements or reports. These may include a flood risk assessment, an energy statement, overshadowing studies and a wind strength appraisal.

In this article I described the process to determine if a real estate development project falls within the reach of the 1999 EIA regulations. Although in many cases this will a relatively straightforward appraisal, it is recommended to consult a specialist for each of your projects.




By: Paul Giesberg

When countries adopted the Basel Convention on Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste in 1989, Jordan ratified this Convention and was a party to it. Consequently, this country has an obligation to enact relevant municipal legislation which conforms to the ideals of Basel, as required by this treaty. Amongst the requirements of Basel are that member states need to ensure that any waste which they produce is recycled or disposed of in an environmentally sound manner. Jordan first enacted its Hazardous Waste No. 12 in 1995 and substituted it with Law No. 1 in 2003. Despite this and other initiatives such as the many important programmes of the Basel Convention’s Arab Centre which covers Jordan, waste continues to be stockpiled in many parts of Jordan as a result of careless dumping and persistent littering in some communities. This causes adverse effects such as pollution, environmental destruction and diseases in human beings. Factors responsible for such littering include inadequate penalties for littering, insufficient public enlightenment, inadequate educational curricula in primary and high schools as well as universities and low capacity. This suggests that the Jordanian law needs to be implemented more strictly by enforcing penalties regarding offenders and granting incentives to community groups, agencies, companies and individuals who promote best practices. This could serve as a tool to encourage people and increase compliance with the law.

Indeed, hazardous waste does not only suggest scenarios where it is transported on a ship and dumped from one country to another. On the contrary, hazardous waste affects the existence of the daily life of every individual. When used batteries from torches, radios and other electrical equipment are placed at dump sites where scavengers and children can freely open them up, it must be borne in mind that these batteries contain deadly chemicals such as cadmium. Such a chemical inflicts perils on the respiratory organs of human beings and cause other diseases as well as atmospheric pollution and pollution to rivers. In some communities including Jordan’s Zarqa and Mafraq, overcrowding of industries causes emission of gases from these industries to rivers and underground water. The incidents of mass poisoning, amongst large sectors of the populace which occurred in Mafraq in 2007, resulted from gaseous emissions of factory waste from neighbouring towns.

Fluorescent tubes, clinical themometres and certain forms of medical waste are said to contain some amount of mercury which affects the nerves and can cause physical paralysis, psychological disorders and other forms of sickness in human beings. Hence, the manner in which they are disposed of, after being used, is one which requires caution in Jordan. Based on these which are just a few examples of the instances where hazardous wastes and chemicals are present, hazardous/toxic waste is obviously an inevitable part of every human activity which needs to be carefully disposed of in every community.

When companies such as the Jordan Petroleum Refinery imports crude oil for recycling and refining for sale, the crude oil is processed with some amount of toxic chemicals which are managed very carefully lest they cause a negligent spill and cause hazardous perils. JUST University disposes of some medical waste from certain hospitals in Jordan and UNDP-Jordan has some projects on recycling waste to energy and biogas. These three agencies are all success stories in this regard. 

In light of such commendable initiatives, should Jordan’s national law specify some guidelines for all stakeholders, to facilitate waste recycling in as many forms of waste as possible, even for the benefit of its rural communities? In addition to protecting the environment, this approach could generate income for the poor, as unemployment is rife in many communities in this country. Furthermore, these recommended amendments to legislation could also provide a definition of what amounts to toxic waste, with relevant explanatory memoranda where necessary, and the exact effects of each type of waste on human health and the ecology, based on empirical scientific evidence. Compliance and liability at municipal level then become easy to deal with.

The national law of this country should also conform to Jordan’s obligations under the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals in International Trade (1998) and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (2001). These two treaties, in addition to Basel, regulate wastes which also include chemicals and pesticides, all of which are used in Jordan. In addition to sending officials from ministries and customs officers for the green training programmes of such treaties, the government of Jordan needs to train other affected members of the society such as farmers on the objectives of these treaties, as ideally reflected in a national law. This could be done in co-operation with other stakeholders and with the guidance of specially designed training manuals. Many farmers, particularly those in parts of the Jordan Valley and certain parts of this region’s rural communities, owing to reasons of insufficient levels of awareness, continue to use obsolete pesticides and chemicals during their farming practices. These farmers do not also know how to dispose of their agricultural waste. The long-term effects become damaging to their health. Farmers could then benefit from receiving training on the requirements of a national law, in Arabic which they can easily grasp and comprehend, with the provision of alternative and more suitable chemicals which they need to use.

As such, it is imperative that Jordan makes certain amendments to its national law and enforce it in a manner so as to conform to its requirements under the Basel, Stockholm and Rotterdam Conventions. With the occurrence of pressing toxic waste issues on a daily basis, these are some of the lessons and recommendations which this country could adopt to suit its circumstances, as it strives to attain the goals of sustainable development.




By: Yvonne Nana Afua Idun