In article ,
"The Question Asker" writes:

[reedbeds]

1) The local planning department is opposing the development on the grounds
that it will cause negative impacts on the surrounding area (At present the
barn is falling down and if nothing is done it will be lost)

Sewage as such is a bit of a problem for constructed wetlands.
Runoff and grey water aren't such a problem.

2) We have a very large deep pond with no water in cos of its size it has no
obvious inflows and would like to be able to use it as a pond.

What is your local soil permeability? You may have to consider
puddling the pond to retain the water.

3) Were keen environmentalists and as such looking at certain things we can
do to decrease impacts from the development.

As such we are looking at having a reedbed constructed to deal with our
sewage and let the fresh water go into the pond, upon Environment Agency
approval. The reasoning behind the reedbed was:

1) To try to prove to the council that impacts will be minimal

More importantly, you should try to prove to the council that the
impacts will be large and positive. Should they at this point
refuse, you should suggest that the next time you see them, it
will be in Strasbourg, as they are violating your human rights.

2) To fill the pond up with freshwater and maintain the water level

Directing your roof runoff there is a good start.

3) To avoid paying sewage charges

Probably not an option.

4) To reduce impact of the property.

An old barn is an old barn. I cannot really visualise it is going
to impinge on the rural idyll unless you paint it day-glo orange.

What I was after was any experiences of such a system pros/cons etc if it
would be suitable to fill a pond. Any possible problems.

Going on the experience I have had with the constructed wetlands
at Heathrow, the local bird population will increase. Buy some
binoculars. The Heathrow scheme is to remediate their runoff,
particularly the de-icing fluids, and is located to the south of
the airport. As the runways run east-west, this means that the
birds do not generally cross the path of the airliners, which
would be a bad thing for birds and aircraft alike. The site is
large, it took me about 10 minutes to cross it on foot. BAA can
probably give you some shiny brochures to wave at the council.

John Schmitt


--
If you have nothing to say, or rather, something extremely stupid
and obvious, say it, but in a 'plonking' tone of voice - i.e.
roundly, but hollowly and dogmatically. - Stephen Potter