Stockport Council News

Email sent – 25 April 2015 18:59

Dear FoI Officer

In the light of this FOI reply below, please let me know what gas monitoring has been carried out at the Vale View School since it opened.

Many thanks and kind regards

Sheila
———————————–

“08 August 2007 18:10

Our Reference FOI/EIR 618

Dear Mrs Oliver,

FOI & EIR Request – Costs of North Reddish Schools

I am writing in response to your e-mail dated 11th July addressed to Cllr Weldon in which your request:

“How much is the removal of the toxic waste costing and how much will these new stipulations of Sport England cost?”

QUERY CONCERNING THE GMGU REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

Firstly regarding your query in relation to the condition of the site, as you are aware GMGU carried a ground investigation report of the site in question (a full copy of the report can be found at:http://interactive.stockport.gov.uk/edrms/onlinemvm/getimage.asp?DocumentNumber=30867 )

This report concluded that:

“In summary, the GMGU consider the site to be safe to develop for a school with playing fields, provided some simple, precautionary measures are taken that will ensure that any residual risks are effectively managed.”

The report does not recommend removing ‘toxic waste’, but states that there are a number of recommended remediation options with regard to the site condition which “include limited landscaping and construction of a clean cover system”. In addition it recommends certain Gas Montoring to occur during and post construction.

I refer you to the report for full details of the recommendations and information regarding the condition of the site.

In addition on the planning file is a document entitled “Justification for Developing Local Open Space for New North Reddish Primary School” (the full report can be found athttp://interactive.stockport.gov.uk/edrms/onlinemvm/getimage.asp?DocumentNumber=49085 ), it is stated at paragraph 8.2:

“The overall costs for the School itself which will include for the pre-planning, planning and professional costs, dealing with contamination, providing services and the overall construction equates to circa £8.5 million. Additional costs which have emerged through the planning application process to meet national and local policy requirements and extended works at and surrounding the School equate to circa £625,000. Much of this investment relates to the new recreational facilities at the Harcourt Street site, including the newly laid out sports pitch, the multi use games area, the additional changing facilities and the landscaping works to deal with formalising footpath routes and planting to improve the visual appearance of the remaining open space area in community use. There are other significant costs in promoting and designing the proposals.”

Therefore there are no specific costs regarding removing ‘toxic waste’ but the estimate of £8.5 Million for the costs of the school includes the costs of implementing the recommendations of GMGU. The exact costs of the recommendations have not been separated from the overall estimate of the scheme. It should be noted that it is impossible to give actual costs for individual elements of construction of the school but as the detail designs develop, so will the estimate of the costs. “

In the end they had to admit the entire site was contaminated with lead, arsenic and brown asbestos –

Our Reference FOI/EIR
618

Email received – 08 August 2007 18:10

Dear Mrs
Oliver,

FOI
& EIR Request – Costs of North Reddish
Schools

I am writing in response
to your e-mail dated 11th July addressed to Cllr Weldon in which your
request:

“How much is the removal
of the toxic waste costing and how much will these new stipulations of Sport
England cost?”

QUERY
CONCERNING THE GMGU REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

Firstly regarding your
query in relation to the condition of the site, as you are aware GMGU carried a
ground investigation report of the site in question (a full copy of the report
can be found at: http://interactive.stockport.gov.uk/edrms/onlinemvm/getimage.asp?DocumentNumber=30867
)

This report concluded
that:

“In summary, the GMGU consider the site to be safe to develop for a
school with playing fields, provided some simple, precautionary measures are
taken that will ensure that any residual risks are effectively managed.”

The report does not
recommend removing ‘toxic waste’, but states that there are a number of
recommended remediation options with regard to the site condition which
“include limited landscaping and
construction of a clean cover system”. In addition it recommends
certain Gas Montoring to occur during and post construction.

I refer you to the report
for full details of the recommendations and information regarding the condition
of the site.

In addition on the
planning file is a document entitled “Justification for Developing Local Open
Space for New
North Reddish Primary
School” (the full report can be found at http://interactive.stockport.gov.uk/edrms/onlinemvm/getimage.asp?DocumentNumber=49085
), it is stated at paragraph 8.2:

“The overall costs for the School itself which will
include for the pre-planning, planning and professional costs, dealing with
contamination, providing services and the overall construction equates to circa
£8.5 million. Additional costs which have emerged through the planning
application process to meet national and local policy requirements and extended
works at and surrounding the School equate to circa £625,000. Much of this
investment relates to the new recreational facilities at the Harcourt Street
site, including the newly laid out sports pitch, the multi use games area, the
additional changing facilities and the landscaping works to deal with
formalising footpath routes and planting to improve the visual appearance of the
remaining open space area in community use. There are other significant costs in
promoting and designing the proposals.”

Therefore there are no
specific costs regarding removing ‘toxic waste’ but the estimate of £8.5 Million
for the costs of the school includes the costs of implementing the
recommendations of GMGU. The exact costs of the recommendations have not been
separated from the overall estimate of the scheme. It should be noted that it
is impossible to give actual costs for individual elements of construction of
the school but as the detail designs develop, so will the estimate of the costs.

STIPULATIONS FROM SPORTS ENGLAND

I have spoken to the
Council’s consultants, NPS, who have stated an allowance in the region of
£500,000 has been estimated for the cost of providing additional the
requirements as suggested by Sports England. It should be noted that this figure
is an estimate and the actual costs will be known once a contractor has been
chosen to do this work if Planning Permission is granted for the application.

FOI
Officer

Town
Hall

Edward
Street

Stockport

SK1 3XE.

Yours
sincerely

No councillor should have political pressure put upon them to pass planning applications, not least to put a new primary school on a still gassing former toxic waste dump.

Bent LibDem Stockport.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/rap-for-council-officers-over-planning-965878

Email received 04 January 2008 10:40

Our Reference: FOI/EIR
860

Dear Mrs
Oliver,

FOI/EIR
– Councillor Porgess

I refer to your request
for information detailed below.

Please find attached
the information you have requested.

If you are
unhappy with our response or the way we have handled your request you are
entitled to ask us to conduct an internal review. Any internal review will be
carried out by a senior member of staff who was not involved with your original
request. To request an internal review please email foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk
in the first instance or write to:

FOI Officer

Town
Hall

Edward
Street

Stockport

SK1 3XE

Yours
sincerely,

Freedom of Information
Processing Officer
————————————————————————–

From:
sheilaoliver
Sent: 09 December 2007 13:43
To: FOI
Officer
Subject: Harcourt Street – Cllr
Porgess

Dear FOI
Officer

Councillor Porgess refers in this
week’s Stockport Express to notes he took whilst looking through the Harcourt Street
contamination reports. Please may I see these
notes.

Kind
regards

Sheila

Email received 04 January 2008 09:27

Our Reference: EIR/FOI
858

Dear Mrs
Oliver,

Environmental
Information/Freedom of Information – PPS 23

I refer to your request
for information detailed below.

The quoted reference
from PPS 23 provides guidance, but it is not mandatory. The Council was aware
from its own records that the site had a history of waste disposal and therefore
commissioned GMGU to consider the contamination issues on its behalf prior to
making a planning application. The Environmental Health Officer was party to
this commission. The work by GMGU has identified the constraints and remedial
measures to ensure the safety of the site for the proposed development. The
screening application for the development resulted in a decision that an EIA was
not necessary.

The planning
application was submitted with the supporting information regarding
contamination (the site investigation) and the Environmental Health Officer was
consulted on the application and has made no adverse comments. The consultation
with the Environment Agency has taken place as part of the on-going processing
of the application and discussions are continuing to address their concerns.

If you are
unhappy with our response or the way we have handled your request you are
entitled to ask us to conduct an internal review. Any internal review will be
carried out by a senior member of staff who was not involved with your original
request. To request an internal review please email foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk
in the first instance or write to:

FOI Officer

Town
Hall

Edward
Street

Stockport

SK1 3XE

Yours
sincerely,