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
