Stockport Council News

LibDems eh? They officially don’t believe in road-building except where it will buy them votes.

Children, meanwhile, are not safe in their hands.

Yet the panjandrums at the top either don’t want to be answerable to council taxpayers or are actually enraged at the very idea.

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/council-lease-cars.html

LibDem run Stockport Council was warned years back their policy of shutting primary schools was short-sighted, but they wanted to sell off “surplus” land for housing.

What a shame for the children of Stockport that they failed to listen to the many voices who raised concern at this policy at the time.

BS 10175 (7.6.2.1) states the more sensitive the receptors…the greater degree of confidence needed in the outcome of the risk assessment and the subsequent risk management. Greater Manchester Geological Unit said 104 boreholes and 209 trial pits (some from an investigation in the 1990s) were not enough for the sister former Jackson’s Brickyard site at Adswood, but for this school, directly over the old tip, 4 contamination pits and 11 boreholes on a similar-sized site were adequate. Why?

A 500+ pupil primary school and babies’ nursery – not sensitive receptors at all.

From the GMGU proof of evidence to the public inquiry 2006 – “The only suitable forms of hard deveopments are large scale commercial developments such as offices, supermarkets etc. Schemes to protect buildings in these situations need to provide multiple levels of protetction e.g., extraction wells, sealing techniques, ventilation voids and extensive monitoring.”

This is not happening for the 550 primary school pupils in the school though. Why not?

From GMGU’s proof of evidence from David Woolrich at the public inquiry in 2006 regarding the sister site at Adswood:- “Very few sites are so badly contaminated that they cannot be reused at all, but the choice of a new use may be restricted by contamination as well as other planning considerations and the consequent financial implication. That …..must include the longterm financial consequences for the site occupants.”

No mention of this problem for the school site.

I asked but it was deemed “vexatious”.

Bs 10175 (7.6.2.3) also states the most common pattern for
establishing sample locations is the square grid with samples taken at
intersections. This was not the case in the April 2006 investigations although
the Council and Greater Manchester repeatedly claimed to have complied with BS
10175