Stockport Council News

Corrupt LibDems.

The area where the school was going had no contaminants (because they hadn’t looked for any). The site is contaminated I said. You haven’t look properly. Don’t be vexatious, they replied, and they still do. Corrupt LibDems.

They admit to contamination hotspots at the south of the site which they suggest planting with prickly bushes to keep the children off it. The plants would have soaked up the contaminants and lost their prickly leaves. Never trust a LibDem with the safety of a child.

A young contaminated land officer at Stockport Council refused to accept the report with just one borehole sunk – quite rightly. Kicking and screaming Stockport Council carried out further investigations.

Boreholes 1, 2 , 3 and 5 are not done over the infilled pits, so unlikely to find much.

Borehole 4 over the pits says no well. It was “vexatious” of me to ask the implications of this.

CBR 1, 2 and 3 are nothing to do with contamination, rather the stability of the land.

Contamination trial pits 1, 2, 3 and 4 were done at the south side of the site, not where this school was going, which was directly over the old infilled rubbish pits.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/methane_gas_monitors_at_vale_vie#incoming-220341

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/vale_vew_school#comment-23672

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/toxic_waste_dump_primary_school#comment-24175

Why employ them to investigate a site involving airborne contaminants then? Because you don’t want them to find the airborne contaminants. Bent Stockport Council.

The Council “forgot” to tell the Environment Agency about the plan to build the school on toxic waste, although BS 10175, which they claim to have complied with, states the EA should have been informed at the outset.

When the Environment Agency emailed the Council to tell them not to decide the application on grounds of contamination, the Council “forgot” to inform the Planning Committee.