Stockport Council News

Is there a sinking fund for the toxic waste dump school as was demanded for housing on this sister contaminated site? No, apparently not and it is vexatious to raise the matter.

A sister site

The warehousing at the Bredbury former Jackson’s Brickyards, where
they did more investigations 30 years ago than they did for this school in 2006,
is not even directly over the old tipped waste – the new school is directly over
the old tip.

The Bredbury sister site investigations – on a strict grid pattern and quite a lot of them – unlike the toxic waste dump school site contamination investigations.

In the early 1980s on a sister Jackson’s Brickyards site opened in
1922, like the Hacourt Street site, with the same layout and planning and
tipping history, they did more contamination investigations on a regular grid
pattern for just warehouses than they did in 2006 for this 550 pupil primary
school. The 1982 warehouses were not going directly over the old tip. This
school is. Why would the safety standards be better 30 years ago than
now?

Stockport Council is insisting that all questions regarding this
issue are vexatious, yet they tried to do no contamination investigations,
knowing full well, as Councillor Mark Weldon admitted recently in the Manchester
Evening News, that the site was likely to be contaminated with brown asbestos.
Councillor Weldon even had a photo-opportunity recently with young children
sitting on the contaminated land whilst he dug the first sod of earth from the
site with a shovel.

Lethal brown asbestos not being removed from the site of a new primary school and it is “vexatious” to mention it. Corrupt LibDems.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0rCPnP5H9o

I asked Trevor Hough, site manager, for details of his firm’s
insurers, as future claims may be made against his company, BAM Construction
Ltd, from people living around the site who may well have been exposed to brown
asbestos fibres during construction – and it appears from the clip that correct
safety procedures were not followed. He has not responded.

In 2006 Greater Manchester Geological Unit (Stockport Council’s contamination ‘experts’) stated to a public inquiry about the sister Jackson’s
Brickyard site at Adswood:- “Where the redevelopment of a closed landfill or
nearby land is involved, even the possibility of difficulties from migrating gas
would be a material planning consideration.” It wasn’t for this new
school.

In a memo written by Stockport Council’s Environmental Health
Officer referring to the former Jackson’s Brickyard sister site at Adswood he
states:- “If a venting point was driven though an area of asbestos there would
be the potential for asbestos fibres to be released on to the development. No
lower threshold exists for certain types of asbestos, hence a serious health
risk would occur if even one fibre of asbestos were to be released during the
venting of the gas”.

Greater Manchester Geological Unit’s proof of evidence from David Woorich to the public inquiry
in 2006 regarding the Adswood former Jackson’s Brickyards stated:- “The general
thrust of guidance is that, ideally, gassing landfill sites should not be
developed for ‘hard’ end uses until they have stabilised but should be developed
instead for open space use. Stabilized in this sense means a methane level of
below 1%v/v .. and a CO2 level below 1.5%v/v.” The school site is gassing over
14%v/v CO2 .

The double standards where the council did and didn’t stand to make a fast buck are staggering. The two developments were happening at the same time.

Concern about landfill gases at Adswood but not at the primary school site.

No concern whatsoever about the 14.7% v/v/ carbon dioxide at the school site.