For the sister site with the same history, the Council is demanding a large sinking fund to cover the costs of repair or replacement of the gas monitoring system. No such concerns at the school and as I understand it (and I have tried very hard to check) at the school they don't even have a gas monitoring system!
At the sister former Jackson's Brickyard site with clay pits infilled with rubbish, they are concerned about cancer causing substances being vented out with the landfill gases.
What about this problem at the toxic waste dump school, I asked? Don't be vexatious, they replied
At the sister site they don't want venting areas where children will play. Where else is there on the toxic waste dump site? I asked this. "Don't be vexatious", they replied.
They have known since 1974 that the land was contaminated and unsuitable for building. If they didn't, I pointed these documents out to them -
Please see the Parliamentary report opposite.
In 2006 the Council told a public inquiry that not enough investigations had been done at this sister site. At the very same time they were trying to get away with doing none whatsoever at the toxic waste dump school site.
Three sites opened up as Jackson's Brickyards in 1922 -
Above is what is now Adswood Tip and the houses they propose to build at Midland Road, Bramhall.
Above is the toxic waste dump school site. At Adswood, where the Council bitterly objected that not enough contamination investigations had been done, the proposed housing was not going over the rubbish infilled claypits -
At North Reddish, where they tried to get away with doing absolutely no contamination investigations, the school is directly over the tipped claypits.
The CBR markings are nothing to do with contamination and Trial Pit 5/05 wasn't even dug, as the Council didn't own that land. Why the double standards on contamination when the Council itself stands to make a fast buck? I think I have answered my own question there.
The Bredbury sister site investigations -
This report is by the same company which initally declared the area where the school was going to be perfectly safe and that children could be protected from the admitted toxic hotspots at the southern end of the site by means of "prickly bushes". I kid you not.
I wanted them off the case for their incompentence. I think anything they claim should be taken with a Nantwich of salt, to quote Nancy Banks Smith.