Is my local MP Andrew Stunell having a laugh here? I repeatedly
asked him to make Stockport Council reply to questions, which they
have avoided for about four years:-

http://www.libdemvoice.org/andrew-stunel...

I shall ask him again for help and post his response, or lack of
it, on this site.

Have a look at this frightening You Tube clip of the brown asbestos
"experts" languidly and unscienficially removing brown asbestos
from the school site:-

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

This is the text of the Greater Manchester Geological Unit submission to a public inquiry regarding a sister site with an identical layout and history:-

Ration and Public Open Space
t.l Policy UL1.3 requires developers to make provision for recreation
amenity open space in new residential developments (Document 27) • Failure to provide the minimum space required would inevitably cause • pressure on existing facilities and increase the shortfall in open space in the Borough. The Bramhall area has one of the highest open space shortfalls in the Borough.
4.4.2 The Council's supplementary planning guidance does not require provision of public open space in excess of that referred to in PPG17-Some authorities use a higher standard than that advised by the NPFA. The requirement is only that development should provide a minimum of open space reasonably related to its scale and location. The guidance does not relate more to standard housing developments and not to flats. There is a wealth of evidence, used in the preparation of the guidance demonstrating the occupancy rates used occur in flat, developments; the guidance has been devised to average out variations and take full account of actual ratess recorded.
4.4.3 The.rf .is_!^9_.j:6ji§on why the ^proposal should avoid making the required play provision on this site although, in the absence of a detailed site . layout, it is not possible to assess whether in practice this could be achieved. The actual requirement is 6.3 LAPs. Should 4 LAPs and one LEAP be provided this might be acceptable. The aspects of formal and informal recreation are entirely separate, and both elements should be fully provided for. Existing of a playground 500 m away is irrelevant as the policy needs to be satisfied on the appeal site.
4.^4.4 The full provision of formal recreation space is not possible on this land, so that contributions to provision off site would be required {Supplementary Planning Guidance "Recreational Open Space Provision and Commuted Payments" at Document 32 Appendix 12) unless adjoining land edged blue offered an opportunity for this element of the policy to be satisfied. Without such provision, the proposals are in conflict with the deposit UDP policy.
Landfill gas and pollution
4.5-1 Landfill gas is a complex mixture which in anaerobic conditions insists of approximately 64# methane and 35X carbon dioxide, the remainder being trace gases including those responsible for the unpleasant odour of landfill gas. The four significant hazards are explosion, where methane is sufficiently concentrated to ignite in a confined space or fire where the gas is unconfined; asphyxia which can occur if there is sufficient concentration to cause significant oxygen depletion; toxicity since carbon dioxide causes headaches, nausea and other ill health effects; and high methane concentrations in the ground which can damage the growth of many plants (Documents 30 and
4.5-2 Three elements must be present for a hazard to occur - the contaminating species itself above a threshold which constitutes a hazard, a target for the contaminant such as an enclosed space or the foundations of a building, and a pathway from the source to the target. Landfill gas. migration is a particular problem around old sites where the nature of the fill is not precisely known, where there may be built development close to
33

------------------------------------------------------

They didn't consider this at the school site though.