Klondikes site (Park & Patersons) new housing

[sooty2]

Up and at 'em Miss M'.Hope the membranes are not a cheapskate method to keep it buried and avoid the £ million plus costs of 2006 to decontaminate?It just goes to show there is usually no smoke without fire.

[Miss Marple]

Hi yes it is true about fruit and veg I have just  come off the phone after a very lengthy conversation with SMBC environmental  health who have comfirmed that they are pleased Morris the builders have produced this disclaimer.  Each house is to have its own membrane to stop contamination 

[Duke Fame]

Regarding reading the history, here's a report from 2006 provided by Miss Marple: www.marple-uk.com/misc/report-park-patersons.pdf

It is a early report outlining the site as it was, examining the viability of the existing buildings and makes the recommendation that the site could not viably be redeveloped for industrial use.

It highlights that the cost of decontamination is (was) likely to be in the region of £1M/£1.25M. Furthermore, ground conditions are such that redevelopment of the site is likely to incur extensive abnormal costings.

There is (or was) a lot more information in the SMBC Planning database but unfortunately it is off-line at the moment. I'm aware of this because my son lives right next to the site and he was obviously concerned about the contamination, so we read everything on there. Once the database is back on line I will post some links.

This topic started off with a suggestion that there is a "disclaimer" that house purchasers would have to sign to say that they won't grow fruit and veg on the site. Is this true? On the face of it, it would be a little alarming to be presented with this when buying a house. If it is true and not just a rumour that has spread (we must be able to find out somehow) then perhaps it's precaution that is often taken with sites like this? However, I think it would put me off buying personally.

Please try and discuss these issues without sniping at each other. 

Thank you for that Admin, I was starting to feel a bit opicked on.

Ultimately, my point was thet contamination of the sort highlighted here does not tend to respect artificial property ownership boundaries and is likely to affect adjcent property.

The original concern is all hearsay and the property develpers may consider such talk as slander.

[admin]

Regarding reading the history, here's a report from 2006 provided by Miss Marple: www.marple-uk.com/misc/report-park-patersons.pdf

It is a early report outlining the site as it was, examining the viability of the existing buildings and makes the recommendation that the site could not viably be redeveloped for industrial use.

It highlights that the cost of decontamination is (was) likely to be in the region of £1M/£1.25M. Furthermore, ground conditions are such that redevelopment of the site is likely to incur extensive abnormal costings.

There is (or was) a lot more information in the SMBC Planning database but unfortunately it is off-line at the moment. I'm aware of this because my son lives right next to the site and he was obviously concerned about the contamination, so we read everything on there. Once the database is back on line I will post some links.

This topic started off with a suggestion that there is a "disclaimer" that house purchasers would have to sign to say that they won't grow fruit and veg on the site. Is this true? On the face of it, it would be a little alarming to be presented with this when buying a house. If it is true and not just a rumour that has spread (we must be able to find out somehow) then perhaps it's precaution that is often taken with sites like this? However, I think it would put me off buying personally.

Please try and discuss these issues without sniping at each other. 

[Duke Fame]

must admit i was thinking that myself miss Marple!!  But actually I think hes just not read the history... again!

I'm not quite sure where Ms Oldham get's this 'again' from. The only other thread where I hadn't waded through the history was 17 windows where I admitted my shortcomings, however, managed to sumise the situation, history to present day much to the agreement of the seasoned pro's here.

I'm not a fan of this 3rd person dialogue, I was hoping to be welcomed in joining the discussion as a new kid in town but increasingly finding a rather set in their ways clique has been formed to usher away non-locals in the style of the league of gentlemen :-)

Anyway, from the thread, this whole concern is based on hearsay from Miss Marple and a report that nobody knows about but whatever it said, it was really bad.

If the building has been given planning permission, there is unlikely to be any real concern  They will not permit
development of contaminated land unless it can be clearly demonstrated that there is no
remaining risk from contaminants or that satisfactory measures can be taken to counter any
possible hazard. I'd be far more concerned to own any of the adjacent properties on Cross lane than in the new development.

Am I right to understand that there was a family issue which resulted in a hitman being hired. The story was actually hte basis of a plot for the comedy Pheonix nights?

[sooty2]

So Duke, You mentioned the word Nimby in another topic, now namby Pamby in this one. As far as I know people are not concerned about the building of houses.People need to know about the sites history so they can make an informed choice!Try adding the words social and Conscience to your vocabulary.

[Lisa Oldham]

must admit i was thinking that myself miss Marple!!  But actually I think hes just not read the history... again!

[Miss Marple]

I think you have to remember that land is running out and we can't just build on greenfield sites forever.

Also, many a house is built on former industrial ground, we're just all a bit namby pamby about it these days.

You never know, the houses may be quite nice & a bit cheaper.

At the end of the day, people worked on the site for years, you spend more time at work than at home, so any adverse affects would e seen by now.

I grew up next to Europes biggest nucleur weapen research plant, you have to keep things in perspective.

I am sure you just come on this site to wind people up ?  Well nice try but do me a favour and read the presenting evidence

[Duke Fame]

I think you have to remember that land is running out and we can't just build on greenfield sites forever.

Also, many a house is built on former industrial ground, we're just all a bit namby pamby about it these days.

You never know, the houses may be quite nice & a bit cheaper.

At the end of the day, people worked on the site for years, you spend more time at work than at home, so any adverse affects would e seen by now.

I grew up next to Europes biggest nucleur weapen research plant, you have to keep things in perspective.

[marveld]

Here is an image recently uploaded on the Virtual Tour: "View from the top of the main office stairs toward the laboratory entrance c1970. Provided by Mark Shawcross."

http://visitmarple.co.uk/photos/albums/uploads/new/mlhs_pp/PandP04.jpg

Here are some images of the building before demolition, one being of the same office stairs -

http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=17589

Here are some more interesting links to Marple with photos -

http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/tags.php?tag=marple

[Miss Marple]

I am not that good finding my way around the net but there must be someone one this site who can find the report I found about 18 months ago on the net.  The investigations concerning the site were published and I remember posting my concerns on this web site but have forgotton where I posted them.  At that time the report on the net gave its findings about the site and said that the land was too toxic to build residential property on.  The report stated that gardens on that site if houses were to be built were not suitable to grow fruit and vegetables and would also not be advisable for children or animals to play in.   I have tried and tried to once again find this report but have not been successful.   I did although find a similar report sometime ago warning about the unsuitability for growing fruit and veg but reference to children and animals were omitted.  I have always been interested in Park and Patersons because my father worked there for many years and like a lot of his fellow workers he suffered throughout his working life from mysterious illness and like so many other of his colleagues he also died a sudden and unexplained death.  This is not an urban tale, just speak to anyone who worked there or knew someone who worked there and you will like me begin to question just what is on that site.

[chicken lady]

If they let me know the outcome I will post it. The man I spoke to said they would investigate, check with me if they needed more information as to the exact location, and, if appropriate, refer to the environment agency. I have his direct number so will check in a few days.

[marveld]

I have spoken to environmental health at the council and they are investigating

I'd like to know the outcome of this. Can I expect the result to be posted on the forum? (not directly by the council, but via feedback)

[chicken lady]

I walked the dog down the Middlewood way this afternoon, and water is gushing from the building site into the adjacent brook, which is now overflowing in places. Very worrying if it is toxic.

Did you do anything about what you saw? The brook is the responsibility of the owners of the land on either side of it but the council or the Environment Agency may be able to enforce any legislation regarding pollution.

I have spoken to environmental health at the council and they are investigating

[Miss Marple]

There was up until recently a very large slurry pit at the rear of the factory.  The pit was very deep and was full with black type sludge it would be interesting to know what the developers have done with that.  Lets hope its not that that's running into the river