25th February 2026
A primary school in North Reddish was ultimately constructed on a former industrial site that had been confirmed to contain contamination including lead, arsenic and brown asbestos, following years of dispute, delay and investigation.
The land, once home to a brickworks before being infilled with waste material during the mid-20th century, became the focus of intense public concern during plans for redevelopment in the 2000s.
Despite objections, rising costs and repeated surveys, the school was built after the Council concluded the site could be made safe through remediation and management measures.
A Contested Development
During the planning process, local residents formed a campaign group amid fears about historic dumping on the site. More than 500 residents objected, alongside then local MP Andrew Gwynne, who supported calls for thorough environmental scrutiny.
Initial soil testing reportedly found no widespread contamination. However, further surveys later identified contamination hotspots, and subsequent investigations confirmed the presence of hazardous substances across the site.
Lead and arsenic were detected in soil samples, and brown asbestos (amosite) — considered one of the more dangerous forms of asbestos — was also discovered.
The findings led to delays and escalating costs, with additional surveys, remediation plans and legal steps required before construction could proceed.
Remediation and Construction
Ultimately, the development moved forward after environmental consultants and the local authority determined that appropriate remediation strategies could manage the risks.
Contaminated land can legally be developed if it meets regulatory safety standards following mitigation works. Such measures typically include removal of hazardous materials, capping layers, gas membranes and long-term monitoring.
The school was subsequently built and opened.
Ongoing Scrutiny
Questions about the site’s history and decision-making processes have continued in the years since construction.
Campaigners say efforts to obtain further documentation about environmental oversight and remediation have been refused, with related information requests described as vexatious or manifestly unreasonable by Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer at Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council.
Under information law, councils may decline requests considered excessively burdensome or repetitive. The Council has previously stated that it must balance transparency with the responsible use of public resources.
For some residents, however, the issue remains one of accountability and public reassurance.
The Romiley Gazette has approached the Council for general comment on its contaminated land procedures and policies governing information requests.
We will continue to follow this story.
