Post by anne on Apr 7, 2015 16:39:39 GMT
This is a piece I have copied of walton .org site
The landfill site at Waterside Drive is highly contaminated.
Although the environmental report have been out since October - NO PUBLIC HEALTH WARNINGS HAVE BEEN DISPLAYED.
It is shown in the LEAP report that there is a risk to receptors (specifically young girls) in the old Walton Casual buildings.
So why have the Tiny Tots Nursery been able to continue in the building when there is a health risk to the children?
Here is a list of some of the nasty's on site:
ARSENIC TRIOXIDE
ASBESTOS
LEAD
CADMIUM SULPHIDE
CHROMIUM
COPPER LEAD CHROMATE
MERCURY DICHLORIDE
NICKEL DIHYDROXIDE
ZINC CHROMATE
ACENAPHTHYLENE
ACENAPHTHENE
FLUORENE
PHENANTHRENE
ANTHRACENE
FLUORANTHENE
PYRENE
BENZOFLUORANTHENE
BENZO[KFLUORANTHENE
BENZOPYRENE
INDENO
Is it a coincidence that the Conservative majority council have amended previous REBLP 200 Policy to permit riverside develop under DM policy DM13?
The landfill site at Waterside Drive is highly contaminated.
Although the environmental report have been out since October - NO PUBLIC HEALTH WARNINGS HAVE BEEN DISPLAYED.
It is shown in the LEAP report that there is a risk to receptors (specifically young girls) in the old Walton Casual buildings.
So why have the Tiny Tots Nursery been able to continue in the building when there is a health risk to the children?
Here is a list of some of the nasty's on site:
ARSENIC TRIOXIDE
ASBESTOS
LEAD
CADMIUM SULPHIDE
CHROMIUM
COPPER LEAD CHROMATE
MERCURY DICHLORIDE
NICKEL DIHYDROXIDE
ZINC CHROMATE
ACENAPHTHYLENE
ACENAPHTHENE
FLUORENE
PHENANTHRENE
ANTHRACENE
FLUORANTHENE
PYRENE
BENZOFLUORANTHENE
BENZO[KFLUORANTHENE
BENZOPYRENE
INDENO
Is it a coincidence that the Conservative majority council have amended previous REBLP 200 Policy to permit riverside develop under DM policy DM13?