GMSF reaction – does development plan now strike the right balance?

City-region bosses this week unveiled the latest draft of its planning blueprint with the borough set to lose less of its protected green space than first proposed.

However, community groups have vowed to renew their battle with the authorities over the sites that have remained part of the GM spatial framework.

Council leader David Molyneux has said the draft now "strikes the right balance" with more than 20,000 homes and vast industrial sites earmarked for the borough over the next 20 years.

Although transport bosses have also unveiled a host of projects aimed at providing the necessary infrastructure to support the proposals, campaign groups have expressed concerns about whether they will be sufficient, or actually come to fruition.

The loss of green belt has been reduced from 4.6 per cent to 1.8 per cent, the council has said, with a major site at junction 26 of the M6 near Orrell – known as The Bell – removed completely.

Other locations identified in the first plan in 2016 – such as land at Astley and Boothstown and Cleworth Hall, Tyldesley – are also no longer part of the plans.

However, one of the most controversial plots in the borough, and across Greater Manchester, remains, albeit with its size reduced.

Plans for land north of M6 junction 25 now include a 140,000 sqm employment development but associated housing plots south of the motorway slip have been removed.

Although concessions have been made, the site remains a key strategic location for the town hall with it expected to attract millions of pounds in business rates.

Makerfield MP Yvonne Fovargue, who has supported local campaigners on this issue, said: “Although this green belt site generated over 2,700 responses to the initial draft in 2016, the announcement that the GMCA still wishes to pursue future development of this site will be met with anger by residents and campaign groups.

“It is clear that their views have been ignored and that development of this site will put additional pressure on the local road network and will also work against efforts to reduce air pollution along the busy A49 corridor.”

The site already has a planning application submitted to the town hall and is likely to come before committee members later this year. The site is said to provide industrial, logistics and warehousing space.

Winstanley ward Labour representative, Cllr Marie Morgan, added: “It is extremely disappointing that the rewrite of the GMSF still offers no protection for this site. We will continue to object to this site’s removal from greenbelt and oppose the planning application.”

Campaign groups for the land north of Mosley Common location in the east of the borough – bounded by Mosley Common, Tyldesley and Ellenbrook – have reacted angrily to the number of houses planned for the site increasing from 1,000 to 1,200, although the footprint has stayed largely the same.

The GMSF document states an extra stop on the Leigh Guided Busway will be included along with "necessary highway capacity improvements at the junction of the A577 and A580".

Member of the Mort Lane Against GMSF group, Nick Johnston, said key routes through the area such as the East Lancs road already suffer with "gridlocked roads around rush hour", adding a stop on the Guided Busway would not be sufficient.

He also highlighted other housing development in the immediate vicinity – such as the former Maxilead Metals site on Mosley Common Road – adding to the housing density.

Fellow member Christine Warwick posted on the group’s public page: “The traffic is horrendous as it is on Mosley Common and you can’t alter the roads – I am absolutely fuming with Andy Burnham after we protested against all this.

“We marched with banners to Mosley Common playing field and met up with other protesters. It’s looking like I am going to have to dig my banner out again. This must be stopped it’s our last green space that prevents urban sprawl.

“We are advised to walk a mile for health, well, if I walked a mile from Mosley Common I would choke on the fumes being inhaled from the congested Mosley Common Road. There has been no consideration to the road situation around this area.”

Further sites at Pocket Nook, Lowton, and south of Pennington, link-up along the East Lancs corridor and pose further questions about their impact on infrastructure, according to one group.

Pocket Nook is earmarked for 600 homes and although it is not designated as green belt it is included in the GMSF sites because of its proposed new link with the south of Pennington plot, which is set for an 160,000 sq m employment space.

A new road would be built through the site from Newton Road to Atherleigh Way, the latter forming the main access route to the site via a new junction

Ed Thwaite, chairman of Lowton East Neighbourhood Development Forum, said the council will face an ownership dispute of the Pocket Nook land.

And several other housing developments already given the green light in Lowton are going add to pressures on transport links.

“A percentage of the site is owned by one man and that person does not want to sell the land.”

He added: “The transport plans include potential for a new (rail) station at Golborne (in addition to Kenyon and Glazebury) but we have unfortunately heard all that before and nothing happens with it.”

The Pocket Nook site is also a "concern" for leader of the council’s Conservative opposition leader, Cllr Michael Winstanley.

He said: “Given the sheer level of housing in recent years in the Lowton area we believe it is unnecessary for it to be included in this plan.

“I would certainly urge members of the public to take part in the consultation process to see what further green belt land can be saved.

“What I am most concerned about is that what must be delivered first, before any building takes place on any site, is the infrastructure.

“Over the years across the borough we have seen development after development that have been given planning permission and no infrastructure or services in place to deal with the increase in population.

“This must be addressed and delivered, this time round we must learn the lessons of past mistakes.”

A further site – land west of Gibfield – will provide 700 homes and 45,500 sqm of employment space, according to the GMSF draft.

Leigh MP Jo Platt said it "remains critical" for her constituency that "adequate infrastructure is in place to accommodate the remaining proposals".

She added: “I am sure the consultation will raise many questions in the constituency about the sustainability of the proposal.

“From access to education and health care to traffic congestion and public transport, I urge residents to ask those questions during this consultation process.

“We need a balanced approach to any development and without an adequate framework, Leigh will be vulnerable to speculative developers without consideration to these wider issues.

“I have long campaigned for Leigh to be reconnected to the rail network and the proposal to reopen the station at Golborne is a great place to start. Leigh is the fifth  largest constituency without a train station and to reopen Golborne after over 50 years represents a significant step forward for transport in Leigh.

“Extending the reach of the guided busway is on its own meaningless without connecting Leigh to the rest of the wider transport networks – connecting people to jobs, education and leisure. I look forward to working with TfGM in moving forward with the Golborne station and identifying other opportunities to improve transport in the constituency.

“It is important that people have their say on this and I encourage constituents to respond to this consultation.”

Around 60 per cent of the 21,400 new homes in the borough will be provided on brownfield sites, the town hall has said.

The reduction of the borough’s green belt development is reflected across GM, with more than half of the green belt land earmarked in the 2016 version scrapped.

Meanwhile, the GMSF also supports previously announced road projects to improve east-west connectivity through the borough, including the link between the M6 and a new junction of the M61.

The potential for the Guided Busway to be extended to Wigan town centre and tram-train connections from Atherton to Manchester are also included.

Wigan MP Lisa Nandy, who along with Ms Fovargue supported campaigns in support of the The Bell site, said: “It’s a testament to the strength of feeling across Wigan that this plan is substantially improved.

“I am pleased that the Mayor and Wigan Council have listened to our concerns and reduced the amount of building on our greenbelt.

“I am particularly grateful to Andy Burnham for coming to Wigan to hear the concerns of local residents and agreeing to protect the land around the Bell from development.

“The Bell is home to a working farm, significant local wildlife and is hugely valued by hundreds of members of the community. Their campaign has saved this land for the community.

“The council has also rightly ensured greenbelt areas in other areas of Wigan are protected. This will be strongly welcome in Standish which has seen significant amounts of new housing in the last decade and where green space is now too scarce.

“The Mayor’s focus on reinvigorating our town centres is very welcome, but it will require a better economic plan than the one currently on offer.

“For our town centres to be sustainable we need higher wage opportunities for our young people, not just minimum-wage warehousing and distribution jobs.

“A longer-term vision that sees the potential for well-paid, skilled jobs in our towns, beyond Manchester city centre, is needed.

“It is welcome that the Mayor and Greater Manchester Leaders have ambitious plans for Wigan’s transport, setting out aspirations for better buses, railway links and connections to the tram network.

“This will not be achieved without substantial investment and greater powers from national government and I will be campaigning with MPs across the borough to make this a reality.”

Cllr Winstanley, who represents Orrell ward, also had praise for the scrapping of The Bell plans.

He added: “I am pleased that the amount of green belt land that will be taken up has been vastly reduced from the original plan.

“On a personal basis I am delighted to see The Bell at Kitt Green being removed from the GMSF proposals.

“As in the original consultation I did register my objections. However across the borough we still have a number of green belt sites that are under threat.”