Parish Council Response

In response to the consultation documents the Council makes the following comment:

“Shaw & Crompton Parish Council supports the visionary principles presented in the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) for the economic growth and wellbeing of the area over the next 20 years.

The GMSF identifies three strategic growth options.  The Parish Council supports Option 2 for the following reasons:

  • Strategic Option 1 - Focuses on the development of Manchester City Centre with insufficient growth on the eight principal town centres (including Oldham).  This option will not drive the desired growth for our region.
  • Strategic Option 3 - Appears to require an over-ambitious economic growth rate that is unlikely to be achieved.  This option also requires very large areas of land, including considerable areas of the Green Belt, to be developed for housing and provide space for employment.
  • Strategic Option 2 - Enhances our strong regional identities and appears to present a more sustainable growth level for Greater Manchester as a whole.

It is apparent from the GMSF draft document that existing supply of, and potential opportunities for, additional industry and warehousing is biased towards the west and south-west of Greater Manchester.  If the implementation of the planned growth is to be successful it is clear that additional employment opportunities and housing must be shared equitably by all our regional centres.  It is vitally important that the east and north-east regions attract significant employment in order to drive the desired outcome of the growth plan.  It is of paramount importance to ensure that infrastructure planning is in place before building takes place.  Transport systems, schools, play areas and leisure facilities, shops, health centres, doctors, dentists, etc. - not necessarily new build – must be available as the houses/ employments/ businesses are developed

It is of paramount importance to ensure that infrastructure planning is in place before building takes place.  Transport systems, schools, play areas and leisure facilities, shops, health centres, doctors, dentists, etc. - not necessarily new build – must be available as the houses/ employments/ businesses are developed. 

The challenge for GM will be to ensure that no areas are devoid of employment and appropriate infrastructure, as this would result in isolation and marginalisation leading to undesirable socio-economic issues.

The Parish Council strongly advocates that no planning for Green Belt use be undertaken until it is determined how many builds may be encompassed on existing brownfield sites.  Definitive calculations must be provided, in a transparent manner, within the final GMSF plan to justify release of Green Belt land for building purposes.  If land within the Green Belt is required, it should not be at the expense of the "lung" areas - those areas between conurbations, however small, allowing breathing space between communities.  Green Belt land assigned for development should be alongside existing roads in a linear fashion, rather than large sprawling estates which take over existing communities and change the ethos of those communities forever.

The Parish Council notes the opportunity to nominate development sites at a later date.  It looks forward to taking up this opportunity.”