Greater Manchester Combined Authority
1st Floor Churchgate House
56 Oxford Street
Manchester
M1 6EU
16th January 2017
Dear Sirs,
I am writing in my capacity as Member of Parliament for Bolton West in response to the consultation on the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework. I support the principle of the GMSF as it should provide a mechanism to meet our housing and employment needs with suitable infrastructure investment. I have received thousands of representations from my constituents on this matter and it is clear that there are many problems with the GMSF as it stands and I urge the Combined Authority to have a complete re-think about how it has been designed. Below I set out my main points of concern.
Introduction
Over many years, the Bolton West constituency and wider area has seen a very substantial amount of building both in terms of new housing, business parks and shopping centres. Some of this has been welcome but, with every new development, there has been a legitimate concern that infrastructure has not kept pace.
The lack of infrastructure investment, that should have accompanied new developments, is clear across the constituency and in a wide variety of vital services. The local transport system is far too congested during the rush hour with some of the worst overcrowding on trains, intolerable congestion on the motorway and huge tailbacks on local roads. Schools, health services and sporting facilities have not kept pace with the increased demand on new residents in housing approved by Bolton and Wigan Councils.
The failure of our local councils to invest gives every reason why local residents and I are sceptical that new housing and industrial developments will be met with suitable investment and that current problems will be compounded.
The GMSF must not ignore current concerns of infrastructure failure.
The context for Bolton West
The clearest example of historic under investment in local infrastructure is on the Westhoughton and Atherton border. The Atherleigh Way was supposed to continue from the Wigan Borough through to the Chequerbent roundabout and by-pass Hunger Hill but all we have are massive concrete blocks blocking the beginnings of a road.
Horwich and Blackrod, on a daily basis, see a massive weight of traffic thundering through local roads designed for village traffic. Whilst not all of the traffic is from the local area the problem is a clear demonstration of the lack of joined up thinking about infrastructure and investment. Bolton West and the areas beyond are increasingly being used as a commuter belt for people who no longer wish to live in central Bolton, Manchester or other areas. It is clear that, whilst there is new development of business districts, most of the employment of new residents will not be local.
The house building intended for Bolton is concentrated in the western edge of the borough which is the furthest away from destination of commuters thus guaranteeing the greatest traffic problems on already congested routes.
Current housing proposals risk the merger of our distinct communities and the eventual creation of an endless suburb of the city of Manchester. The green belt and our green spaces should constrain developers so that they use the substantial brown field sites in our towns rather than creating a hollowing out effect.
The GMSF should champion the building up of our towns rather than building out and creating an urban sprawl.
Population forecast
It is unfortunate that some politicians have given the impression that central government is instructing the boroughs of Greater Manchester on how many houses they should have when the reality is that it is an entirely local decision. Central government just expects that local councils deliver on what they choose to commit to.
The foundation of the GMSF is flawed as it uses outdated population projections as a basis for house building. The prediction of 294,800 extra people living in Greater Manchester was made before the Brexit decision. Since a major component of Brexit is to take back control of our borders and stop uncontrolled EU immigration it is clear that immigration post-Brexit will be lower than anticipated therefore fewer houses will be required.
Also, the predicted population increase is 294,800 whilst the house building is intended to be 227,200 which equates to each house only having 1.3 people. This demonstrates that the leaders of the ten boroughs in Greater Manchester do not want to build just for the predicted increase in population but to also draw in additional people. In fact, Wigan Council do not want to merely meet their target of 16,500 houses but have volunteered to take an additional 3,000 on top.
If we agree to the GMSF, we know that we will get the extra houses but, on past evident, we cannot be certain that we will receive the investment in local services and infrastructure.
Transport infrastructure
Central Government is investing in long overdue upgrades to our railway and motorway infrastructure but the GMSF looks set to not only cancel out any improvements but to make road and rail transport even more difficult than it already is.
There is no mention of the building of the M61 Junction 7 or clarity of the completion of the Westhoughton by-pass in the GMSF. Without serious upfront infrastructure investment, the whole concept of the GMSF is flawed and will not have any public support.
It is vital that new housing and industrial developments have a strong link into public transport networks but there is no evidence that this has even been thought about. Urban sprawl will mean that every journey will have to be taken by car and have the associated pollution.
The GMSF should be the greatest champion of cycling. The building of 227,200 houses as well as industrial estates should have walking and cycling at their heart but these vital elements of a healthy lifestyle have only the vaguest references in the GMSF. Many people will know of token efforts to encourage cycling that do nothing of the sort.
The GMSF proposals have the opportunity to set the gold standard for modern, healthy and sustainable developments but there is little evidence that the current proposals can deliver.
Clarity in the consultation process
Many of my constituents have complained that the GMSF consultation website is too difficult to navigate and it has been difficult to retrieve the information required to make a decision on how the GMSF will affect them. Large numbers of people are wholly unaware of the GMSF so details should have been publicised to every household to ensure that it is a fully inclusive process.
There should have been more clarity on the other developments that are in the pipeline. Constituents should have had clear maps made available which show current and GMSF development proposals side by side in order to more fully understand what changes are in store.
There is no clarity on the housing types to be built in any particular project so people cannot judge the suitability of new developments.
Public support
It is clear that these plans do not have the support of local people. The strength of feeling against the GMSF have been absolutely clear. My own petition against the plans for just one Westhoughton site attracted over 2,000 signatures in a matter of weeks and I know that similar petitions have been collected against sites across Greater Manchester.
Transport infrastructure
Central Government is investing in long overdue upgrades to our railway and motorway infrastructure but the GMSF looks set to not only cancel out any improvements but to make road and rail transport even more difficult than it already is.
There is no mention of the building of the M61 Junction 7 or clarity of the completion of the Westhoughton by-pass in the GMSF. Without serious upfront infrastructure investment, the whole concept of the GMSF is flawed and will not have any public support.
Without public support the GMSF cannot go ahead.
Conclusion
In summary, I am against the proposals outlines in the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework for the following points:
- The GMSF must address the history of underfunding of infrastructure and public services such as in health, education and sporting facilities
- The proposals have to do far more to work with current transport infrastructure and increase its capacity
- Housing designed for commuters should be located as close as possible to their place of work so as to minimise traffic congestion
- Urban sprawl should be minimise and our green spaces should be protected – build up and not out and use brown field land first
- Ensure that cycling and walking are a key part of any new development
- The population forecast must be redone in the light of the Brexit decision and also reflect the needs of local residents rather than being a council tax raising exercise
- The character and identity of communities must be respected so that our towns and villages to not merge together and ultimately become a suburb of Manchester
- Give clearer information in the next step of the consultation process because a lack of clarity will prevent public support where it is due.
The Greater Manchester Spatial Framework, as it stands, is fundamentally flawed. It will not deliver a cleaner, healthier and wealthier place to live and has made no attempt to reflect the needs and wishes of residents across the Bolton West constituency.
I believe the current plans need to be scrapped and started again, involving local people from the very beginning in a new process that takes into account all of the above points and those raised by my constituents.
Yours sincerely,
Chris Green MP
Member of Parliament for Bolton West and Atherton