HOME   ARCHIVE   GALLERY   SHOP   ABOUT US      
 

 
PEEL HOLDINGS ATTEMPTS TO HIJACK SALFORD FUTURE
 

Star date: 3rd September 2012

SEPTEMBER SEES HUGE BATTLE FOR THE FUTURE OF SALFORD

`For once, Salford Council is standing its ground, basically arguing that Peel is talking through its arse…'

Beginning this week, Salford City Council's future plans for the city – the so-called Core Strategy - are being examined by a Government Inspector. While people may agree or disagree with the Council's plans – which cover everything from the Green Belt, to work and retail spaces, to housing - it seems that Peel Holdings is trying to control the whole process to have its wicked way with Salford.

The future of Salford itself is at stake as Peel wheels out its consultants and legal teams to destroy the city's Green Belt and more…

Warning: Salford people might want to have a bath after reading this… click here if you dare


Peel Holdings in the Battle for Salford's Future Peel Holdings in the Battle for Salford's Future Peel Holdings in the Battle for Salford's Future
Peel Holdings in the Battle for Salford's Future Peel Holdings in the Battle for Salford's Future
click image to enlarge

THE BATTLE FOR SALFORD'S FUTURE

PART 1

…eeeeeewwww. Even back in February this year, Peel Holdings was busy trying to control the agenda for this month's Battle for Salford's Future, as dummies were flying out of its pram in all directions.

Salford Council had written an Opening Statement for this month's Government Inspector examination of the very boring sounding Core Strategy. And Peel Holdings were having none of it. The statement was returned with the Word Document equivalent of red ink scrawled all over it – crossings out, bits added in…whole new sections included, in ironic magenta ink.

Peel wanted to control the agenda for the Government Inspector. That's how important the Core Strategy is for the company which aspires to control, not just Salford but half the North West, to financially exploit every inch of the vast expanses of land it owns, including much of the Green Belt.

The boringly titled Core Strategy is probably Salford's most important planning document and isn't just about Peel Holdings (not that you'd know it). The Core Strategy sets out a policy and plan until 2028 of everything that can happen in the city – from how many houses are allowed to be built, to how much retail and industrial space can be used and, crucially, how much space can be protected.

Peel Holdings wants Salford City Council to release 100 hectares of Green Belt land for the expansion of its Port Salford project, even though the first phase of the Port hasn't yet been built. And for almost 1,500 houses in East Irlam, next to Irlam FC's ground.

It also wants Green Belt land released at Hazelhurst for 450 houses, as well as previously protected land in Worsley for a further 1,000 `aspirational' houses.

After initially proposing to release 40 hectares of Green Belt land near Irlam, Salford Council famously did a u-turn a couple of years ago, just before the local elections, following big protests by local residents, also attended by former Salford MP, Ian Stewart, who is now Mayor of Salford (see here and see here).

The new proposals in the Core Strategy are to protect the Green Belt, apart from "exceptional circumstances". And it's over this that the Battle For Salford's Future is to be fought.

Peel's `people', Turley Associates, have been producing a tsunami of documents over the last six months attempting to prove that the release of Salford's Green Belt is crucial for the success of Port Salford - for which Salford Council has chipped in a £4million grant and a £11million loan, while the Regional Growth Fund has added another £15million of public money (more of this in Part 2).

Peel's justification for the Green Belt destruction is economic growth and 7,700 jobs (er, see MediaCityUK). The official Peel reasoning on Port Salford states… 

"The proposed employment land provision is insufficient to meet economic development needs and growth opportunities… The PCS [Core Strategy] policy of a reduction in industrial and warehousing floorspace is unacceptable and harmful to the economic prosperity of the City… The lack of policy provision for an expanded Port Salford as a logistics hub fails to recognise a nationally significant need is a substantial and harmful loss of opportunity and associated benefits."

For once, Salford Council is standing its ground, basically arguing that Peel is talking through its arse…

That Peel's demand for 100 hectares of Green Belt release "is well in excess of its own identified land shortfall of 42.5 hectares for the entire port corridor up to 2030"; that Peel's claims to be saving c400,000 HGV movements a year with the expansion are spurious - "there is no explanation of how that figure has been calculated"; that if the logistics side of the Port does need to expand it can go somewhere else other than the Green Belt, like Trafford Park; and that "it is unclear whether an expanded Port Salford would result in additional jobs for the region or would simply affect where those jobs are located".

There is also the "very significant potential traffic impacts of an expanded Port Salford". Just on Phase 1 of Port Salford there will be an estimated 3,780 HGV trips per day, more than one per minute during peak times. A tripling of the amount of warehousing that Peel wants to plonk on the Green Belt would, understates the Council, "result in an extremely high frequency of HGV movements onto the A57 and surrounding highways".

Then there's the whole principle of what the Green Belt actually is…

The Peel proposals would remove all of the Green Belt south of the M62 between Irlam and Eccles, which the Council states, "would result in the neighbouring towns of Irlam and Eccles merging into one another, which the Green Belt is intended to prevent".

The Council also disputes Peel's assertion that the agricultural land that would be lost is rated as 3B… "The City Council has not seen this evidence. The latest detailed information received from Defra suggests that the site… includes around 110 hectares of Grade 1 agricultural land and around 25 hectares of Grade 2. The proposal would therefore involve the significant loss of high grade agricultural land."

The area also includes habitats for red and amber threatened species of birds and potential for great crested newts and reptiles, plus bat habitats.

While the Council is putting forward what looks like a concrete case, don't underestimate Peel Holdings, or over estimate Salford Council's appetite for a fight.

When Peel challenged Salford Council through the Government Inspector over Burgess Farm, Salford Council didn't contest it (see here), despite the Inspector finding against Peel (see here). And when Secretary of State Eric Pickles over-ruled the Inspector and gave the go-ahead to Peel, Salford Council again didn't challenge the decision, unlike other councils around the country in a similar situation.

Meanwhile, Peel recently won a case against the Department of the Environment over Salford's flood plain policy (see here). Indeed, all over the country there are cases where Peel's legal bods have won planning battles over elected authorities. Even former Home Secretary Jack Straw has been foaming over a Peel retail park recently. Will this case be any different?

Peel is using new ConDem Government freedom-to-concrete-over-the-Green Belt policy, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), in favour of `sustainable development' to justify its case…

"The sustainability balance between the three dimensions of economic, social and environmental has not been correctly struck particularly post publication of NPPF" states the latest Peel communiqué to the Inspector

"Peel identify in detail in its representations where a different, pro-growth balance should be struck" it adds "in summary around housing in Salford West and employment land provision particularly embracing the expansion of Port Salford. All would represent sustainable broad locations for the CS."

As well as Tory planning policy, Peel are also enlisting AGMA (Associated Greater Manchester Authorities) policy to over-ride the Council, and, at the end of the day, Salford Council's own support in getting them public loans and grants of £30million…

"Port Salford Phase 1 therefore includes a major financial commitment from both the public sector and the private sector, to ensure the delivery of the necessary port, rail and road infrastructure" states Peel "In considering these commitments, it is crucial to consider that both the public and the private sector require such major investments to deliver maximum return on capital expenditure."

In other words, `if you want your money back, play the game'…

Everyone knows what Peel Holdings will do to get its own way – as witnessed by the attempted `buying of the local election' in Irlam and Cadishead a few years ago, when the multi-billion pound company tried to unseat sitting Labour Councillor Roger Jones over congestion charges (see`Come Dance With The Devil' here). Roger Jones has recently won his seat back in Irlam, right in the ward where the Green Belt is threatened. But can the Council keep control over its own spaces?

Following Peel Holdings magenta ink attack on the Inspector's agenda, the company virtually got its own way with much of its proposed changes implemented. Indeed, Peel now has its own day just to discuss the Port Salford expansion, on Wednesday 19th September.

In the meantime, the inspector's examination of the Core Strategy begins tomorrow, Tuesday 4th September at 10am, Crompton House, Swinton. The public is welcome to attend and see Peel Holdings legally grinding methods first hand.

The hearings go on all month, off and on – for the full schedule see here.

See also all the reams of Peel Holdings documents for its attack on the Core Strategy click here for the library.

* Last week, Peel Ports issued its so-called `Corporate Social Responsibility Report for 2012/13' talking about "our responsibilities to the environment and the communities in which we operate". Nowhere in the report is any mention made of the Green Belt...

Part Two - Public Money and Jobs click here

                       
NotFooled wrote
at 6:43:45 AM on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Which council apologist turkey are you BlueLiam ? You cannot defend the indefensible !
 
Rick24 wrote
at 5:33:59 AM on Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Well done to the Star for collating the information and keeping track of this issue. I don't like the prospect of being concreted over!
 
caroline wrote
at 3:01:50 AM on Thursday, September 6, 2012
i agree with Brain..100%...How dare you make nasty remarks about the Star...who have done everything to surport all people in the area...You need to wash your mouth out with soapie water....An learn of the history of the area..an stop thinking money god cures all...people working together for the betterment of each.....is the way forward.
 
life is loud wrote
at 11:06:09 AM on Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Why can I not say that Peel holdings is just one man and not an organisation
 
Brian F Kirkham wrote
at 9:31:54 AM on Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Liam, if you want to decry the loss of our Docklands and Shipbuilding, you need look no further than Peel Holdings themselves. It was they who moved all the work down the canal to Liverpool, not Salford Council. When the Market was right for them, they opened up the Euroterminal at Trafford Park, and that began the decline at Liverpool. They produce schemes to reach their own conclusions. Mediacity was a Great thing for Salford, With both BBC and ITV setting up here, but jobs? those promises can be read as either long term ambitions or Pie in the Sky. As for Middlewood Locks, this is another example of an outside company willing to invest but not really knowing the area. Lots of work done, nice housing built , but (in the end) unfinished. I now await the next bunch of cowboys (oops..) I mean DEVELOPERS who descend on our city, thinking its cheap land to make a bundle on, and as for our leaders - I wan't to know what kind of return we're getting on council tax investment - As Peel is making an awful lot of money out of the money it's getting from council and returning VERY LITTLE back...and don't give me the usual spiel on Council tax..If you do, i'll be nipping over the road and digging a rat hole for you to pour the council tax into.
 
blueliam wrote
at 12:15:27 AM on Tuesday, September 4, 2012
I agree with the saving of our green belt land, but who else other than PEEL is willing to inject and invest in the dying industry around the Ship Canal save it becoming just another lost waterway, whats wrong with the Port Salford scheme? Atleast PEEL follow through with ideas, not like the embarrassments that have become the Middlewood locks and that other half dug-out building site on Silk Street. We need to look to the future if we want Salford and Manchester to become major citys or we will fall behind in what is becoming an ever smaller world. Progress comes with cost. Plus your journalism stinks of contempt, whats ironic about magenta ink? Sounds more like you have an axe to grind than a nib to ink.
 
Sick of them all wrote
at 7:52:33 AM on Monday, September 3, 2012
These bastards must be stopped .
 
Please enter your comment below:
 
 
 
Salford Star Hoodies
Salford Star contact
Deli Lama
advertisement
 
Contact us
phone: 07957 982960
Facebook       Twitter
 
 
Recent comments
article: 91% OF SALFORD UNIVERSAL CREDIT CLAIMANTS IN ARREARS WITH CITY WEST
Mystic Meg laughs at Rayofsunshine before "Is that the best you got? Is that all you got, Sucka?! If it is, then how very Ostrich... [more]
article: NEW CLADDING FOR SALFORD TOWER BLOCKS IN MARCH SAYS DEPUTY MAYOR
I must further demand these residents get 100% rent free, covering weeks they have been left waiting for action. The rent free mu... [more]
article: SALFORD COUNCIL AJ BELL STADIUM WORTH £6.5MILLION DESPITE OVER £24MILLION PUBLIC LOANS
£24.752million, No wonder Salford is so hard up. The people who authorised these loans should be held responsible and sacked. Ever... [more]
article: 91% OF SALFORD UNIVERSAL CREDIT CLAIMANTS IN ARREARS WITH CITY WEST
Rayofsunshine, and now that you've gotten old Mystic Meg going, ray, do tell her how much as a percentage is taken from the counci... [more]
article: 91% OF SALFORD UNIVERSAL CREDIT CLAIMANTS IN ARREARS WITH CITY WEST
Mystic Meg,I do hope that you are taķing your anti psychotic tablets. Cleary you are not a full shiĺling!... [more]
 
 
 
 
 
Days
Hours
Minutes
Seconds
 
 
 

Donate

Help the Salford Star...

all donations welcome

 
 

More articles...

SALFORD CITIZENS ADVICE BUREAU TO RUN ENERGY BILL SLASHING SESSION

Star date: 20th January 2018

ENERGY SAVING CAMPAIGN COMES TO SALFORD

The Salford Citizens Advice Bureau is holding a special session at Pendleton Gateway this Thursday, 25th January, between 10am and 1pm, to help people slash energy bills by up to £300.

Full details here...

GARFIELD WESTON FOUNDATION LAUNCHES £5MILLION FUND FOR COMMUNITIES

Star date: 20th January 2018

SALFORD COMMUNITY ORGANISATONS COULD RECIEVE UP TO £150,000

To celebrate its 60th anniversary, the Garfield Weston Foundation has launched a £5million fund for charities and community organisations, to be spent on things like buildings and refurbishments.

Full details here...

SALFORD COUNCIL AJ BELL STADIUM WORTH £6.5MILLION DESPITE OVER £24MILLION PUBLIC LOANS

Star date: 20th January 2018

PEEL HOLDINGS WILL SELL STADIUM, SALFORD COUNCIL WON'T SAYS SALE SHARKS OWNER

Speaking to the BBC North West Tonight, Sale Sharks owner Simon Orange said that the AJ Bell Stadium, which has had over £24million in public money loans from Salford Council, has now been independently valued at just £6.5million.

He added that the Sharks had offered to buy the stadium at "more than 50% higher" than the valuation, but, while joint owners Peel Holdings were keen to sell, Salford Council were "not interested"

Full details here....

SALFORD COUNCIL RUNNING FIRST AID FOR DOGS AFTER £1.6MILLION CUT TO HEALTH IMPROVEMENT

Star date: 19th January 2018 

DOGS FIRST AID COURSE AFTER HUMAN GROUPS CUT

"An insult to the people of Salford..."

Salford City Council is using its Health Improvement Team to run First Aid For Dogs courses, after slashing £1.6million from its budget which helped improve the lives of humans.

The courses, run in conjunction with the PDSA, cover doggy bloat, doggy bandaging and resuscitating doggies... "It's an insult to the people of Salford that managers are putting the health of dogs before the health of people" says one resident affected by the Health Improvement cuts.

Full details here...

‘ETHICAL’ AVIVA TRIES TO EVICT NEW MANCHESTER HOMELESS SQUAT

Star date: 18th January 2018

MANCHESTER COUNCIL SAYS 17 HOMELESS PEOPLE 'WOULD NOT BE INTERESTED IN RELOCATION BECAUSE THEY ARE ACTIVISTS'

After the brutal eviction of 17 homeless people from occupied offices above BetFred in Manchester centre on Monday morning, they have taken refuge in a new building on King Street owned by Aviva Investors Pensions Ltd. Tomorrow, the company is taking the homeless people to court to face further eviction, despite its 'social purpose' statement that "one of our values is to 'care more'"...

Meanwhile, the homeless people are furious about a statement purportedly made by Manchester City Council on the court papers that "they would not be interested in arranging any relocation because they are activists"...

Full details here...

 



written and produced by Salfordians for Salfordians
with attitude and love xxx