| |
COMMUNITY GREEN SPACE CAMPAIGNERS JOIN DEMO OUTSIDE SALFORD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
|
|
Star date: 16th January 2019 'IT'S THROWING RESIDENTS TO THE WOLVES OF RAMPANT DEVELOPMENT' Before a full meeting of Salford Council this morning, residents campaigning against development on green spaces in the city held a demonstration outside the Civic Centre. Representatives of campaigns including from Campbell Road, Duncan Matheson, Walkden and Buile Hill Park then went into the meeting to hear City Mayor, Paul Dennett, say that the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework was "protecting green belt and green spaces", after Carol Boyce of Saving Our Neighbourhood had accused the Council of "throwing residents to the wolves of rampant development". Full details here...
|
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.jpg)
click image to enlarge
|
Inside a meeting of the full Salford City Council this morning, the City Mayor, Paul Dennett, and Planning Lead Member, Derek Antrobus, declared themselves satisfied with development plans laid out in the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework and the Salford Local Plan, published this week for consultation.* Before the meeting started, however, a demonstration outside the Civic Centre told a different story, with banners reading 'Gridlock', 'Save Our Field' and 'Consultation – is it real?'. "We are here to try and make the Council listen to what we are saying and stop turning Salford into a car park with all the developments they are building, because that's exactly what's happening" said Pauline Atkinson, opposing development of around fifty houses earmarked for Duncan Matheson Playing Fields "We were supposed to be in consultation but that's ceased now, and the Trust for the fields has also stopped consulting" she added "It was just lip service for them to us, to say 'We've been in consultation and we're doing what we want'. We're still opposing it and they can expect big things coming from the residents of Duncan Matheson..." Tish Wilkins, from Saving Our Neighbourhood, which has been campaigning for better mitigation against Bellway Homes which is currently building 241houses on Campbell Road, underlined the feelings that are spreading the campaigns across Salford... "We're here to get the Council to listen to us about saving our green space" she explained "It's not just about Campbell Road, that's too late, it's about Duncan Matheson, Chat Moss, Irlam and wherever else." And Nicole, campaigning against any houses being built in Buile Hill Park, also summed up the attitude... "I don't want Capital and Centric to build housing within the grounds of Buile Hill Park but this is all absolutely related" she said "I think the more we learn about the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework and their ideas around expanding and developing housing, the more we'll see that this is a very important issue; that we protect our green spaces, particularly within our cities." Inside, the Council meeting began with two questions from the public – Roy Harding asked if the Council would re-establish the Swinton and Pendlebury Community Committee, which hadn't met since 2015, so that local residents' issues, like those surrounding Campbell Road, could be discussed with local councillors present. In response, Councillor Tracy Kelly explained that the Committee had been replaced by "network events" but it could be discussed in June. Roy wasn't impressed with having to wait six months, and after further questioning it was agreed that a meeting could be arranged sooner. Next up was Carol Boyce, from the Saving Our Neighbourhood campaign, who provided a long list of complaints surrounding the Bellway Homes development on Campbell Road – "a perfect study of how the planning system works" she explained, adding that "there is no support for residents from the planning office...there was nothing in place, no monitoring...no environmental management... residents are left to deal with developers directly" she said, adding that a private study of pollution paid for by residents had shown a 95% increase in pollution since development started in the area. "How are you going to change the culture? How are you going to ensure that residents are protected and supported?" she asked. In response, Planning Lead Member, Derek Antrobus, argued that he was satisfied that planning officers had acted with diligence following up complaints by residents, to which Carol retorted "That is not the experience at Campbell Road...every day is misery...Your planning department is not working; it's throwing residents to the wolves of rampant development". She told how Bellway Homes had even issued a legal threat to try to stop residents protesting, as is their democratic right.* Councillor Antrobus avoided answering Carol's question directly, merely stating that "It's not the culture of the Council we have to change, it's the culture of developers...", and offered a meeting to discuss some outstanding issues. Later on in the meeting, ruling Labour councillors and the City Mayor defended both the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework and the Salford Local Plan, despite some of their own members and Worsley and Eccles South MP Barbara Keeley speaking out against plans for 1,600 houses on green belt land in Irlam. City Mayor, Paul Dennett, stated that the latest GM Spatial Framework was a "radical re-draft of the original" that was "protecting green belt and green spaces", while Derek Antrobus argued against the "ludicrous assertion that people have been betrayed on the green belt", adding that there was a net increase in green belt land in Worsley, around the West Salford Greenway. Other councillors added that all brown field sites had been accounted for in the city but there was still not enough land to build houses in the city...all of which will not go down well with those opposing 'rampant development'. There was one piece of good news that came out of the meeting, as Paul Dennett, in answer to an inaudible question from Councillor Paul Wilson (many microphones weren't working!) on housing in Buile Hill Park "categorically" assured him that "I do not intend to build houses in the Park"... Meanwhile, the rest of affected Salford is gearing up for a green space fight, with a huge meeting expected in Irlam next week to kickstart another campaign...
* For a full background see previous Salford Star articles...
Greater Manchester Spatial Framework Sees Green Belt Destruction – click here Over 32,000 New Homes For Salford In Revised Local plan – click here Bellway Homes Wins Salford Star Award For Protest Stifling – click here
|
|
|
|
Cody wrote
at 20:46:29 on 31 January 2019 |
|
|
| Rayofsunshine – The following extracts are taken from Salford Council’s own ‘Salford Quays Milestones’ pdf on their website. 1) “The Manchester Docks were purchased by Salford City Council using derelict land grant from the Ship Canal Company. Following the risk taken by the city council, interest from the private sector for the first phase of development was eventually found. The city council made an agreement with Urban Waterside Ltd to transfer Dock 6 on condition that further private investment was secured.” The Council was involved here. 2) “The city council recognised the need for a development plan to provide confidence to both public and private sector long-term investors: and to provide the framework for environmental improvement, economic development and employment. The government agreed in principle to the city council leading the docks’ regeneration, providing a unique rolling programme of derelict land and urban programme funding, on condition that the first phase of development was successful.” The Council had a leading role in the regeneration there. 3) “A clear framework was created in the original development plan proposed by Shepheard Epstein and Hunter architects, town planners and landscape architects working with the city council. The plan was published in May 1985.” They were working with the Council. I could go on with examples but I won’t. So you’re claim that it was solely a Tory project is nonsense, I am not saying the Tory Gov of the time and private enterprise didn’t have a hand in it, because they did, but to say Salford Council has not been involved is denying reality. They were complicit with how it came about. And, again, I am not trying to deflect blame from the Tories; I’m holding Salford Council to account, of gentrification to be exact, which was my original claim. They were doing it then and they’re still doing it now. Yet you insist in defending them while Council housing and land is flogged to private developers, something the Tories would be proud of. They probably look at this Council and think “Who needs a Tory Council when Labour flogs public land to private companies and supporters of Labour defend it?” I can’t verify if the Tories robbed the Council of millions or not, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all. Though ultimately, what does that have to do with the Council flogging land and housing stock to private developers? Is the argument that because the Tories robbed the Council housing budget the housing fell in to disrepair and so they have to flog it or knock it down (btw we’re ignoring the 13 years Labour were in national Gov)? That’s a great plan by the Council, to knock the houses down or flog land and not have these companies build much else, even though they’re supposed to. Which brings me back to parts of Langworthy being vacant, these companies don’t want to build because of the area is considered ‘rough’ and the Council agrees because these companies have the money. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 11:02:58 on 31 January 2019 |
|
|
| Cody,why do you have "issues" with established facts?
Fact:the Salford Quays Development Corporation was set up in the 1980's by Thatcher. By design,this
còrporatiòn excluded Salford City Council from decision making relating to the Quays.
Fact:during the period,1979/97,the Tories stole hundreds of millions from Salford's Housing Budget.
Fact:to date,Theresa May is refusing to provide funding to make tower block cladding safe !
I note,Cody,your claim,"I'm no Tory",but why are you so anxious to deflect blame away from the Tories? |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 06:22:30 on 29 January 2019 |
|
|
| Rayofsunshine - Everything I said was factual. If I was to live in your world then the Quays project was completely undertaken by Tories, with no input from Salford Council, despite the fact the Council constantly takes credit for it. Even during a Labour Gov, it was a Tory project. The expensive flats and housing is also the Tories fault, as is Salford Council’s housing policy that benefits developers. You’re logic is baffling. I’m not anti-Labour, I’m anti anyone who’s flogging social housing and land to developers who aren’t providing the social housing they’re supposed to, of which this council is to blame. And again, I was saying the Council and developers are trying to ‘attract a better class of tenant’. I wasn’t saying the people of Salford are not worth it or should be replaced. If you look at the recent developments around Salford, you will see the new properties are expensive and the residents are obviously richer, the type they want. I shouldn’t have to explain this as what I said was quite clear. It’s like you don’t properly read the comment and just see what you want and then run with it. You completely over look what was said and then throw around accusations of anti-labour sentiment, bias and blaming Tories. Anything but accept reality, like Rossi used to. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 09:09:23 on 28 January 2019 |
|
|
| Bob the regular,why do you persìst in muďdying the water over cladding? Are you lacking in understanding or are you deliberately malicious ?
As I've pointed out several times,national governments set safety standards and contractors are
legally responsible for delivering work in compliance with national standàrds! It can't be any simpler,Bob. |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 09:08:52 on 28 January 2019 |
|
|
| Bob the regular - Yup, I agree. I find it hard to believe the Council knew nothing about the cladding or that they were not involved in any facet of it being chosen/procured. If there's something the Council are good at, (as well as wasting money) it's red tape and bureaucracy, and they would've been all over that cladding checking it's price etc. Now they're giant fire hazards, nothing but the best for the people of Salford. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 09:08:16 on 28 January 2019 |
|
|
| Cody,you clearly are incapable of facing the facts ;instead you retreat into a fantasy world of
Anti Labour Bile. I note that yet again yoù are slagging Salfordians off,"a better class of tenant"! |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 07:26:54 on 26 January 2019 |
|
|
| I am sick and tired about all this crap over cladding. Our Mayor should stand up and say who he blames for all this mess, and tell us if he is going to instigate legal proceedings against these responsible. Thing is, he won't because he knows it will come out in the wash that the council are at least partly to blame.Meanwhile people suffer, but they still vote Labour. |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 07:26:34 on 26 January 2019 |
|
|
| Rayofsunshine - You’re basically saying it’s the Tory’s fault... again. The fact that Salford Council bought the docks in the early 80s and the fact the Tory Gov at the time put Salford Council in charge of it, means nothing does it? The ‘regeneration’ was led and signed off on by Salford Council. The Council even boasts of it’s success story of ‘Salford Quays’, every chance they get. It was Salford Council that gentrified Ordsall too, that had nothing to do with the Tories. Also, a lot of the demolitions in Langworthy have happened under a Labour Gov and Council. There’s also the current expensive flats and town houses going up on the border with Manchester, they have nothing to do with the Tories either, it was Salford Council’s doing. Yeh, the Tories are cutting funding to the Council, but that doesn’t mean our Council should flog social housing and land to developers and even create a housing policy that helps those developers and get little back in return. That’s why prime land is being flogged to developers and parts of Langworthy are left with vacant lots, because these developers and the Council know they can’t make a profit or attract a better class of tenant to the area without clearing everyone out first, like they did in Ordsall. As for cladding, both Labour and Tory Govs are culpable. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 08:16:55 on 25 January 2019 |
|
|
| Cody,you raise a number of issues.
Salford Quays - development in the 1980's/early '90'swas instigated by a government quango,not Salford City Council! Thatcher set up this quango to
insure that money invested in the Quays benefited bosses,not working people.
Langworthy - whilst the Tories poureď hundreds of millìons into the Quays,during this same period they
litteralļy robbed hundreds of millions from Salford's Housing Repairs Budget.
Cladding - initially the current government tried to
suppress the truth about the threat posed by tòwer block cladding. To date,the Tories refuse to provide Salford with fundinģ to ensure that tower blocks in Salford are safe! |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 16:46:39 on 23 January 2019 |
|
|
| Rayofsunshine - The rampant gentrification of areas close to the Quays and Central Manchester, while parts of Langworthy are bulldozed and left. Cheap flammable cladding used on Tower blocks and the fact it’s still been left (please save me the argument it was legal by law). |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 10:20:59 on 23 January 2019 |
|
|
| Cody,what evidence do you have for your accusation that the Council regards most Salfordians "as scrotes"? Why is that many contributors to this site have giant çhips on their shoulders? It isn't very attractive! |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 06:00:47 on 23 January 2019 |
|
|
| Rayofsunshine - I wasn’t, I was talking about how developers see the natives in Salford. We’re not worthy of investment because we’re all scrotes they couldn’t get a decent return from. In fact, I’d say the Council sees us the same way. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 16:44:37 on 22 January 2019 |
|
|
| Bob the regular,why shouldn't people,regardless of material circumstances,live in decent homes? Turns out you are a prig and snob! |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 16:44:28 on 22 January 2019 |
|
|
| Cody,don't put Salfordians down! |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 22:57:04 on 21 January 2019 |
|
|
| Ok Ray , lets build 80 or 90 dirt cheap starter flats, and have lots of people living in the land that is surrounded by parkland. We could have half of these for social rented.This would soon turn into a dosshouse with some of the types that are being given priority by Salford homesearch. Apart from the fact that this would not make any cash to fix the old mansion, it would upset the people who want to see that place tidied up a bit. Like I said, the way forward is to build 8 top end places. That brings in most cash, and has least people impact on the park. Thing is building bigger and better housing creates more work. It also eases pressure on the housing market below, but all the socialist mind can see, is people living in better houses than they can ever afford to live in. I have worked on lots of houses like this, but I have never been envious of the people who were going to live there. whatever gets done, our council will make a balls of it for sure. |
|
|
?
|
Cody wrote
at 22:56:50 on 21 January 2019 |
|
|
| Rayofsunshine - You should probably ask that question to the Mayor and his cabinet. However, while I agree with you, I do believe Bob’s aim is to get the most money for as little housing/building as possible. Though like him I have very little faith in the Council’s ability to make it work. As for the article subject; why has the land where Windsor High School used to be not been built on? Could it be the location, too close to the unwashed, rough, native Salfordians? |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 17:04:09 on 21 January 2019 |
|
|
| Surely,Bob what Salford needs is lots of low to mid price housing,not more 'executìve' luxury residences? |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 09:01:39 on 21 January 2019 |
|
|
| To answer our Ray I can say with conviction that there is nothing wrong in building on brownfield sites, and that is what they are going to do. The thing is they will go the wrong way about it like they always do and make a balls of it. They will put loads of dwellings on it, upset Mary and the other people who have concerns about the park,and end up not getting enough money to renovate that mansion.my idea was the best and simplest. flog 8 plots off at 600k to a million with covenants for one dwelling each. Mark my words, a balls up they will make. |
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 06:00:24 on 20 January 2019 |
|
|
| I think Gareth is right on this. If you enlarge the pictures a bit you can see most of them have this "Labour voter" look about them. |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 05:57:43 on 20 January 2019 |
|
|
| Felsey,the lesson to be learnt from the recent events at Westminister is that the birds are finally coming home to roost on lying,duplicìtous Brexiteers! Mrs.May has been exposed as both incompetent and dishonest ; she's prepared to risk a
No-Deal Brexit in order to appease the Tory Right. Meanwhile Eurosceptic Maggots are devouring the Conservative Party. Working people of Salford,mobilise to prevent Brexit Armageddon! |
|
|
?
|
Rayofsunshine wrote
at 05:55:59 on 20 January 2019 |
|
|
| Bob the regular,what's wrong with building on brownfield? |
|
|
?
|
Felsey wrote
at 05:53:41 on 20 January 2019 |
|
|
| Bob makes sense but after the Westminster shambles this week who knows how the public will vote come elections. Labour may be thrown out within a short time then we can protect green belts and reclaim our borders. |
|
|
?
|
Gareth L wrote
at 19:47:30 on 17 January 2019 |
|
|
| How many of these people complaining will go out and vote labour in the next election? The only way to stop this vote them out and this is from a former labour voter.
|
|
|
?
|
Bob the regular wrote
at 07:41:06 on 17 January 2019 |
|
|
| What a nice bunch of pleasant type dissidents you seem to have here. They are all wasting their time here though. Dennetts mob will do they want to do, as always. Must admit though, our pal Dennett is telling the truth when he says they will not be building houses in the park. They won't be, they will be building them in that crappy old former depot which is totally surrounded by the park. That land has to be brownfield land, it cannot be anything else.It's all bullshit all of it. Pure bullshit. |
|
|
?
|
|
|
|
|
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
(3).jpeg)
.png)
(1).JPG)
