Comments on: The Subplot | Nutrients and New Towns

By: Rich X

Rich X — Fri, 01 Sep 2023 16:35:30 +0000

Thanks Elephant, so much rings true there. I have relatives in Littleborough who disdain Rochdale town centre, but of course have convenient access to Manchester by rail, tram, and motorway (but somehow do everything they can to prevent more housing there). You are so right that there’s a historic opportunity for these towns to create the new suburbs for a thriving Manchester, and that will naturally bring more money and skills into this places. It’s also a chance to address towns like Middleton (all the boroughs in the north of GM seem to have their somewhat hard done by 2nd or 3rd townships) that should have been allowed to evolve as a suburban outgrowth of Manchester. The fact that green belt left it sub-scale and isolated is one of the reasons it’s transit connections are weak, and that makes it hard to attract new investment to the town. Atom Valley is a valid strategy, but it is in a way compensating for years of these places not being able to evolve.

By: Elephant

Elephant — Fri, 01 Sep 2023 12:40:46 +0000

Rich X is spot on. Towns like Rochdale, Oldham and Bolton, have wealthy rural hinterlands but the inhabitants of these wealthy hinterlands, don’t patronise the hollowed out towns, they pay council tax to. Ask someone in Uppermill, when they last visited Oldham and they will say, that they go to the Trafford Centre, or Central Manchester, as there is nothing to attract them there.Bury is slightly different as it has a relatively wealthy urban bit, bordering Manchester too, which is possibly why, it has done better for investment than its neighbours. We have to use the L word here, “London,” as an example. As South Manchester, becomes as expensive as the South East, people will need to see these towns ,as an alternative but decent housing stock is necessary and better facilities, within these towns, plus better schools.They will have to be Manchester suburbs to thrive. In the way the South East is London’s dormitory, these towns must be the same for Manchester. Manchester was never the Mother city for these towns, and that mindset is beginning to change. A recent report suggested that productivity has increased noticeably in Oldham, Rochdale and Bury, but not in Bolton. The Metrolink is Bolton’s missing factor. Burnham must continue to bang on about expansion.

By: Rich X

Rich X — Fri, 01 Sep 2023 10:07:19 +0000

New towns don’t really address the issues that face GM. One of the reasons the satellite towns in the north of GM lack a certain economic vibrancy is green belt. My old home town, Rochdale, is over 60% green belt, and significantly under-indexes in people with higher incomes and higher skills because it also under-indexes in the ‘middle class’ housing despite having strong transit links into Manchester. I’ve seen many lazy observations that the towns like this lack spending power, the skills to attract employers, or have highly ranked schools without reflecting the fact that land use planning has prevented places having a broader population that can take advantage of being close to a thriving city.

By: Les Payne

Les Payne — Fri, 01 Sep 2023 08:05:37 +0000

Great comments from ‘unlevelled for balance’. Housing, infrastructure and planning is in a mess and probably the worst I’ve seen with an incessant nimbyism, hyper local politics, meaningless and ignored policy and constantly delayed planning.
Intensification and brownfield undoubtedly has it place although isn’t generally of scale to meet the true demand, provide variety and more often requires intervention from the public purse ,or viability argument to proceed without input to practical or social infrastructure in some of our more challenging towns We need a balanced approach and not everyone wants to live in an urban location and not all employment is centred there. New towns and large urban extensions have a place if we are to meet housing need and also improve our housing stock.

By: Unlevelled for balance

Unlevelled for balance — Thu, 31 Aug 2023 11:47:38 +0000

Critical failure of thinking at Maccreanor Lavington. The idea that you can deliver the range of housing needed on urban, brownfield sites is ludicrous. That is not to say we shouldn’t seek to optimise those sites, but they won’t deliver enough units anyway and they won’t provide range. Added to the fact that we all know these sites are more difficult to bring forward, the speed at which you deliver them is also affected. The comment also plays into the idea that open land outside urban boundaries is de facto ecologically beneficial. It isn’t. Of course you could (and, I think, should where possible) re-wild land and we should be seeking to protect the best and most versatile agri land, but we’ve got loads of it in this country. Absolutely loads of it. I’m not an advocate for building on greenfield and Green Belt as a matter of course – we absolutely shouldn’t. But it has to happen to meet housing need, so it’s about finding a proper planning system which allows that to happen with the least harm in other regards.

The current debate about delivery of housing is infantile, frankly, and has been for some time. Hijacked by politicians too weak to tell the truth and who deal in sophistry to support their stance – much of which is about protecting their own position rather than about meeting the needs of the public. It has led, in part, to the utter nonsense of prior approvals, many of which lead to sub-standard housing schemes that don’t deliver anything by way of support for the housing that is delivered – no affordable, no highway provision, no open space, no education contributions, etc. And some politicians will tell us this is a good thing.

The approach to housing in this country is an embarrassing and shameful mess.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:22:37 +0000

This is a very disapointing and utterly one sided piece on new settlements. It completely fails to consider the very many benefits of new settlements and the fact that many households want the benefits of a new home, but don’t want to live in a very dense urban environment. I expect better reporting from Place NW!