“That depends where you live and what area you want to protect”
Does it really depend on where you live as to which GMSF proposals you'll object to? Is this really about not letting them build in our back yard, where we take our dog for a walk or on our local birding patch or is it about really trying to save our wildlife habitats and the wildlife which go with them?
Whilst some sites with organised individuals and large nearby conurbations which are prepared to object to any proposals are likely to receive a good number of objections, other less well birded areas lacking in direct conurbations and yet which contain some of the most important habitats and wildlife in the county are likely to be overlooked. Take Chat Moss for instance, probably the county’s rarest habitat with more Red and Amber List Birds of Conservation Concern species than any other area and is under serious pressure from the GMSF but is likely to be one of the least objected areas merely due to its relatively low profile and poorly understood importance. For me, this is not about objecting to only those proposals which directly affect us personally but objecting to as many as possible, if not all of them! Frankly, we don’t want any of them on any of our green belt land and wildlife rich.
So please, please object to as many proposals as you can but certainly the more significant sites of county importance. You will note that the original GMSF thread which started way back in January 2016 is now a sticky post at the top of this discussion forum so it is always easy to find and as there are two threads running simultaneously for this topic it will become the primary thread and this one will be closed; so please add further information etc onto that thread so it’s all in the one place.
The final words from me are that your bird records have never been of more significant importance. The Greater Manchester Bird Recording Group (GMBRG) has been very (very) busy supplying its huge amount of records (submitted by county birders) in the fight against the GMSF proposals and yet many areas under threat and which have good observer coverage still have a relatively poor amount of records which are useful in these objections. I cannot stress enough how important it is to officially submit your records to the GMBRG (see the ‘Greater Manchester needs you bird sightings’ thread) as it is these and pretty much only these records which are used by developers when it comes down to it. Whilst there has been a recent panic in requests for us to supply data against GMSF it should also be remembered that the GMSF proposals run to 2035 and in that we need as many records as possible in the future regardless of what happens to the current proposals as they will be back!!
Ian McKerchar said
Sat Dec 31 8:50 PM, 2016
For all further comments or information on this important subject please see the relevant sticky thread at the top of this discussion forum.
David Bentley said
Fri Dec 30 9:23 PM, 2016
Richard Thew. Not really a form to fill in. Just you must include your full name and address and the name of the allocation you are objecting to (and say I object), e.g. Elton Reservoir Housing Allocation. State why you are objecting. Send your objection by email to GMSF@agma.gov.uk by 23.59 on 16th January 2017.
David Bentley said
Fri Dec 30 9:17 PM, 2016
Tim Wilcox, That depends where you live and what area you want to protect. Check out Bury Folk against Manchester Spatial Network on Facebook if you live in Bury for instance.
-- Edited by David Bentley on Friday 30th of December 2016 09:18:13 PM
Ian Boote said
Fri Dec 30 10:56 AM, 2016
If you don't want a large piece of concrete coming to a place near you get the objections in before the deadline.
This is county wide and a massive plan who's predictions of need are based on pre brexit 2015 growth forecast of 2.3% for GMC
Their own consultants Oxford Economics current 2016 post Brexit forcast is growth inof 1.1% in 2017 and 1.4% in 2018. OEs made further predictions that if the UK economy could be 3.5% of GDP below where it was in their previous forecast to 2035. These later figures have not been printed when it was reported they would be in December 2016.
The Greater Manchester Spatial Framework are keeping to the 2015 higher figures to justify their predictions and state
Whatever the outcome, Greater Manchesters ambition to achieve a high growth future in line with the Accelerated Growth Scenario 2015 scenario remains as appropriate and credible now as before the Referendum
This is not about a plan for GMC or affordable housing which have merit but inappropriate release of green belt land.
The idea of the spatial framework therefore is good, but I am not absolutely convinced that in its current mode it is fit for purpose. Four areas seem to have been identified this afternoon: the inadequate evidence base for the green-belt proposals, and too much reliance on the green belt in the framework plan; the lack of protection for green space in the plan; the democratic deficit, given that we are not sure who will make the decisions about the plan; and the lack of ambition and imagination in relation to the areas needs.
.
There therefore seems to be a complete lack of an evidence base to enable councils to build on the green belt. Furthermore, they have not demonstrated clearly that brownfield development will not be enough, and that needs to be done in some detail, because the Government now require a brownfield register to be put together. We simply have not seen that, and it has certainly not been subject to enough scrutiny.
Zoe Barrett said
Fri Dec 16 11:59 PM, 2016
Looking at website of GM FRAMEWORK it looks as though consultation runs to 16th January.
Have submitted my objection to the agma email address for Elton. Hope it was done correctly
Tim Wilcox said
Fri Dec 16 10:41 PM, 2016
I'm late to all this I'm afraid. Not been paying attention though I do have some time as I'm retired. What should I complain about quickly to have maximum impact?
David Bentley said
Fri Dec 16 1:52 PM, 2016
The deadline has been extended to 16th January 2017. No time currently given, presume 23.59. per gmca tweet today. email gmsf@agma.gov.uk with the site name you object to and reasons, plus full name and address.
-- Edited by David Bentley on Friday 16th of December 2016 01:53:45 PM
Steven Higginbottom said
Thu Dec 15 9:40 PM, 2016
Bury council are having another consultation event to answer any questions on Monday 19th December 2016 at The Elizabethan Suite Bury Town Hall 12 noon till 7pm
Over the next twenty years there is a need to deliver continued sustainable economic growth, creating more jobs and new homes for the people of Greater Manchester. We are working together with the nine other local authorities in Greater Manchester to produce a joint plan (the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework GMSF) to deliver this growth and to ensure that these new homes and jobs are provided in the right places with the transport (roads, rail, Metrolink) and other infrastructure to support communities and manage growth sustainably.
Public consultation on the draft GMSF has been running since 31 October and is scheduled to end on 23 December 2016. Following on from the first drop-in session in November, the Council will be holding a further drop-in session to show what the GMSF means for Bury and to respond to any questions people may have. The event will be held on Monday 19th December in the Elizabethan Suite at Bury Town Hall between 12 noon and 7pm.
Cheers Steven
John Watson said
Fri Dec 9 9:17 AM, 2016
Apart from Radcliffe & Elton, there's also Cadishead Moss that will be earmarked. It's as large as the Elton area, one of the few remaining lowland mosses, and is the southern part (S of the M62) of the Lancashire Wildlife Trust's reserve "Cadishead & Little Woolden Moss". Much of it is farmland, but a large part is restored from moss workings
Richard Thew said
Thu Dec 8 9:33 PM, 2016
Apparently, I've spoken to several individual locals around Radcliffe and Elton and non of these either knew about the proposals or hadn't realised that it includes all of the elton and withins area and these were all as horrified as I was when I first heard about the news myself. I think it may be a good idea to try and spread the news as much as possible as the more voices we have, the better.
Many thanks.
Ian Boote said
Tue Dec 6 8:07 PM, 2016
Here you will find the overarching plan and maps and details of how to lodge comments
These should be objective and as Dave states specific
This is a massive change to the status of greenbelt. The plan essentially states projected demands of housing jobs to 2035 mean big chunks of land will be removed from greenbelt protection.
Richard Thew said
Tue Dec 6 6:45 PM, 2016
Pondydave wrote:
It is vital that everyone fills in the objection forms. Objections must be site specific. I'll be starting work on this in next few days. If I fail my life's work will be destroyed. Anyone can contact me at big@davebentleyecology.co.uk
How does one get hold of these forms please? I've never done anything like this before....
Ian McKerchar said
Fri Dec 2 10:17 AM, 2016
There are three drop-in sessions to find out more about the GMSF in the Bolton area (GMSF being a document which sets out how much housing and employment land is needed in the area up to 2035, and where development could take place). At the drop-ins there will be a display of the draft GMSF and council officers will also be present to help with enquiries.
The times and locations of the drop-ins are as follows:
- Carnegie Hall, Market Street, Westhoughton, BL5 3AE, from 3pm-7:30pm, on Thursday 8th December - Friends Meeting House, Silverwell Street, Bolton, BL1 PP, from 3pm-7:30pm, on Tuesday 13th December - Bromley Cross Village Hall, Darwen Road, BL7 9LG, on Thursday 15th December
David Bentley said
Tue Nov 22 5:31 PM, 2016
It is vital that everyone fills in the objection forms. Objections must be site specific. I'll be starting work on this in next few days. If I fail my life's work will be destroyed. Anyone can contact me at big@davebentleyecology.co.uk
Steven Higginbottom said
Tue Nov 22 5:13 PM, 2016
Elton and Withins Res proposal photos attached. Cheers Steven
Went to have a look at the plans for Bury yesterday 21st November didn't look good for Pilsworth or Elton areas if you wish to have a say about any of the proposals then you can before 17:00hours 23rd December 2016, by either online at http://gmsf-consult.objective.co.UK Or email to GMSF2agma.gov.uk By post to Greater Manchester Integrated Support Team, PO Box 532, Town Hall Manchester M60 2LA I will put some photographs on of the proposals Cheers Steven
-- Edited by Steven Higginbottom on Tuesday 22nd of November 2016 04:44:56 PM
James Walsh said
Mon Nov 7 6:55 PM, 2016
There is a big campaign in the South of England for London to become a National Park City, a new concept that would give the city of London National Park status, Manchester could also be a National Park City
The GM Spatial Framework should be given to ecologists to decide Neutral Zones where no industry/housing should happen such as the Mosslands, all the areas of habitat that perform the function of carbon capture
There should also be a Greater Manchester EcoTourism Plan that highlights all areas that are EcoTourism assets for now & the future
We are now in the era of the Paris Agreement, all the old rules of business as usual are in the past & everyone needs to work together
David Walsh said
Sat Nov 5 12:04 AM, 2016
There's a drop-in session inviting comments on the GM Spatial Framework at Oldham Library from 12 - 8pm on 8th November
John Watson said
Sat Oct 22 10:56 PM, 2016
It seems to be getting bit political, if that makes a difference:
Individual planning applications will still have to be considered and approved by the councils planning committee, and it will take many years for these to come forward."
The draft plan will be considered by the Greater Manchester Combined Authority on October 28 for approval to begin an eight-week consultation period from October 31 to December 23.
All stakeholders, including members of the public, are encouraged to have their say and views will be considered before a final draft is published in 2017 when another period of consultation will be held.
As part of the consultation, Bury Council will hold a drop in session at the Elizabethan Suite on Monday, November 21, from noon until 7pm where plans will be on show.
Northern Gateway (extension of Pilsworth to the East of the M66)
The largest site proposed to be released in Bury forms part of a number of sites in Bury, Rochdale and Oldham that are collectively referred to as the Northern Gateway. Around 490 hectares is proposed to be released within Bury, with the potential to generate significant levels of investment and create around 17,000 high quality jobs in a range of sectors including advanced manufacturing and logistics
Gin Hall
As part of a wider release of 30 hectares of land in the Baldingstone area, the proposal is to deliver new, high quality employment development on a site at Gin Hall.
Elton Reservoir Area
This area includes a number of significant parcels of land covering a total area of 87.49 ha. on land around Elton Reservoir and to the east of Starling Road. The sites within this area together represent a significant opportunity to create a new large-scale residential community in a parkland setting. The area is a sustainable location and has the potential to provide around 3,500 new homes (This seems to be the whole area from the canal to Ainsworth Road, Starling Road, and Bury Bolton Road west of the reservoir.)
South of the M62
It is proposed to release 255 hectares of land in Bury around Simister Island to the south of the M62 extending eastwards from Prestwich towards the north of Middleton. In total, this site has the potential to accommodate around 2,300 new homes including a significant element of affordable properties and supporting facilities, (This seems to include all the area east of the M66 M60 in Bury.)
Whitefield
It is proposed to release 62 hectares of land around Pole Lane and Mode Hill Lane in Whitefield. The land is bounded by the M66 to the east, the M60 to the south and the urban area of Whitefield to the west and Unsworth to the north. The site has the capacity to provide around 600 new homes
Walshaw
50.83 ha. of land to the north and south of Walshaw Road sits within the existing urban area and represents a significant opportunity in a sustainable location for the provision of around 1,250 new homes
Councillor Rishi Shori, leader of Bury Council, said: In drawing up Burys proposals, we have been at pains to avoid urban sprawl and to avoid damaging the borough's environmental attractiveness.........Individual sites will not be fully developed, as there will be considerable green space left within them and in fact some sites will open up more green space to public use.
Andy Bissitt said
Fri Aug 26 9:44 PM, 2016
Ian Boote wrote:
Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) is produced for public consultation in October.
In Bury over 12000 houses are proposed by various developers.
This includes
217 homes could be greenbelt land at Old Farm, east of Knowsley Road Ainsworth
2,400 homes, (calles Elton Parkland.) along with shops, on land south of Bolton Road and west of Elton Reservoir but reports 'Given the large area of the site, the layout of the development can be sensitively designed so as to take into consideration (wildlife habitats) In relation to heritage assets, two Grade 2 listed buildings are located within the site. These are the early 18th-century Old Farmhouse and the gate piers to the north west of the farmhouse.
1,264 homes on greenbelt land east of Heywood Old Road, near the eastern boundary with Simister and that work could potentially start immediatly.
500 and 1,000 homes off Cams Lane, Radcliffe.
250 homes could be built on greenbelt land west of Starling Road, Cockey Moor, over a ten-year period.
123 homes on greenbelt land to the west of Lowercroft Road, Starling.
200 homes could be built off Brandleshome Road, Greenmount
450 homes could be built north of Lindow Close, Brandlesholme
These are proposals only..........at the minute.
more here http://www.burytimes.co.uk/news/14703896.REVEALED__What_developers_want_to_build_in_Bury_over_the_next_few_years/
-- Edited by Ian Boote on Thursday 25th of August 2016 01:34:34 PM
They call it 'spatial framework'. I call it 'systematic eradication of wildlife'. With greenbelt gone, we are looking at wall to wall suburbia from the coast to the Pennines. Glad I won't be around for too long when this depressing vision comes to pass. What a mess we're in.
Ian Boote said
Thu Aug 25 1:33 PM, 2016
Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) is produced for public consultation in October.
In Bury over 12000 houses are proposed by various developers.
This includes
217 homes could be greenbelt land at Old Farm, east of Knowsley Road Ainsworth
2,400 homes, (calles Elton Parkland.) along with shops, on land south of Bolton Road and west of Elton Reservoir but reports 'Given the large area of the site, the layout of the development can be sensitively designed so as to take into consideration (wildlife habitats) In relation to heritage assets, two Grade 2 listed buildings are located within the site. These are the early 18th-century Old Farmhouse and the gate piers to the north west of the farmhouse.
1,264 homes on greenbelt land east of Heywood Old Road, near the eastern boundary with Simister and that work could potentially start immediatly.
500 and 1,000 homes off Cams Lane, Radcliffe.
250 homes could be built on greenbelt land west of Starling Road, Cockey Moor, over a ten-year period.
123 homes on greenbelt land to the west of Lowercroft Road, Starling.
200 homes could be built off Brandleshome Road, Greenmount
450 homes could be built north of Lindow Close, Brandlesholme
These are proposals only..........at the minute.
more here http://www.burytimes.co.uk/news/14703896.REVEALED__What_developers_want_to_build_in_Bury_over_the_next_few_years/
-- Edited by Ian Boote on Thursday 25th of August 2016 01:34:34 PM
“That depends where you live and what area you want to protect”
Does it really depend on where you live as to which GMSF proposals you'll object to? Is this really about not letting them build in our back yard, where we take our dog for a walk or on our local birding patch or is it about really trying to save our wildlife habitats and the wildlife which go with them?
Whilst some sites with organised individuals and large nearby conurbations which are prepared to object to any proposals are likely to receive a good number of objections, other less well birded areas lacking in direct conurbations and yet which contain some of the most important habitats and wildlife in the county are likely to be overlooked. Take Chat Moss for instance, probably the county’s rarest habitat with more Red and Amber List Birds of Conservation Concern species than any other area and is under serious pressure from the GMSF but is likely to be one of the least objected areas merely due to its relatively low profile and poorly understood importance. For me, this is not about objecting to only those proposals which directly affect us personally but objecting to as many as possible, if not all of them! Frankly, we don’t want any of them on any of our green belt land and wildlife rich.
So please, please object to as many proposals as you can but certainly the more significant sites of county importance. You will note that the original GMSF thread which started way back in January 2016 is now a sticky post at the top of this discussion forum so it is always easy to find and as there are two threads running simultaneously for this topic it will become the primary thread and this one will be closed; so please add further information etc onto that thread so it’s all in the one place.
The final words from me are that your bird records have never been of more significant importance. The Greater Manchester Bird Recording Group (GMBRG) has been very (very) busy supplying its huge amount of records (submitted by county birders) in the fight against the GMSF proposals and yet many areas under threat and which have good observer coverage still have a relatively poor amount of records which are useful in these objections. I cannot stress enough how important it is to officially submit your records to the GMBRG (see the ‘Greater Manchester needs you bird sightings’ thread) as it is these and pretty much only these records which are used by developers when it comes down to it. Whilst there has been a recent panic in requests for us to supply data against GMSF it should also be remembered that the GMSF proposals run to 2035 and in that we need as many records as possible in the future regardless of what happens to the current proposals as they will be back!!
Richard Thew. Not really a form to fill in. Just you must include your full name and address and the name of the allocation you are objecting to (and say I object), e.g. Elton Reservoir Housing Allocation. State why you are objecting. Send your objection by email to GMSF@agma.gov.uk by 23.59 on 16th January 2017.
Tim Wilcox, That depends where you live and what area you want to protect. Check out Bury Folk against Manchester Spatial Network on Facebook if you live in Bury for instance.
-- Edited by David Bentley on Friday 30th of December 2016 09:18:13 PM
If you don't want a large piece of concrete coming to a place near you get the objections in before the deadline.
This is county wide and a massive plan who's predictions of need are based on pre brexit 2015 growth forecast of 2.3% for GMC
Their own consultants Oxford Economics current 2016 post Brexit forcast is growth in of 1.1% in 2017 and 1.4% in 2018. OEs made further predictions that if the UK economy could be 3.5% of GDP below where it was in their previous forecast to 2035. These later figures have not been printed when it was reported they would be in December 2016.
The Greater Manchester Spatial Framework are keeping to the 2015 higher figures to justify their predictions and state
Whatever the outcome, Greater Manchesters ambition to achieve a high growth future in line with the Accelerated Growth Scenario 2015 scenario remains as appropriate and credible now as before the Referendum
This is not about a plan for GMC or affordable housing which have merit but inappropriate release of green belt land.
Dr Roberta Blackman-Woods (City of Durham) (Lab) in debate on the GMSF echoed these concerns
The idea of the spatial framework therefore is good, but I am not absolutely convinced that in its current mode it is fit for purpose. Four areas seem to have been identified this afternoon: the inadequate evidence base for the green-belt proposals, and too much reliance on the green belt in the framework plan; the lack of protection for green space in the plan; the democratic deficit, given that we are not sure who will make the decisions about the plan; and the lack of ambition and imagination in relation to the areas needs.
.
There therefore seems to be a complete lack of an evidence base to enable councils to build on the green belt. Furthermore, they have not demonstrated clearly that brownfield development will not be enough, and that needs to be done in some detail, because the Government now require a brownfield register to be put together. We simply have not seen that, and it has certainly not been subject to enough scrutiny.
Have submitted my objection to the agma email address for Elton. Hope it was done correctly
The deadline has been extended to 16th January 2017. No time currently given, presume 23.59. per gmca tweet today. email gmsf@agma.gov.uk with the site name you object to and reasons, plus full name and address.
-- Edited by David Bentley on Friday 16th of December 2016 01:53:45 PM
Bury council are having another consultation event to answer any questions on Monday 19th December 2016 at The Elizabethan Suite Bury Town Hall 12 noon till 7pm
Over the next twenty years there is a need to deliver continued sustainable economic growth, creating more jobs and new homes for the people of Greater Manchester. We are working together with the nine other local authorities in Greater Manchester to produce a joint plan (the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework GMSF) to deliver this growth and to ensure that these new homes and jobs are provided in the right places with the transport (roads, rail, Metrolink) and other infrastructure to support communities and manage growth sustainably.
Public consultation on the draft GMSF has been running since 31 October and is scheduled to end on 23 December 2016. Following on from the first drop-in session in November, the Council will be holding a further drop-in session to show what the GMSF means for Bury and to respond to any questions people may have. The event will be held on Monday 19th December in the Elizabethan Suite at Bury Town Hall between 12 noon and 7pm.
Cheers Steven
Many thanks.
Here you will find the overarching plan and maps and details of how to lodge comments
These should be objective and as Dave states specific
Closing date for this stage is 23rd December
https://www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/info/20081/draft_plan
This is a massive change to the status of greenbelt. The plan essentially states projected demands of housing jobs to 2035 mean big chunks of land will be removed from greenbelt protection.
How does one get hold of these forms please? I've never done anything like this before....
The times and locations of the drop-ins are as follows:
- Carnegie Hall, Market Street, Westhoughton, BL5 3AE, from 3pm-7:30pm, on Thursday 8th December
- Friends Meeting House, Silverwell Street, Bolton, BL1 PP, from 3pm-7:30pm, on Tuesday 13th December
- Bromley Cross Village Hall, Darwen Road, BL7 9LG, on Thursday 15th December
Cheers Steven
Cheers Steven
Or email to GMSF2agma.gov.uk
By post to Greater Manchester Integrated Support Team, PO Box 532, Town Hall Manchester M60 2LA
I will put some photographs on of the proposals
Cheers Steven
-- Edited by Steven Higginbottom on Tuesday 22nd of November 2016 04:44:56 PM
The GM Spatial Framework should be given to ecologists to decide Neutral Zones where no industry/housing should happen such as the Mosslands, all the areas of habitat that perform the function of carbon capture
There should also be a Greater Manchester EcoTourism Plan that highlights all areas that are EcoTourism assets for now & the future
We are now in the era of the Paris Agreement, all the old rules of business as usual are in the past & everyone needs to work together
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-37739205
Recent Press Release
Individual planning applications will still have to be considered and approved by the councils planning committee, and it will take many years for these to come forward."
The draft plan will be considered by the Greater Manchester Combined Authority on October 28 for approval to begin an eight-week consultation period from October 31 to December 23.
All stakeholders, including members of the public, are encouraged to have their say and views will be considered before a final draft is published in 2017 when another period of consultation will be held.
As part of the consultation, Bury Council will hold a drop in session at the Elizabethan Suite on Monday, November 21, from noon until 7pm where plans will be on show.
Bury Times
http://www.burytimes.co.uk/news/14813148.25_000_jobs_and_12_000_new_homes_earmarked_for_Bury/
Bury MBC report following sites will be developed
Northern Gateway (extension of Pilsworth to the East of the M66)
The largest site proposed to be released in Bury forms part of a number of sites in Bury, Rochdale and Oldham that are collectively referred to as the Northern Gateway. Around 490 hectares is proposed to be released within Bury, with the potential to generate significant levels of investment and create around 17,000 high quality jobs in a range of sectors including advanced manufacturing and logistics
Gin Hall
As part of a wider release of 30 hectares of land in the Baldingstone area, the proposal is to deliver new, high quality employment development on a site at Gin Hall.
Elton Reservoir Area
This area includes a number of significant parcels of land covering a total area of 87.49 ha. on land around Elton Reservoir and to the east of Starling Road. The sites within this area together represent a significant opportunity to create a new large-scale residential community in a parkland setting. The area is a sustainable location and has the potential to provide around 3,500 new homes (This seems to be the whole area from the canal to Ainsworth Road, Starling Road, and Bury Bolton Road west of the reservoir.)
South of the M62
It is proposed to release 255 hectares of land in Bury around Simister Island to the south of the M62 extending eastwards from Prestwich towards the north of Middleton. In total, this site has the potential to accommodate around 2,300 new homes including a significant element of affordable properties and supporting facilities, (This seems to include all the area east of the M66 M60 in Bury.)
Whitefield
It is proposed to release 62 hectares of land around Pole Lane and Mode Hill Lane in Whitefield. The land is bounded by the M66 to the east, the M60 to the south and the urban area of Whitefield to the west and Unsworth to the north. The site has the capacity to provide around 600 new homes
Walshaw
50.83 ha. of land to the north and south of Walshaw Road sits within the existing urban area and represents a significant opportunity in a sustainable location for the provision of around 1,250 new homes
Councillor Rishi Shori, leader of Bury Council, said: In drawing up Burys proposals, we have been at pains to avoid urban sprawl and to avoid damaging the borough's environmental attractiveness.........Individual sites will not be fully developed, as there will be considerable green space left within them and in fact some sites will open up more green space to public use.
Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) is produced for public consultation in October.
In Bury over 12000 houses are proposed by various developers.
This includes
These are proposals only..........at the minute.
more here http://www.burytimes.co.uk/news/14703896.REVEALED__What_developers_want_to_build_in_Bury_over_the_next_few_years/
-- Edited by Ian Boote on Thursday 25th of August 2016 01:34:34 PM