A Greater Manchester MP has called for a flagship ‘Atom Valley’ site to be thrown out of the region’s emerging development masterplan - despite claims it would be pivotal in creating thousands of jobs.
Places for Everyone - the conurbation’s controversial long-term strategy for jobs and homes - is currently undergoing a public examination as part of the process towards it being signed off by the government.
But Chris Clarkson, MP for Heywood and Middleton, has written to inspectors overseeing the examination urging them not to allow the Northern Gateway on the grounds it would be a ‘devastating hammer-blow’ to the area.
The huge site, close to the motorway network and Heywood Distribution Park, could generate 1.2m sq m of employment space and 1,000 new homes. A second element includes a further 1,550 homes at Simister and Bowlee.
READ MORE: The big plans that could change the face of Rochdale in 2023 and beyond
Local leaders have hailed it as being of potentially national importance, having previously attracting the attention of Tesla. But the Conservative MP says it - and major plans for 1,680 new homes and 35,000 square metres of employment space at Stakehill - could 'not be any less appropriate' for the area.
Together with Kingsway Business Park the two sites form the ‘Atom Valley’ Mayoral Development Zone, which local leaders say could bring 20,000 jobs to the region.
Mr Clarkson's blistering letter comes just weeks after the secretary of state signalled a potential overhaul of planning laws - including the easing of the house building targets councils are expected to meet.
It reads: “It has been my own experience when discussing Rochdale borough’s housing needs, [that] there is little interest in actual local need, which would highlight a need for smaller, lower cost dwellings centred on employment and transport links, but rather to push ahead with developments which will boost council tax yield in the borough.”
Rochdale council declined to comment, but bosses have previously described PfE as a once in a generation opportunity to ‘boost competitiveness’ in the north of the city region.
However, Mr Clarkson claims the authority is driven by a desire to ‘monetise the green belt’, insisting on building at Bamford and Littleborough ‘come hell or high water’.
“These statements are frankly astonishing, but they tell you all you need to know about Rochdale council’s objectives,” he adds. “They have not come to this process as an honest broker, but rather with a specific agenda.”
In respect of the Northern Gateway and Stakehill allocations, Mr Clarkson argues that ‘no exceptional circumstances have been demonstrated’ to justify the removal of the land from the green belt.
“I would also contend that the size of proposed housing development will overshadow the current community and is not consistent with GMCA (Greater Manchester Combined Authority) statements about existing settlements and pockets of housing,” he adds.
He adds that Local Housing Need (LHN) figures show that Rochdale overbuilt by 170pc between 2018 and 2020 - and claims the council is ‘conflating several schemes (Atom Valley, Rochdale Rail Corridor, PfE) and using them all as the basis to build on green belt’.
He also contests the economic benefits in terms of bringing employment and skills to the area, suggesting they are ‘a figleaf for further residential development'.
“It certainly does not meet the aspiration for “high quality, adaptable, employment floorspace within a ‘green’ employment park setting,” he adds.
Mr Clarkson also brands the infrastructure proposed to support the proposed developments as ‘vague and unquantified’, accusing the council of routinely using the promise of rail links 'as an inducement to support building’.
He continues: “ I would encourage the panel to have regard to the environmental impact in the area. Undoubtedly, the loss of green land and addition of potentially hundreds of vehicles to the roads in the area will have a significant impact on air quality.”
Mr Clarkson concludes by saying he finds it difficult to see how either site could ‘be any less appropriate for inclusion in PfE or a local plan’.
He adds: “I would be most grateful if you could take the above points into consideration when reaching your final conclusions – to allow this to proceed would be a devastating hammer-blow to the local community, the environment and the future of the area.”
Rochdale council declined to comment.
For more of today's top stories click here.
READ NEXT:
