These are just some of the reasons you should be objecting to the proposed loss of our greenbelt. Please consider how the loss of these green spaces will affect you, and refer to our facebook page and links to organisations such as the CPRE for further evidence and information.
Your children : these areas cannot be replaced or replicated elsewhere, they give our children direct access to wildlife, farm animals, green space, fresh air.
Wildlife : Frogs,toads, newts, bats, woodpeckers, swans, kingfishers, tawny owls, kestrels,dunnocks, sparrows, starlings, redwings, fieldfares,chiffchaffs, chaffinches, blue tits, adders, roe deer, foxes, rabbits. Some of these are protected or conservation concern species, some are living in already designated Sites of Biological importance within the areas proposed for future development. Why destroy this?
(Please see our Objections page, Walshaw Objection, for detail about the biodiversity of the area)
Traffic and roads more housebuilding in the proposed areas will significantly increase the already busy roads - how often do we end up in gridlock because of a minor accident or temporary traffic lights? How does that make you feel about your childrens safety? Even if developers offer up money to improve our roads and transport - there isnt any space to do this - or are they going to knock down some houses to widen the A roads?
Health More noise pollution, more air pollution. Less green space for leisure and fresh air.
Jobs Where is the employment to support these new residents? The proposals also offer industrial development - but does that guarantee businesses will want to set up here? Do they want their lorries to take 20 minutes to travel the 3 miles to the M66?
Brownbelt and Empty Homes first
We should be forcing development on brown belt and derelict areas BEFORE any of our greenbelt is released. Even if that might cost developors a bit less profit. After all this is supposed to be about providing affordable housing, not profit.
Flood Risk Boxing day 2015 was devastating for many residents of the Bury area. Further development on our green fields is just going to increase the flood risk - we need fields and trees to help soak up excess rainfall, not more houses.
Schools, Doctors, Hospitals Where is the provision for new schools and medical facilities to support these new residents? there is already a steady reduction of services at Fairfield, and Radcliffe has not had a local high school for some years, apparently because of low birth rate and low subscription rates....
We dont believe these proposals will address the housing shortage
This is being done because of the governments requirement for councils to build more houses. But have we even seen housing developments which actually produce more than one or two affordable homes? Or will the developers continue to line their pockets at our expense by building 4 and 5 bed executive homes on our green fields?
Why weren't we as residents of the affected areas (including the tenant farmers who live ON the greenbelt) not directly informed of the the proposals? Why was the initial consultation period set just before Christmas when we were all busy and had little time to react?