Regulation 18 Local Plan - Issues Paper Consultation Form (July 2018) Any comments you have on the Local Plan Issues Paper can be submitted using this consultation response form. Please note, not all questions are mandatory. Comments, using this form, can be submitted by email to [email protected] or by post to Strategic Planning, Strategic Growth Services, Trafford Council, Trafford Town Hall, Talbot Road, Manchester, M32 0TH. If you have any enquiries regarding the Local Plan Issues Paper, please email [email protected] or call 0161 912 3149 and a member of the Strategic Planning Team will be able to assist. Comments are invited on the Issues Paper from 23rd July 2018 until 14th September 2018 when the consultation will close. Data protection Please note all comments will be held by the Council and will be available to view publicly. Comments cannot be treated as confidential. Your personal information such as your postal and e-mail address will not be published, but your name and organisation (if relevant) will. Trafford Council maintains a database of consultees who wish to be kept informed about strategic planning matters such as the Local Plan. In responding to this consultation your contact details will automatically be added to the consultation database (if not already held). If you do not want to be on the consultation database and therefore not be contacted about future strategic planning consultations please state this in your response. Personal details Title Dr Forename Charlotte Surname Starkey Organisation (if applicable) Position/title (if applicable) Address Postcode Email address Landline phone no Mobile phone no If you are representing another person, please provide their details as follows: Title Forename Surname 1 | P a g e Organisation (if applicable) Position/title (if applicable) Address Postcode Email address Landline phone no Mobile phone no Scope and contents of the Local Plan Do you agree with the scope and contents of the Local Plan? No. Whilst the content list is comprehensive, the topics are expected of any local council survey. What is of concern is that you are using Capita for your service in providing statements re-the topics, a company with a history of illegal activity when in the public sector. I am assuming Capita has franchises over GM too in which case it’s assessment of Trafford is going to be governed by inevitable conflicts of interest and hidden agendas. This is obviously the case without even reading their ‘comments’ in individual papers. The central problem is that Trafford as a distinct council is being submerged into Capita’s version of ‘Greater Manchester’ and that is a key issue for Trafford which should retain its own distinct identity. The presence of Capita simply reinforces the ‘outsourcing’ of local government into ‘consultancies’ on huge fees whilst members of the local councils in England are completely ignorant of the places where they operate in public service. Should any assumptions be made for development beyond the end of the plan period in line with the emerging GMSF? How can we ensure a ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’ runs through the Plan? “Sustainable development” is a sloppy phrase which means absolutely nothing. What are you intended to ‘sustain’? Housing development; manufacturing development; green spaces development (that grows by itself if left alone); economic development; population development; intellectual development; emotional development? 2 | P a g e Vision and objectives for the Borough Do you agree that the Local Plan should have its own spatial vision? Yes. Trafford consists of numerous individually and historically distinct areas and it does not need to bow to the demands of the anonymous ‘Greater Manchester’ body. 3 | P a g e What do consider are the key spatial priorities which should be included in a Local Plan Vision? Remediation and restoration of degraded peat bogs (Carrington Moss) to contribute to climate change threats. Control of urban sprawl. Reduction of Carbon emissions (transport). Prioritise public transport and reduce car usage. Minimise Light Pollution across the whole of Trafford. New buildings to be constructed only in existing built-up areas. Spatial profile of the Borough Does the diagram (page 16 of the Issues Paper) provide a good representation of Trafford? No. It identifies the Carrington area as a ‘growth’ area. Carrington is situated on a badly degraded peat bog as a consequence of abuse since 1886 when Manchester Cleansing Dept. began to tip human and industrial waste on the site, further trashed when Petrochemicals/Petrocarbon and Shell introduced the invention of plastic production at Carrington, further contaminating the moss. Any attempt to introduce ‘growth’ here will simply destroy the only moss land left in Trafford capable of contributing to control of global and regional carbon emissions. It also connects with the Mersey Valley. The plan has also taken it out of the Green Belt definition which has existed formally since at least 1945 in the Manchester and District Regional Planning Proposals 1945 where (p. 11) it was stated that “the mosslands are not suitable for development and have been included in the proposed green belt round the Manchester district”. This also identifies the fallacy of attempting to allow building across Carrington Moss now because the geology and carbon capture resources of the moss are still relevant. The spatial profile also ignores the option at Carrington to create a new focus for the remediation of degraded moss land, a globabl problem, when it is a prime location for expert study and regeneration as a peat bog for carbon capture within the region. That initiative would bring huge economic benefits in terms expert employment capable of being exported, too. The diagram also suggests that Trafford is coming under increasing pressure from other combined Greater Manchester authorities to ‘deliver’ on their building programmes, in other words, pushing their problems upon any space they think is easily obtainable; and it is well known that has been a view within Manchester and other regional authorities re-Trafford for decades. 4 | P a g e Should the Local Plan identify different distinct “Places” to those in the Core Strategy? Yes. Specificallly named green belt, heritage, historic landscapes, distinct regional town centres and villages for proteection; brownfield sites for future development, and area boundaries should be clarified. In other words, a much large and more detailed map is required for informed responses. Include in this, too, a detailed ‘Rights of Way’ map of Trafford. It is outdated and inaccurate. Trafford consists of many individually and historially unique locations whose identities and histories are ignored in most decisions; this problem is compounded by the overarching ‘monster’ of Greater Manchester, which is far too big and typically an extension of the culture of Manchester City during the Industrial Revolution where everything was ‘up for grabs’. Economic Growth Economy Do you think the key issues identified and how the Local Plan could address the key issues in relation to economy is appropriate? No. The phrase ‘sustainable growth’ is used repeatedly and is meaningless to many people, a catch phrase without specific detail. The focus on industry is minimal and ultimately this is the only real growth area that is ‘sustainable’. The plan does nothing to address the catastrophic loss of industry since the 1980s and there are key areas missing: engineering and science to address the problems of climate change; refocus the minds of the council away from the take-away, pizza parlour, café mentality and nail-boutique culture that now defines ‘work’ in Trafford. The key area for me is the great opportunity at Carrington. Historically abused from 1886 with night-soil tipping, then industrial and urban tipping, followed by the petrochemical industry of Petrocarbon, Shell and Bassell, it is the place where a Peat Bog was badly abused. Carrington provides a huge opportunity, when climate change is such an urgent issue, and where plastic pollution (first discovered at Carrington in the fractioning of crude oil, 1947, Petrocarbon), for a serious Peat Bog Remediation and Restoration Centre with a secondary dedicated site to finding solutions to Global Plastic Pollution. I think this enterprise in combination would be a huge economic driver for Trafford, with global export potential both in terms of science and engineering from this region. It would solve a huge problem for the Moss itself, restore a beautiful tourist attraction, bring global interest and investment and lead to the export of jobs in the field as well. It is much more important and obviously not at all destructive to the Moss as the proposed house development programme suggested so far. There is the potential at conservative estimates for over 1,000,000 tonnes of Carbon to be captured in Carrington Moss, even more if fully restored. That equates to the washing machine and dryers being switched off in evert household in the whole of the UK once every week for 2 years. The challenges and opportunities are enormous. 5 | P a g e Are there any other key issues relating to economy you feel the Local Plan could address? Introduce alternative transport options so that the car culture of Trafford is limited: car ownership here is higher than in almost any other borough in the country, 50% +. The industrial base for alternative fuel ‘green’ options in Trafford is not mentioned nor is there any clear sense of the importance or regenerating industry in this borough. The ‘coffee shop’ culture seen in a town centre like Altrincham is a farcical ‘gentrification’ of a once vibrant town, now reliant upon a single culture economy, food, when the hospitals are filled with cases of obesity. Is there any other key evidence relating to economy you feel the Local Plan should have regard to? Cut the car parking fees in town centres and refocus away from the supermarkets.