Agenda item

Agenda item

Places for Everyone Publication Plan 2021: A Joint Development Plan Document for Nine Greater Manchester Local Authorities

Repot of the Director of City Centre Growth & Infrastructure attached


This report sets out the proposed consultation on the publication stage of the Places for Everyone Publication Plan (PfE) pursuant to Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.


The Committee considered a report of the Director of City Centre Growth and Infrastructure, which sets out the proposed consultation on the publication stage of the Places for Everyone Publication Plan pursuant to Regulation 19, Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.


Key points and themes in the report included:


·                Places for Everyone set the plan for growth and ambition across Greater Manchester and was designed to align with Manchester’s own local plan;

·                The spatial strategy set out the position on growth, competitiveness and opportunities alongside the housing methodology;

·                It considered the previous consultation exercise carried out as part of the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework and set out the next steps following consultation whereby the draft joint development plan document and representations would be submitted to the Secretary of State, a post-consultation report would then be prepared and then the plan submitted to the Secretary of State for Examination.


The report was also scheduled to be considered by the Executive at its meeting on 28 July 2021.


Some of the key points that arose from the Committee’s discussions were:


·                The report and documentation referenced carbon neutral which was different to zero carbon. There needed to be greater clarity on what was expected in terms of carbon objectives within the report;

·                Heat in cities and surrounding environments and whether consideration had been given to the role played by heat islands around buildings and developments?

·                The employment land identified to the North of Manchester but outside the City identified in the consultation was important to North Manchester and its residents;

·                It was felt that the report was very technical report and residents may not appreciate the impact and role they had to play in shaping the future;

·                Members would like to see attempts to ensure widest possible engagement to get the plan out to residents;

·                It was a large piece of work which had been married to the GM 2040 Transport Strategy, and it was questioned whether Stockport’s removal had altered the transport impact?

·                Many green spaces in Manchester were reclaimed brownfield land which in places were often more biodiverse than some of the greenbelt land itself.  And it was pleasing to see that the report offered a good insight and nuance into the types of green space in Manchester; and

·                Reference was made to the zero waste strategy and GM plans to move towards a circular economy in seeing waste as a resource.


The Planning and Infrastructure Manager stated that the plan didn't state zero carbon but did state carbon neutral by 2038 so did pick up the theme in the plan to an extent.  It was reported that changes were not possible to this consultation but can be incorporated in future iterations.


In respect of the heat islands point, it was stated that the Environment Bill required net biodiversity gain which was built into the plan and in November theEnvironment and Climate Change Scrutiny Committee would be considering a presentation on climate and environmental policy around heat island effects setting out the difference between green streets and those without.


On getting local buy-in the Planning and Infrastructure Manager stated that due to the strategic nature of the development plan document it had been difficult to get buy-in at a local level.  Going forward, engagement was likely best achieved through the local plan.  The development plan should be taken as a whole for Greater Manchester and not just the nine participating districts so each proposal did need to be considered as a whole.


Around the issue of the government reforms on local plans, at present there was no clarity on the draft legislation/expectations around local plans.  The ongoing conversations would be considered in light of the proposals once they came forward.


It was reported that Stockport’s Transport 2040 Strategy had been refreshed following its their from the GMSF.  Manchester schemes were firmly in scope and it was reported that Manchester needed to focus efforts onto upcoming infrastructure tranches.  The Head of Environment, Planning and Infrastructure informed the Committee of the government’s recent commitment to £4.2bn for an integrated transport fund for eight city regions.  Manchester was expecting to get a good share to put towards its 2040 strategy.  It was also reported that both the TfGM/GMCA growth strategies and Paces for Everyone were coming forward together.


In relation to the point around greenfield/brownfield sites, the Planning and Infrastructure Manager stated that Places for Everyone offered a strong urban regeneration framework.  The plan could deliver site-specific outcomes with granular detail.  Victoria North offered an example of integrating green/blue infrastructure in the city and it was important to look at all the aspects of green/blue infrastructure for the city.


The Executive member for Houisng and Employment stated that the Plan would deliver 165,000 homes across Greater Manchester with 56,000 in Manchester, of which 20,000 would be affordable and 30,000 social rent.  He added that the brownfield/greenfield discussion was a really important debate especially around what was defined as being brownfield land.  He welcomed the plan coming together despite the Conservatives/Liberal Democrats blocking of affordable housing via GMSF in their borough


The Executive Member for Environment stated that conversations had started and a policy on the circular economy would come through Environment Scrutiny Committee, with the Chair of Economy Scrutiny updated on progress.  She also added that community grants had recently been issued to encourage upcycling with HWRCs mending items to look to reuse items again.




The Committee


1.            Endorse the recommendations of the report to Executive on 28 July, those being:-


·                Approve the Places for Everyone Publication Plan 2021, including strategic site allocations and green belt boundary amendments, and reference to the potential use of compulsory purchase powers to assist with site assembly, and the supporting background documents, for publication pursuant to Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 for an 8 week period for representations to begin not earlier than 9 August 2021; and


·                Delegate authority to the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing,  in consultation with the Executive Member for Housing and Regeneration, to approve the relevant Statement of Common Ground(s) required pursuant to the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.


2.            Recommend that conversations take place between Officers and Executive Members around resident engagement particularly in wards bordering other GM boroughs such as in Blackley.


3.            Requests that a future update comes to the Committee regarding the policy on the circular economy.


Supporting documents: