PEOPLE POWER: Green belt campaigners celebrate as Wigan Council backs away from five development sites
Campaigners fighting to protect green belt across Wigan Borough have been handed a major boost after the council said five controversial development sites should not be taken forward.
For residents who have spent months fighting proposals on land at The Bell, Kitt Green, the announcement is particularly significant, and shows what can happen when a community refuses to give up.
Wigan Council is recommending that four green belt sites are removed from the latest version of its Local Plan. They are North of M6 junction 26, known locally as The Bell; Moss Industrial Estate extension in Leigh; Bridgewater West in Astley; and West of Winwick Lane, Lowton.
The council is also set to formally oppose proposals for West of Gibfield, Atherton.
It is a huge moment for campaigners who have organised, objected and repeatedly made their concerns heard.
Seeing Astley made campaigners even more determined
For campaigners at The Bell, one development in particular provided a stark reminder of what they feared could happen on their own doorstep.
During the campaign, I took residents from The Bell to see the huge warehouse development at Astley Business Park, where the scale of the industrial buildings has caused hughe outrage, not just in Wigan borough, but across the country.
Seeing the warehouses up close had a real impact on the group. Campaigner Sarah said the visit made them even more determined to fight the proposals at The Bell.
For residents, it was a chance to see for themselves just how dramatically a large-scale development can change an area, and reinforced their determination to protect the green belt at Kitt Green.
Their fear was simple: they did not want to look back in years to come and wish they had fought harder to protect the green space on their own doorstep.
Now, that determination appears to have paid off.
Council says it has listened to residents
Wigan Council says the four sites are no longer required because there is sufficient land elsewhere in the borough to meet its expected employment land needs.
Councillor Paul Kenny, cabinet portfolio holder for planning, environmental services and transport, said: “We have listened to your feedback, and the views of our communities have been reflected in these decisions.
“We are aware of the depth of feeling surrounding these four sites.
“By removing them from the latest version of the Local Plan, we believe we have struck the right balance between supporting economic growth and job creation, providing opportunities for residents, and protecting our environment.”
With West of Gibfield, the position is slightly different. The site forms part of the Greater Manchester Places for Everyone framework, but the council says it does not believe the current proposals are appropriate and intends to object to the developer’s masterplan.
Councillor Kenny was unequivocal about the council’s position on that proposal, saying: “With Gibfield, we simply do not believe the proposals are appropriate and we will make that clear through the consultation. The masterplan requires the council’s approval and we cannot support it.”
For campaigners, however, this is about more than planning policy.
It is about residents organising, asking questions, turning up, objecting and refusing to accept that development on valued green spaces is inevitable.
The fight is not completely over.
The latest version of the Local Plan will still go through consultation before being reported back to Full Council and eventually submitted for independent examination.
But for communities which have spent months fighting these proposals, this is a significant moment, and proof that making your voice heard can make a difference.
What happens next… and what is still going ahead?
While the four green belt employment sites are set to be removed from the latest Local Plan, that does not mean development across the borough is being put on hold.
Six sites proposed for new homes, which are not in the green belt, have been retained in the plan. These are North Leigh Park, South Hindley, remaining land South of Atherton, East of Atherton, remaining land at Landgate in Ashton-in-Makerfield and Westwood Park in Wigan.
The council says significant changes have been made to the housing proposals following feedback from residents, including extra provision for flood management, more certainty over road infrastructure, reductions in the number of homes, a greater mix of house types and improved walking and cycling connections.
At South of Hindley, for example, the council says the proposed link road would have to be “funded and programmed before any homes are built and occupied”, alongside full investigation and measures to deal with land contamination. Developers will also be expected to contribute towards the infrastructure needed to support new communities, which could include health and care services, schools, community facilities, open spaces, play areas, sport and recreation facilities and affordable housing.
The Local Plan will now enter its next public consultation, known as the publication stage, before being reported back to Full Council in November. Councillor Dane Anderton, cabinet portfolio holder for economic development and regeneration, urged residents to stay involved.
He said: “I would like to thank everyone who has contributed so far but urge them to take part in the next round of consultation, which is called the ‘publication’ stage.”
Following that consultation, the plan is expected to return to Full Council with a recommendation that it is submitted to the Secretary of State for independent public examination by the Planning Inspectorate.
And what about Winstanley Hall?
One major housing proposal which is separate from those six Local Plan sites is Winstanley Hall. Plans submitted by Kingswood Homes would see 396 new-build homes on land adjoining Pemberton Road, together with a further 36 homes created through the conversion of buildings within the historic Grade II* listed Winstanley Hall complex.
The developer says the wider scheme would enable the restoration and secure the long-term future of the historic hall. The proposals are not affected by the council’s announcement on the four green belt employment sites and remain a separate planning matter.
With major development proposed around one of the borough’s most important historic buildings, it is another scheme residents will undoubtedly be watching closely.
For now, though, this is a moment for the people who gave up their time, attended meetings, raised awareness, challenged proposals and refused to give up.
People power matters, and the communities behind these campaigns have shown that determined residents can make their voices impossible to ignore.
