Example objection letter.

Dear Martin Kimber

I would like to object to the proposals outlined in the Core Strategy Preferred Options and the Spatial Policy for Ashton and Bryn. I give the following reasons:

1. Part of the proposal would mean the destruction of Greenbelt land.

2. The vast majority of the proposal would mean the destruction of approximately 193 acres of agricultural land.

3. The development would mean the destruction of ponds, wildlife habitats, woodland, wildlife corridors, hedge-rows and well established trees.

4. The increase in noise and pollution that an expansion of the South Lancs Industrial Estate, and the development of warehousing at Landgate, would bring.

5. The proposed road closely resembles the route of the Ashton Northern Bypass (ANB). The Government Inspectors report regarding the ANB states that:

“the proposed ANB would not achieve, to any tangible extent, the purposes for it which are stated in the reasoned justification for the policy i.e. that it would relieve industrial and through-traffic from a large part of Ashton. There can, therefore, be no justification for regarding this scheme as a potential solution to the identified problem”.

Given that the proposed road would not reduce traffic, I object to its development.

6. The increase in traffic that an expansion of the South Lancs Industrial Estate, and the development of warehousing at Landgate, would bring.

7. The Spatial Policy Principles document states:

”…and delivery of the northern section of a relief road for Ashton, from Lockett Road to the A49 Wigan Road”.

This road would carry HGV’s to a junction/roundabout on a section of the A49 which lies in an Air Quality Management Area. I believe this would contravene section EV1B Pollution (a) of the UDP. I quote:

” Not permitting development which would result in unacceptable levels of air pollution or which would have an unacceptable effect on air quality, particularly in or adjacent to the Air Quality Management Areas declared by the Council under the Environment Act 1995.”
Therefore I object to the development of this road.

8. The Spatial Policy Principles document section 9.138 states that:
“Ashton has specific opportunities for development at Landgate and Stubshaw Cross, not least arising from its strategic location alongside the M6 motorway.”
I object to Stubshaw Cross being a Key Strategic site as it is definitely not “alongside the M6 motorway.” As section 3.66 of the Core Strategy Preferred Options points out:
“…at the South Lancashire Industrial Estate to the north-east of the town, on the opposite side from the motorway.”
9. The Spatial Policy Principles document section 9.144 states that:

“A new school site is needed to replace the existing Cansfield and Byrchall High Schools.  The preferred location is part of the Stubshaw Cross site”

I object to Stubshaw Cross being the preferred school site because of its proximity to South Lancs Industrial Estate. The danger from HGV traffic and the pollution created from the HGV’s and the Industrial Estate make this area inappropriate for a school that would have to accommodate all of Ashton’s high school pupils.

10. The Spatial Policy Principles document section 9.144 states that:

“A new school site is needed to replace the existing Cansfield and Byrchall High Schools.  The preferred location is part of the Stubshaw Cross site”

I object to Stubshaw Cross being the preferred school site because of the increase in traffic that it would bring, particularly at “school-run” times.

11. I object to the expansion of the South Lancs Industrial estate as I believe it contravenes section EM1A of the UDP. I quote:

“Development of the available land at the South Lancashire Industrial Estate must be limited to schemes which, due to their inherent nature or their integration with achievable off-site works, will not significantly increase the traffic flows through Ashton-in-Makerfield town centre.”

This is backed up by the Government Inspectors Report regarding the ANB. I quote:

“The proposed extension to the South Lancashire Industrial Estate would
increase its area very substantially. It would certainly increase the level of traffic
generated, the extent of this depending on the nature of the new activities to be located
there. Given the extent of the problems of congestion, noise, pollution, severance and
danger caused by the existing through traffic in Ashton town centre, it is reasonable to
assume that the additional employment development at the South Lancashire Industrial
Estate must be severely restricted until such time as a viable means of substantially
reducing through traffic is devised for this area or a Transport Assessment submitted with
a planning application within allocation EM1A36, demonstrates that the particular
scheme would not unacceptably increase that harm.”

Please post your objections to

Martin Kimber
Director of Environmental Services,
FREEPOST 5378,
Civic Buildings,
New Market Street,
Wigan,
WN1 1ZZ.