OBJECTORS have failed to derail controversial plans to build homes on public open space by Radcliffe Civic Suite - but a further battle lies ahead.

In October, Bury Council's Cabinet decided it would sell the suite, in Thomas Street, Radcliffe, so Great Places Housing Association can build 40 'affordable' homes — properties sold or rented at 80-per-cent of the market value.

Town-hall chiefs put a formal notice in The Bury Times about their proposal to sell public open space surrounding the suite and it drew objections.

Eight people emailed the council with written objections and 116 others wrote letters registering their opposition.

Sarah Woolfe, of Outwood Road, Radcliffe, said: "I have lived here for many years. The civic hall is the heart of the community. I have been to many functions there.

"If the civic hall is demolished, the heart of the community is ripped out."

Tracey Shaw, of Railway Terrace, Radcliffe, said: "I object to the demolition of the Radcliffe Civic Hall.

"As a child I appeared here in plays from my local school.

"My mother lives in Radcliffe on Rupert Street and she's now in her 70s. When she cant travel to Manchester to performances and needs to be closer to home

"If you demolish this hall you will destroy people's independence. Well Done for taking away the spirit of Radcliffe.

"Myself and my husband who reside in Bury object."

The objections triggered a discussion at the Cabinet meeting held at the town hall on the evening of December 16.

Members had to decide whether to throw out the plans or press ahead to the next stage.

A report to the meeting says: "In these letters, the Green Party state that the disposal plan accompanying the advert was misleading because it did not include the civic hall itself.

"However, by definition, the civic hall is enclosed and not open space and, consequently, it would have been wrong in law to include it within the plan.

"It is suggested that the proposed use for housing runs contrary to a local policy contained within the Unitary Development Plan and, consequently, the land should not be sold for this purpose.

"This policy states that the council will maintain community facilities and public open space as the predominant land uses within the Green Street/New Church Street area.

"This assertion affectively prejudices the outcome of the planning application and it will be for the planning committee to decide how planning policy issues impact upon the proposed scheme."

At the meeting, the Cabinet decided to allow the proposal to continue.

The next step is the tabling of a planning application and the council's finance and housing representative, Cllr Rishi Shori, said he believed that would happen early in the new year.

One of the key aspects of the application will be how the applicant, Great Places, proposes to compensate for the loss of public open space.

By law, developers must either replace the lost space or agree with the planning committee to provide cash for suitable projects in the immediate area, such as building or maintaining play areas or sports pitches.

Once the application has been tabled, the council will write to neighbours and a public consultation will take place.

Bury planning committee would be asked to make a decision, probably in the spring.

The Cabinet report said the land would not be sold if planning permission is turned down.

Bury Green Party co-ordinator Nichole Haydock said: "Council plans make it clear that, if the council was to take the opportunity to develop the Green Street/New Church Street area, this would be for retail, business, office and leisure use and not for housing."

Cllr Shori rejected claims that the council was engaging in double standards by expecting others to maintain protected patches of land while disposing of such land themselves.

He said: "The council, like any organisation or individual, has a right to consider the disposal of its land, but only if it follows the correct rules and regulations, and that is what we are doing.

"Some of the objections raised were valid, but Cabinet was not the right place for them to be considered. The planning process provides ample opportunity for those objections to be considered.

"The people affected by this are the people of Radcliffe who would lose the land, but it is interesting that only 22 of the people who wrote to use live in the immediate area, so I am not sure how the others would personally lose out."

Cllr Shori added that he could not speculate on the outcome of the planning application but said that any income the council gets from land sales would be used to fund the construction of a new purpose-built leisure and community centre on the site of the former Radcliffe Pool in Green Street.