Bloor ready with 312-home Littleborough plan
A hybrid application submitted to Rochdale Council features linked plans to extend the visitor car park at Hollingworth Lake Country Park.
If approved, Bloor Homes would develop a 47-acre farmland site off Hollingworth Road, allocated in Greater Manchester’s Places for Everyone plan.
Bloor’s proposals for the 312 homes would see a housing mix comprising of 31 two-bed, 147 three-bed, 122 four-bed, and 12 five-bedroom properties.
Of those homes, 265 would be for private sale and 47 made available for social rent.
The south-eastern part of the land parcel, which currently serves as a public car park for visitors to Hollingworth Lake, has been earmarked for a potential primary school and children’s play area.
An extended parking area would provide an extra 140 car parking spaces and space for coach parking within a woodland setting, as well as a wildflower meadow and picnic area.
A large swathe of grassland would be kept, with trees to be planted along the park edge, according to the plans.
This central park would provide a green corridor linking Rochdale Canal to Hollingworth Lake, for walkers and cyclists as well as a circular footpath network.
Access would be from the existing Hollingworth Lake Country Park car park off Rakewood Road, with a priority junction from the car park’s internal road to be created.
Sustainable drainage systems, sized to accommodate increased flows from potential future climate change and electric vehicle charging points are included in the plans.
Rochdale Council planners will decide on the proposals at a future date.
Stantec is on the project team along with Tyler Grange Group, Curtins, Briary Energy, and Reading Agricultural Consultants.
To view the plans, search for application reference number 24/00581/HYBR on Rochdale Council’s planning portal.
This is a ridiculous idea! Littleborough is far too small to house all these extra people. The roads are already gridlocked and a short journey takes far too long. You can’t get a Doctors appointment and we don’t have enough schools. I know you will build a school but what about high schools? We don’t need more houses in Littleborough
By Anonymous
Brilliant to see residential proposals come through in a location exactly where they are needed and with heaps of benefits to the local area too. Hope these proposals sail through planning and are delivered as soon as possible!
By Anonymous
Well I love the comments on how wonderful all the houses will be round the lake, it will be awful expensive unaffordable housing and steal all of the beautiful area we look at whilst already being gridlocked
By Debbie gilbert-swale
RIP Hollingworth Lake Country Park. (Can’t have a country park without countryside)
By Anonymous
Great development! Houses needed everywhere, if they weren’t needed then they won’t sell but they will so only a NIMBY would get annoyed by more developments.
By JAB
Absolute NO!!! To the proposed primary school to be built on the car park. It is the only parking space for the terraced houses opposite. The occupiers of the said houses are Pensioners and one being disabled and bedridden. Where are we supposed to park? Where are the daily carers supposed to park when attending their client. I suppose it’s just hard cheese for us.
By Denise Lord
@Denise Lord, if they are bedridden why do they need/have a car?
By Thekidswillbealright
To respond to some of the comments;
1. Littleborough is ‘too small’ – by definition it will be bigger with 320 homes and primary school
2. Gridlock – this is a sustainable transport location with the train station enabling people to get into Manchester very quickly
3. As far as I can see the proposal butts up to a small section of the lake and country park, with the majority still adjacent to fields
4. car parking – there is a proposal for new car parking for the country park. In terms of the terraced housing parking, yes it is hard cheese – if you don’t own a parking space you have to street park. No one owes you parking immediately outside your house
Given the majority of Smithy Bridge housing is mid to late C20th, if your house was a field circa 50 years ago I think its a bit rich to complain that the field next to you is being developed.
By Bradford
Another beautiful area that will be desecrated with ugly volume housebuilder type homes. I appreciate the Council has to provide housing but the quality and design of these homes are just taking the character and uniqueness away from the area. You can see this in almost every new build housing scheme. The developer needs to work with us (the community) to deliver housing that is affordable, attractive and ultimately still able to preserve this as an area to live, work and visit.
By Helen
Current road inferstructer could not cope with all extra traffic ( most house owners have about 2cars pair family) how would they address this?
By Mick
Nobody has a right to a view. We cannot prevent new homes being built to meet local needs and enable people to get onto the housing ladder simply because other people have chosen to buy a home that doesn’t include parking. We stopped car-centric town planning decades ago, thank goodness.
By Anonymous
It’s gridlocked on local roads as it is. Ever used Wildhouse Lane at rush hour? On a sunny day? As for creating a green corridor….. it’s a corridor of green already and there are already walking paths through the area already so you’re offering nothing. No further doctors or dental practices within these plans. Already over subscribed high schools. Rochdale council are already planning hundreds of new homes in the Slattocks area of Middleton eroding the green belt. In fact around Middleton the council has been building on farmland for years. In fact there’s major building work everyday within the Borough, look at the huge development around Sudden, though at least that mainly seems to be brownfield. Basically the Council are raking it in of the developers. Save the greenbelt before it’s too late. Save the lungs of the city not just farmland.
By Anonymous
Already roads to busy and enough homes built and being built. Why not develop old Mills
By Beverley Pritchard
Stupid idea. Build more apartments and flats nearer to the city centre, use the derelict land and empty buildings. This would reduce cars on the roads and preserve fields and nature. This build is about lining someone’s pockets
By Anonymous