Burnage resi rejected for third time
Despite drastically changing its approach to redeveloping a site off Kingsway following two refusals, Superstan has once again been unsuccessful in securing planning permission from Manchester City Council.
The local authority has rejected the developer Superstan’s plans to convert an existing office building on the Burnage site into 24 apartments.
The refusal came about due to concerns that not all of the rooms within the development would have a natural light source.
According to a report by the city council’s planning team, only 77% of the habitable rooms would benefit from a natural light source.
Having twice met with rejection over its plans for a new-build apartment scheme off Kingsway, the developer proposed the much smaller office-to-resi conversion late last year.
Superstan has lodged an application with Manchester City Council requesting permission to convert an existing office building on the site into apartments.
In 2020, the developer lost an appeal over Manchester City Council’s decision to reject a 147-apartment scheme at the former Kingsway Business Centre. Superstan appealed this decision but lost.
The authority also rejected the developer’s bid to build 90 flats on the same site in 2022, a decision that was upheld at appeal earlier this year.
To learn more about the most recently refused scheme, search for reference number 138733/P3MA/2023 on Manchester City Council’s planning portal.
It look terrible. Another lazy property developer developing bog standard and ugly apartments, but wanting six figures sums for them. Hopefully it will stay refused.
By jrb
Who owns Superstan ?
By Anonymous
The city could benefit from more medium-high density flats near transport stops. I don’t like the design or the idea of no natural light… but if the developer could build a little bit taller, they could maybe have provided more open space and light.
By High Density
Looked at this site a few years ago for potential client, and the problem was the severely restricted access. Trying to get round the limits on density this imposed by invoking PDR either the last throw of the dice in terms of getting enough money back on the site, someone tried to save money on decent planners with local knowledge who could have put them right, or opted not to listen to advice, even after the previous rejections.
By Rotringer
It’s like an apartment scheme but ..
By Vicar in a Tutu
Well, with Gove’s proposals as announced this morning Manchester CC is on a loser here!..
By Grump Old Git
I would reject it for the lack of balconies
By Balcony Warrior
The latest scheme was horrible, the laziest, cheapest way to plonk flats onto the site, and would have been awful for residents, and kept the site looking an eyesore, which is such a waste given the location. You absolutely could get planning permission for some nice new flats, just need to keep the height appropriate for the area, and it will be welcomed.
By James
It’s a total eyesore at the present time , as is the building behind it. Squatters were removed from it last year . The council should let it be developed.
By Anonymous
The concern is the effect on the available resources schools are full it’s hard to get in to see a GP as it is roads are rammed. An extra 100+ people would have an effect on more than just housing.
By Modern