Drama in Bolton as £75m Church Wharf regen deal called in – then not
Objecting to the local authority selling the 7.5-acre site to Watson Homes for less than £5 at a meeting on Monday, Cllr David Grant pushed for the decision to be examined at scrutiny – only to drop his call-in shortly afterward.
The call-in request was made at a Bolton Council cabinet meeting this week after the majority of councillors signalled their approval for the land deal. Grant had made it despite warnings that such a move would damage the council’s regeneration reputation. However, he subsequently dropped it, meaning that the land deal can progress.
Grant, who is the leader of the Horwich and Blackrod First Independent Party, had been obstinate throughout the meeting about his distaste for the deal and commitment to calling it in, despite Labour and Conservative councillors chiming in that putting the decision under more scrutiny was unwise.
With his request withdrawn now, the council’s voted decision to approve the land deal has a green light.
Watson Homes will acquire the long-vacant Church Wharf site and build 414 homes, a 124-bed hotel, and substantial commercial space on the plot. Of the 414 homes to be built, 78 are to be available for social rent and 20 for shared ownership. The project is a £75m construction project, according to the council.
Church Wharf has been flagged for a large-scale regeneration effort since 2008. The first attempt by Ask Real Estate and Bluemantle failed due to the financial crash and a second attempt in 2019, led by Muse, was similarly foiled by viability concerns.
Bolton Council was advised by CBRE on the land deal to Watson, which would be restricted with opportunities for the council to claw back more money should the developer’s return surpass estimates. A conditional land sale concept had initially been approved by the council in March, with the meeting on Monday meant to see the cabinet formally accept the detailed land deal.
Grant persisted that the council was “giving [the land] away for free,” arguing that the developer would make a substantial profit. He also objected to CBRE’s economic assessments of the project, describing the details as “at best fanciful and usually a complete work of fiction”.
CBRE had estimated the project would create 377 temporary jobs a year during the four-year construction period, providing a £81.6m GVA in the North West and £64m in Bolton itself.
Cllr Akhtar Zaman pushed back against Grant.
“Everybody knows that regeneration of this site has been absolutely difficult,” Zaman said. “It’s been lying empty for years. It’s bringing the town centre down. If it was marketable, then we would not be discussing what we are discussing here today.
“The site is not marketable. When a site is not marketable you have to be flexible,” he continued.
Zaman addressed Grant’s call-in as he concluded: “This will damage Bolton’s reputation as a facilitator of regeneration and it will have knock-on negative adverse impacts on regeneration as a whole.”
Bolton Council Leader Cllr Nicholas Peel pointed out that Grant had only caused a delay in the delivery of Church Wharf. “This will be approved,” Peel said. “This will happen.”
Peel’s words held true – even without the scrutiny meeting. The Church Wharf project is due for a planning application to be submitted in October or November, with hopes for construction to begin in the second quarter of 2025. Based on that timeline, work would complete in 2029.
UPDATE: This story has been updated to reflect an after-meeting discussion where Grant formally withdrew his call-in request.
I understand that deals need to be scrutinised but this really does seem like a pointless delay which could have very negative impacts on future, much needed development in the town centre. As Cllr Zaman highlights if the site was massively commercially viable it would not be the eyesore that it is today. Sometimes deals need to be done which are not ideal in order to get the ball rolling. Bolton needs to demonstrate to developers that it is open for business and this does nothing to help that. Look at recent stories of regeneration projects in Prestwich, Stockport and Oldham while the residents of Bolton can only look on with envy, hoping that decision makers do the right thing.
By Anonymous
Hi Anonymous! The story has been updated (the news never ends). The call-in has now been withdrawn, so the land deal can proceed as planned.
By Julia Hatmaker
Bolton needs to drop its infighting and get on with regenerating the town centre. All the social housing being built is not the answer. Its sites like this that are key drivers for the town centre.
By MJ
Pity the residents of Horwich that have these muppets elected to represent us. They spent time and resources campaigning to join Lancashire not too long ago. Please lets elect some grown ups next time that support the economic development of the area.
By Anonymous
And this is why the planning system needs reform. If we’re actually serious about clearing the housing shortage we need to take key decisions away from incompetent planning departments.
By Anonymous
The site was sold for less than £5? Do you mean £5m?
By Anonymous
No. Less than £5. Here is a link to the council report which explains the reasoning more thoroughly than this story: https://bolton.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s2701/Church%20Wharf%20land%20disposal%20and%20regeneration%20for%20mixed%20use.pdf
By Julia Hatmaker
We’re putting houses up for the sake of putting houses up. We go from one ugly sight to another. The houses on moor lane are quality cheap tatty and will become a slum in 10 years. The same applies to back George street and the same will apply here. The town has few leisure facilities and the shopping is closing down at a rate of knots. The place will increase its migrant intake and has become a drop off point for Manchester. The place is a wreck and this is going to make it a whole lot worse.
We needed church wharf to become a walk between the two parks and the town needs larger art centres.
The council are just grabbing the council tax while they can. Goodbye Bolton, now just a housing suburb of Manchester
By Nigel Greenwood
Nigel “We’re putting houses up for the sake of putting houses up.”
No we’re putting houses up because there is a chronic shortage and the average house price is now 7 x earnings.
By Anonymous