GALLERY | Inside Manchester’s abandoned Hotspur Press
Dead pigeons, the detritus of illegal raves, and some eerie artwork. That is what greeted Place North West on a recent tour around a derelict Manchester mill at the centre of a planning saga.
Scroll down to see what the inside of Hotspur Press looks like
Plans from developer Manner would see the Hotspur Press site off Gloucester Street redeveloped into a 37-storey student scheme, while preserving some of the former mill building.
That vision was approved by Manchester City Council earlier this year. However, the project hangs in the balance after an attempt by an anonymous individual to have the former mill complex listed.
Under Manner’s plans, the majority of the dilapidated structure would be pulled down to make way for the student tower.
The fact that a significant portion of the former mill’s wall would be retained as part of the scheme was not enough to deter one nameless campaigner from appealing to Historic England to grant to mill protected status.
The conservation body, which passed no comment on the proposal during the planning process, has opted against listing the building once before.
In 2019 the former cotton mill did not meet the threshold for architectural or historic interest required for it to receive protected status.
Historic England is now assessing the merits of the building once again.
During the consultation period, 560 letters supporting Manner’s plans for the site were submitted.
That consultation ended last week and Manner must now wait nervously for the ruling.
- View of the new 10,000 sqft public square opening onto a link to First Street, the retained eastern façade with the Percy Brothers Ltd and The Hotspur Press signage retained
- View from First Street with the improved public realm that will lead to the newly created square and palisade wall on Gloucester Street. The north elevation will be restored and house commercial space. The facade will be retained on the south and eastern elevations
Historic England will make its recommendation to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. A final decision will then be made by secretary of state Lisa Nandy. With no timeline given on a decision either way.
While that process continues, Manner is hamstrung. The developer is unwilling to pull the trigger on its plans before Historic England makes its judgement.
There is nothing to stop Manner from making a start on site but to do so under the circumstances is “not in our DNA”, according to managing director Richard James.
James is passionate about the site. He says that as soon as he saw it, he had to have it. He sees Manner’s proposals as the only viable means of preserving the site’s heritage.
“I think it’s far better to save as much of the building as you can than nothing at all.
“If the building gets listed it will slip away into the history books and our reference of it will be in in textbooks as opposed to a visual aspect.”
The attempt to list the building and block its redevelopment would be a “tragedy” and condemn the site, he said.
He reckons the building has about two winters left before it would become so unsafe that it would have to be pulled down.
“Most of the inside [of the building] is gone or riddled with asbestos,” he said. “[It is] not something that health and safety, or building regs would allow you to keep in any viable shape or form. That’s the reality.
“I think you can tell a narrative and a history of a building, without necessarily trying to retain a roof that is about to cave in.”
Click any image to launch gallery
Absolutely ridiculous that anyone is standing in the way of this redevelopment. Must be a special breed if you’d rather let an old mill rot in the middle of MCC than repurpose it for good.
By Verticality
Just get it built! Would be a great transformation for the area.
By Chris
We need to limit the power of Historic England so common sense prevails. The UK market is far too over regulated as it is hence why the majority of new buildings are so bland and unexciting, prioritising unrealistic ambitions imposed by an insignificant few.
By The Tarantula
A fantastic scheme with an excellent, viable solution. Saving the retrievable part of a building in such an awful state on the verge of demolition. It’s a no brainer. 560 letters of support v one nameless campaigner.. it will sail through.
By Phil
Why is this possilbe? Who (names please) wrote these laws/regulations? Who (names please) opposes changing these laws/regulations so that anonymous knit-wits can waste so much effort, time and money all to be borne by others? Events like this need putting in context. Otherwise we all just get angrier and angrier.
By Anonymous
Utter madness this is allowed to be held up by one nameless individual. The current proposal is the best that can be achieved for this site or it will fall into a worse state and have to be pulled down in 5 years anyway losing what little is left. Or does the nameless individual have a pot of money with the risk appetite to do better? I think not
By Bob
Leave it as it is
By Anonymous
Given they’ve already looked at this and declined to take further action, HE should deal with this quickly so it can go ahead as soon as possible.
That being said, I’m not sure giving PNW this tour is that helpful as part of a PR strategy, the pics seeming to show it not being in that bad a condition internally given how long it has been empty, certainly better than I expected, and apparently OK to walk round. Dead pigeons, asbestos, graffiti and detritus would not be unique to this old building.
By Rotringer
the new plans look good. normally id be against demolition of an old Mill, but in this case theres not much worth preserving
By Anonymous
I’d prefer it if they reduced the height and changed the shape/staggered the top but the ground floor interaction is pretty cool
By Anonymous
“Who (names please) wrote these laws/regulations? Who (names please) opposes changing these laws/regulations…”
“By Anonymous”
Ironic.
As much as conservation legislation – just like any rules – can be used with perverse effect, the need for control to preserve what needs to be preserved and to maintain planning control is vital. Where those powers are removed, we can see the effect of bland design and planning.
Nevertheless, hopefully the right outcome will prevail in this situation, as nail-biting as it might be for those involved. Hopefully a sense of the original building will be maintained while a modern design will meet current and future needs.
By New Once
If this scheme gets approval, the individual objecting should have to reimburse all parties involved who have lost time and money to get the project through. The council, developer, consultants (not lawyers…F them) and anyone else who has been financially hit because of one persons crusade. I realise setting this precedent could be abused and put people off trying to save buildings worth saving, but when there is such overwhelming support and one idiot is throwing a spanner in the works and zero risk or expense to them…pass the bill on to them I say.
By Egg
I think Manner is playing the old ‘we’d have to pull it down’ card to garner support. But would people like Urban Splash or Capital & Centric take the same view? The scheme looks good so no need for these theatrics.
By Anonymous
There is a small stretch of the River Medlock alongside this building. It’s currently overgrown and full of rubbish. It could be really nice if it was cleaned up and incorporated into the development. I’d be happy to see the site redeveloped, the photos show the retention of the facade and signage which is the most important part. Other than being old, I can’t see any part of the interior that has any significance.
By Richard Williams
There a lot of empty buildings in Manchester
By Anonymous
I remember walking around the ground floor only of 42-44 Sackville Street for Health and safety reasons with Gordon Hood only for it to kick of the resi conversion boom. Doesn’t matter what Hotspur looks like now.
By Anonymous
The majority of Manchester people would rather see this historic building restored and not a great ugly apartment building for foreign students that creation only benefit certain developers
By Tracey Barnes
These NIMBYs who live in Congleton need to keep out of Manchester’s business. This is a health risk and needs to be restored or bulldozed.
By Elephant
Well then Tracy Barnes you need to find an exceedingly wealthy philanthropist who is prepared to lose many millions of pounds restoring it. I’m sure you can sort that out
By Harsh reality
‘There a lot of empty buildings in Manchester’ ok let’s pretend that even made sense. There is more development in Manchester than any other city outside London, so old buildings (like this) either fall into disuse until they are redeveloped or repurposed. Hope that helps.
By Tanya Hyde
Our city is not a museum for London based pseuds to visit on their weekend jaunts up north.
There is a housing shortage. Convert it and move people in
By Anonymous
There is not a shortage of student housing. But the building does need to be saved and if the only viable way of doing it is redeveloping it for housing so be it.
An appreciation for built heritage does not make you a ‘pseud’- what a pretentious statement. Not is an appreciation for built heritage restricted to people from London.
By Anonymous
‘London based Pseuds…hmmm haven’t heard that phrase since the 1970’s ! Let’s leave the developers and grown ups to decide if this can realistically be redeveloped for housing or not, otherwise Mcr council will be the only arbiters and down it comes.
By Fredrick Angles
It was a S**th*le when I worked there as a compositor 56 years ago. Should have been demolished long ago. Interesting about the asbestos though – have I got a claim.
By Roy Webster
It has to be said, Capital & Centric or Urban Splash or Allied would make this incredible without needing to blight the conservation building with excessive intervention. The owners and the developers are squeezing the pips on the profit. I think they’ll get away with it too.
By Zebra