Manchester sides with residents on Hulme student saga
The city council’s planning committee has rejected proposals for a PBSA scheme on Boundary Lane for the fourth time after deciding existing residents should not have to put up with an influx of students.
Curlew Investments’ project has been scaled down from 13 to nine storeys since it was first proposed in 2021 with the number of bedspaces also reduced from 261 to 146. However, not a single iteration of the project has been deemed acceptable by the committee.
The latest version of the project was rejected today [Thursday], with members deciding that giving the scheme the go-ahead would render the neighbourhood unsustainable.
Members moved to refuse the application – which will have to return to committee at a later date – because it would result in an “imbalance of student numbers in a traditional residential area”.
Director of planning Julie Roscoe warned the committee that there is no planning policy lever available to reject a proposal on those grounds.
An exasperated Dave Roscoe, Manchester City Council’s deputy director of planning, pointed out the city’s “clear need” for purpose-built student accommodation.
“[We need] 10,000 by 2030. Students have to mix. They are part of sustainable communities unless we want to consign them to islands and ghettos.”
Cllr Joan Davies said Curlew’s scheme – designed by SimpsonHaugh – and the subsequent influx of students, would result in “a lot of Ubers, a lot of Deliveroos, a lot of litter, and a lot of late-night noise”.
“Students are extremely important to the life of the city, but we need to preserve residential communities,” she said.
Cllr Basil Curley, the former chair of the planning committee, also sided with Hulme residents, who have been vocal about their opposition to the scheme. In all, nine councillors agreed with the motion to refuse the project.
Poor students are not welcome in Manchester, only wealthy ones who can afford city centre apartments
By Gilly
All that money and resources trying to appease NIMBYs wasted
By Anonymous
NIMBYism is normally pretty straightforward but I’m always so confused by some of Manchester’s residents desire to keep that lovely authentic derelict feel to their neighbourhood. Councillors need to complete a basic training package where they learn they are not legislators and do not make laws but have to abide by them. Eventually this bloody mindedness ends in a lost legal battle that costs the people who’s interest they claim to represent. Listen to your planning department!!!! This is a mistake that is being made with such frequency it may damage the cities reputation and deter architecturally interesting schemes. If you cant get a pedestrian scheme through how can you get through a creative one.
By H
Can’t wait for this to get built following a successful appeal / planning enquiry
By Bradford
They’ll appeal and the council will almost certainly lose. Pretty sure the University was there before those houses.
By Anonymous
This is next to the uni. We need more accommodation near the uni. Sustainable travel is needed to bolster the inner city and take pressure off the transport network. There are other tower blocks nearby so I really don’t get it. If I were the developer I would appeal this.
By Ridiculous
Some real vitriol in these comments towards Mancunians. For the moment, it’s one less tower block on a bit of land about the size of a five-a-side football pitch. The future of learning isn’t in buildings, it’s online. In fact, most lectures now are online. If the university wants to accomodate its students let it renovate or demolish its plentiful and soon to be redundant buildings on campus.
By Anonymous
This really isn’t nimbyism. The rents were gonna be upto £230 per week which most working-class students like myself can’t afford. The marketisation of education pushed unis into endlessly chasing profit and they’ve been taking in far more students than they can support. Hulme has already paid the price for this quite heavily. The plan was bad for local residents and students alike. We need social housing not luxury flats.
By Elliot
This is within 5 minutes walk of university, there is no better place for student accommodation than here. With the under supply of student accommodation and rents pushed to high levels due to students moving into the private rental market, this decision is very short sighted.
By Anonymous
NIMBY ridiculousness. Nothing worthwhile gets accomplished appeasing these “committees”.
By Tom
The council allowed Man met to build their new campus there, it was a student area before and now.
By Anonymous
The problem with YiMBYs is they have little critical taste when it comes to buildings or tolerance when it comes to other people’s opinions. The council have made the right decision here. Excellent.
By Anonymous
It should have been 31 storeys rather than 13. A shame it was been downsized further 🙁
By Giant Skyscraper Fan
The whole function of PBSA is to house students who may otherwise choose to live in other residential dwellings hence the name and the derelict site straddle both residential Hulme as well as the Universities and is a stone’s throw away from Oxford Road it isn’t really a tranquil suburb, its the ideal site for such developments and refusing it is counterintuitive as students may be forced to compete with young professionals for rented housing. Makes no sense whatsoever
By Anonymous
What an absurd decision. Its an area full of apartments, close to existing universities and amenities. A derelict brownfield site that is a blight on the area. No better place for student accommodation. The amended proposal is a nice design and would enhance the area. The Cllrs have shown themselves up to be completely incompetent here.
By Anonymous
Affordable accomodation should be offered to local people before students.
By Anonymous
Surprised there is not a single mention of Block the Block and the Gamecock Community Plan. I believe this rejection is not an endorsement of NIMBYism but rather the response to comments from locals who desire developments which actually benefit the communities they are located in, instead of conceding every hectare of land in Manchester to developers looking to cash in.
By Harry
We should be spreading these student developments across the city – why not build a few in Chorlton?
By Jo
We are moving the student ghetto from Fallowfield, to other places. Can we not allow Central Manchester to not flourish without all these tacky student towers?
By Elephant
Keep the student ghetto in Fallowfield, without students Fallowfield will not become Didsbury, it will become Gorton
By Gilly