Peel calls for review into Secretary of State’s Broadoak ruling

Jessica Middleton-Pugh

Peel Investments has said that Secretary of State James Brokenshire’s decision to dismiss appeals against the refusal of two residential schemes in Salford was “unlawful and should be quashed”.

Last month Brokenshire came down on the side of Salford City Council on a long-running dispute over whether Peel should be allowed to build homes on a greenfield site in Broadoak, Worsley.

The first appeal covered an application for 600 dwellings and marina facilities at Broadoak, refused in 2013, and a second application for 165 homes in the same area, refused in 2017. The plot is a mixture of woods and open meadows which stretches from Monton Green to Worsley Road. In defending against the proposals, the council has described it as a “vital green lung,” that would be fragmented by development.

Since 2013, Peel and Salford City Council have gone through a cycle of refusal, appeal and inquiry over the council’s decision to block the developer’s proposals.

Having made it to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities & Local Government, Brokenshire ruled last month that both of Peel’s appeals should be dismissed. Peel had six weeks to appeal his decision.

In a statement issued today, Peel said: “Peel Investments (North) Limited will bring a claim for a statutory review of the decision by the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities & Local Government to dismiss two appeals for new homes at Broadoak in Salford, Greater Manchester.

“The central question will be whether the Secretary of State correctly interpreted national policy, particularly in respect of housing and the presumption in favour of sustainable development. It is Peel’s contention that the Secretary of State’s errors render the decision unlawful and should be quashed.”

One of the points being argued by Peel is that while Salford can demonstrate a five-year supply, the supply identified would not deliver a wide choice of homes. The supply is dominated by apartments in two wards, Ordsall and Irwell Riverside, Peel has said, but while the Secretary of State agreed that the council is not presently meeting the needs of the housing market as a whole, that was not enough to sway his verdict.

Peel continued: “In our view, the decision brushed aside the genuine needs of families and people on affordable housing waiting lists. These are needs that are not going to be met in any other way. It cannot be right that Salford’s housing supply is only about numbers and that it doesn’t matter what gets built where or for whom.”

“In those circumstances, where there is no alternative to meeting the real needs of people, national policy and housing needs must prevail over local policies that seek to restrict development. We think the Government has failed to correctly apply its own National Planning Policy Framework in this case.”

Peel is advised by Shoosmiths.

Your Comments

Read our comments policy here

Peel has made little or no consideration to a housing need other than greed on their part. Living in the area and facing the constant traffic problems, there should be no further building development in the area as Worsley is the traffic bottleneck for the entire area of outlying building developments currently underway. Air quality is already extremely poor with noise pollution not far behind. No major infrastructure changes have taken place for almost 45 years,

By Chris Birbeck

If Peel and TfGM worked together to fund a new Guided Busway or Metrolink extension on the old Roe Green loopline, with a station at Broad Oak near this site, then I would fully support these proposals. However, the area has little to no public transport options at the moment. A development like this would only severely clog up the roads.

By Anonymous

The traffic is so bad around there, it was a significant factor in choosing to move out the area. It became pretty unbearable. Dread to think what it will be like with the new scheme being built, never mind if these are added into the mix.

By Logenberry

Surprise .. Surprise ..
I knew this would rear its head again .. Peel will not let this go..
They will keep coming for this development until it finally happens… Sadly

By Gary M

These homes will not be affordable either. Who do Peel think they’re trying to kid?

We also know for certain that no marina facilities will ever be built – it’s a classic Peel tactic. They’re about as likely to be built as the wharves and rail terminals at Peel’s so-called “Port” Salford scheme.

By Not buying it

It’s so reassuring that Peel has the “genuine needs of families and people on affordable housing waiting lists” as its’ priority on this proposed scheme. Heartwarming stuff.

By Artie Fufkin

There is absolutely no chance any of these houses will be affordable. Just look st the boatyard

By D Hynes

Peel care not for the area or housing needs, the properties will not be affordable but carry a hefty worsley price tag. No one on either side of the green space in in favour and traffic is already too much with it being some of the worst congestion in the city and greater Manchester.

By Kaz

Absolute Joke, as if Peel care about affordable housing! Why not pick a brown site for your next development and build homes that will sell for £100k instead of £500k+

By Neil

There isnt any infrastructure. Certainly struggling as things are going. Roads are a joke.traffic is a joke. Hospitals .Policing etc. PEEL why don’t you show to the people of Manchester that you care. Build a hospital do something that don’t fill your pockets.

By Bill Terry

Get off the Isle of Mann and show some concern for the area’s you cynically exploit! That family will go down in history as the antithesis of the enlightened philanthropist.

By Roscoe

No schools, no doctors and no room on the local roads for the residents of another 600 houses. Peel are having a laugh if they think “affordable homes” cost £600k, as that is what these houses would sell for. Problem then would be the kids would have to travel miles to the nearest school / doctor. Traffic on Worsley Road currently takes 25 minutes to travel one mile at rush hour – that’s an average speed of 2.4 miles per hour!!

By Steve Birchall