PLANNING | Decisions delayed on Manchester pub projects
Manchester City Council’s planning committee have pushed back on the redevelopment of two former pubs, deferring a decision on a residential scheme at Hardy’s Well in Rusholme until a site visit, and being minded to refuse 12-storey student scheme on Cambridge Street described as “a giraffe among hamsters”.
DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT
Hardy’s Well, 257 Wilmslow Road
Number of storeys: Six
Number of apartments: 62
Ground floor retail space: 9,720 sq ft
Architect: PHA
Developer: Eamar Developments
A six-storey residential block, proposed on the site of Hardy’s Well in Rusholme, a building known for the Lemn Sissay poem which features on the outer wall and is set to be retained. While recommended for approval at yesterday’s committee, at the very start of the meeting the councillors asked for a decision on the scheme to be deferred until a site visit takes place, before the next planning committee in May.
MINDED TO REFUSE
84 Cambridge Street
Developer: Alumno Group
Architect: Carson & Partners
Number of storeys: 12
Number of student bedspaces: 97
Alumno purchased the former Church Inn pub on Cambridge Street from Urban Splash last year, and is proposing a student accommodation block for the site, receiving several objections over the height, possible increase in anti-social behaviour, and amenities servicing the site.
Speaking at the committee, one objector said that neighbouring windows would experience up to a 70% loss of light, many of them student rooms, which was “discriminating against a transient community” and threatening the students’ eye sight while studying. Local councillor Annette Wright said that “residents in the area are living in difficult circumstances already” which the project would add too, while Cllr Mary Watson described the building as “huge in the context in which it sits”. Watson quoted a local objector who said the block would be “a giraffe among hamsters” in terms of scale.
The councillors ruled that they would be minded to refuse the application, meaning the project will return to committee in May, with a report from the council’s planners detailing reasons for refusal. The committee will then vote on whether to refuse.
The problem residents in Hulme are locals, not students. It’s the students I feel sorry for.
By PDM
That 84 Cambridge St proposal is dreadful
By Tyler
We are being abused by greedy rich developers who don’t give a damn who lives here, what they are doing to our community, or what our future will be living underneath more and more tower blocks that we don’t need or want.Every concernned resident should stand up and be counted, and stand behind councillors who are objecting to these monstrosities destroying our lives and our future
By A concerned resident
Bit dramatic..
By Above
Tbf if I was a resident of Hulme I’d be concerned too, not about this though
By Linden
The Hulme proposal is abysmal. Could we see a rare bout of sense from Manchester City Council or is this just window dressing for the local elections?
By Acelius
What the hell is happening to Hulme. My family have lived here for many, many years. Children and grandchildren all growing up here. At the moment, it is worse living here than when all the deck access housing was up. Far to much student accommodation. Developers And the university don’t give a monkeys about the local community which used to be great. Feeling very sad.
By Horrified resident!
No, Hulme was never great, it was to be avoided at all costs in the 80s before slum clearanc moved a lot of them out, it’s next to Moss Side for pete’s sake.
By PDM
Hulme looks better than it ever has. In the 80s it was an embarrassment to the city. They used to use it as a stand in for East Berlin in 1945. That is how desolate it was.
By Elephant
@horrifies resident. Don’t be so utterly ridiculous. Of course the deck access flats weren’t better. Agree it would be nice to see more family housing or private rental flats but there’s already a lot of that. At least the students are occupying purpose built accommodation rather than Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs).
Where the planners are going wrong is not insisting on the new developments along Stratford Road and Cambridge Street having ground floor commercial units in doing so giving something to the street and amenities that everyone can use. Typically for MCC planners, they’ve forgotten about their own planning policy / guidance in their desperation to approve whatever arrives on their desks.
By Hippy watch