Rochdale rejects Lower Falinge demolition
Flipping its position on the project, the council has opted to refuse Rochdale Boroughwide Housing’s application to knock down six unsafe apartment blocks.
The Quinton, Vaynor, Ullesthorp, Ollierton, Newstead, and Romsey buildings were built in the 1970s. RBH has maintained that they are not suitable to be occupied and are at the end of their life.
Rochdale Council had initially greenlit the razing of the 126 flats before it was forced to reconsider after a successful judicial review instigated by two nearby residents. The winning argument was that the council had not provided adequate reasoning to justify the omission of an Environmental Impact Assessment in the demolition application.
EIA are required for projects of more than 150 homes.
The residents’ lawyer, Cornerstone Barristers, had argued that the demolition application could not be viewed in isolation but rather in the context of the wider regeneration plan that calls for more than 400 homes to be destroyed and later replaced with more energy-efficient new builds.
Rochdale Council has subsequently agreed, listing the absence of a EIA screening opinion as the sole reason for rejecting the application.
Hannah Fleming, director of regeneration and development at RBH, said the housing association was disappointed in the council’s decision.
“We have fully complied with all information requests from the council’s planning department throughout this process, and will be meeting with the council as soon as possible to discuss next steps,” she said.
“We have been jointly working with Rochdale Council on the regeneration of Lower Falinge for several years, and our ambition remains – to continue to work together to build much-needed new warm, safe, family homes in Lower Falinge.”
To review the application for prior approval for the demolition, search reference 25/00292/DEM on Rochdale Council’s planning portal.
Words escape me… and we wonder why we have a housing shortage!!!
By Anonymous
Madness.
By Anonymous
Two people complained ? How many people are for it the council are beyond crazy knocking down old buildings in poor state and putting up new is common sense
By Anonymous
Wow. They are an eyesore and a liability. Replacing them with modern family homes is a no brainer. The councillors should be called to account
By Anonymous
The empty and abandoned blocks are in such a state of dereliction due to the managed decline (or wilful neglect) of them by Rochdale Boroughwide Housing since taking over ownership of them. The adjacent and retained blocks which are occupied and which RBH have invested money in improving over the last 12 months (Pershore, Stavordale and Thetford) were constructed at exactly the same time and all completed by 1971. So how can RBH claim that these now empty blocks are at the end of their life. There are currently 22,000 on the rehousing waiting list in Rochdale, but yet RBH want to demolish 228 homes here? It is this which makes absolutely no sense. In addition, the surrounding green spaces would be destroyed during demolition, impacting the environment. To those comments here regarding these blocks being an eyesore, then go and ask RBH why they were neglected and left in such a state of disrepair. What has failed to be mentioned is that there’s an alternative community plan involving the Greater Manchester Tenants Union and a team of architects that has spent the past two years working with residents to develop a valid and affordable way to retrofit these abandoned blocks. Whereas RBH haven’t even got a plan on what would be built on the land if demolition took place. So let’s question Common Sense.
By Resident
Most people living in the “retained” blocks are against demolition of their emtpy sister blocks as all were built at the same time. RBH chose some blocks to remain (like the one I live in) and some to demolish with no sound reasoning – one block they want to destroy actually had new windows put in at the same as my block! Residents want them retrofitting, not demolishing, and there is a costed Community Plan by an established architectural company who have experience of saving similar social housing across the country – maybe now RBH will listen to us. The council is sick of the poor running of housing stock in Rochdale by RBH.
By Anonymous
Residents cutting off their noses to spite their faces. This just delays the inevitable demolition of these poor quality homes. the council should be strong and help ensure Rochdale and the environment get the more modern and better quality homes that it needs in this part of town.
By Tom Cruckle
This application received 67 objections (not just 2).
The blocks are not “unsafe”; they could be retrofitted and refurbished and brought back into use. This would cost a lot less money and carbon than a demolish and rebuild approach.
RBH keep saying the blocks are at the end of their life while simultaneously retaining other blocks that are the same age, the same design, and in the same state (because RBH have done no internal or external work on the buildings as part of refurbishment).
RBH’s previous development on the estate, where 5 blocks of homes were demolished, removed 100 homes from the estate. These were replaced with only 55 homes. New build homes are not being replaced in equal number, RBH are replacing only round 50% of the homes they demolish, reducing the overall number of homes available in the area. This is contributing to the housing shortage in Rochdale.
RBH is the landlord that necessitated Awaab’s Law. Can they really be trusted to create new safe housing in Rochdale?
By Anonymous
To be clear, the two objections referenced in the story refers to the fact that the judicial review was instigated by two individuals – it was not meant to refer to the number of objections on the planning application itself.
By Julia Hatmaker
I remember the flats being built and my grandmother lived in one. It was fine and she was very happy. Perhaps it is some of today’s tennants/attitudes that are the root cause of today’s problems. If so replacing them with new housing may not solve the underlying issue.
By Anonymous
This work must be completed as soon as possible. Any further delays are unacceptable and will not be tolerated. It’s time to act quickly and efficiently to move this project forward without wasting any more time. Immediate action is expected to ensure everything stays on track and meets the required standards.
By Shavaiza