Salford fails to make a decision on 3,300-home ‘city in the sky’
“One party is going to be happy and one party is going to be unhappy,” that was the message from the planning committee chair ahead of the tense deliberation of divisive plans to redevelop Regent Retail Park, which include a 70-storey tower. In the end, nobody left satisfied.
After more than two and a half hours of deliberation, Salford City Council’s planning committee voted to defer Henley Investment Management’s plans for 10 buildings – including seven towers – at the retail park today, a development that has divided opinion from the outset.
By the time the committee took their seats, 460 objections to the scheme had been lodged with the local authority, which had recommended the 3,300-home project for approval.
Read the full Salford City Council report
However, impassioned pleas on the day from Ordsall councillor Brendan Keville and Salford MP Rebecca Long-Bailey were enough to sway the committee – which determined a decision on the project should be delayed so that concerns about a range of issues from affordable housing to impact on highways could be addressed.
Objectors speaking at the meeting raised concerns about the impact such a large scheme would have on local infrastructure including roads, schools, and health facilities.
Long-Bailey, an outspoken critic of the £1bn scheme, urged councillors to stand up for Ordsall residents and reject the application, which she described as a “new town in the sky” and “not out of place with downtown Manhattan”.
Objectors also raised concerns about the level of affordable housing proposed within the development.
No on-site provision is currently proposed but could come forward if Salford City Council allows Henley to regear the headlease or if a registered provider applies for funding though Homes England to deliver discounted properties as part of the scheme.
Long-Bailey said the application should not be approved on this basis.
The final bone of contention was around the retail provision that would be lost; Cllr Keville said the proposals “put a wrecking ball through a viable local centre”.
Credit: Mode Visuals
Regent Retail Park is home to a Poundland and Home Bargains as well as several charity shops and the loss of these “cheap shops” would impact low-income families in Ordsall, another objector said.
However, Henley said it is committed to re-providing 90,000 sq ft of the existing 118,000 sq ft of retail space and has offered first refusal to existing tenants “at market rates” on the modern units.
Hattie Charlier-Poole, development manager at Henley, said creation of the scheme was the result of five years of collaboration between the developer, its design team, and the city council and that the plans had been “directly shaped” by resident feedback.
Regent Park, as the scheme is known, is designed by Matt Brook Architects with landscape support from LDA Design, Buro Four as PM, and planning expertise provided by Savills.
Other firms working on the scheme include: Trium, AKT II, HDR, OFR, Twin & Earth, Vectos, Lexington Communications, Turley, Trooper’s Hill, Gardiner & Theobald, Hann Tucker, Project Four Safety, Sweco, GIA Surveyors, JLL, Disrkt, Tim Cole, Temple, Roger Hannah, and Mode Visuals.
To learn more about the project, search for reference number PA/2024/0962 on Salford City Council’s planning portal.
Long-Bailey doesn’t want 1 billion pounds of investment in Salford? Where do they find these people? This is in effect Central Manchester. Parochial MPS holding back progress,and stopping job creation. What does she want there? Coronation Street?
By Elephant
because there aren’t any other Poundlands in town, what a load of ****
By Anonymous
NIMBYism at its finest. Place is a dump.
By John McFadian
Absolutely pathetic from the Council to defer decision, as for Long Bailey describing it as a “new town in the sky” and “not out of place with downtown Manhattan”, these are compliments and even more justification to get it approved and GET IT BUILT.
By Mr. Plenty
Long-Bailey described the scheme as a “new town in the sky” and “not out of place with downtown Manhattan” – a Labour MP who’s own government wants to create new towns to help with the housing crisis? a bin wouldn’t look out of place in Manhattan, does that mean there shouldn’t be any bins in Ordsall now?
Why didn’t she get involved with the developer and council and help shape it into a better scheme instead of making irrational comments.
By GetItBuilt!
Putting it bluntly, while these could be much better design wise. The Ordsall area next to it with the old low density estates are incredibly run down & block Media City from connecting smoothly to the centre.
They should approve the skyscrapers as a catalyst to rip up Ordsall entirely (excluding the buildings with history) then create a huge park, amenity area & taller high density homes between Salford & MCC.
People are complaining about affordable housing, but the UK market is going up regardless, much better to have new regenerated areas with a focus on public transport than old estates that cost £10,000 years ago spiralling to £100,000s arbitrarily, adding traffic with cars when they can literally walk to the centre.
By Anonymous
MPs overreaching their power to influence planning decisions. How does the government propose to meet it’s housing targets when it’s own MPs are shouting down proposals.
By Anonymous
Concerns around infrastructure, schools, and health facilities are all quite sensible. But it’s infuriating and baffling that someone could argue this injection of investment and new homes is somehow less desirable than a run down retail park featuring Home Bargains and charity shops!
By Andee
The 1.5m homes are never going to get built are they. NIMBYism strikes again…
By Anonymous
These councillors are disgraceful. How can nimbyism continue to prevail this way, there is a shorting of housing and this is a huge improvement on the retail park currently there. Do these councillors forget they are living in a CITY? This isn’t green belt peak district.
By Dan
Build them, sick to the back teeth of NIMBYISM
By Skyscraper Enjoyer
…which she described as a “new town in the sky” and “not out of place with downtown Manhattan”…
and these are reasons for objection??
By Anonymous
No great loss because let’s be honest this one doesn’t really add up. People say this area is a “dump” and this should be approved, and you are sort of right – yet you some how expect there to be demand for this sort of density of housing? The strategy is to get some sort of approval and flip the site clearly hoping that a certain Manchester-based contractor that specialises in building towers comes along and takes it on. There you go.
By Anonymous
I’m sure the objectors to the plans for them not to go through do not live in the area. I live a stones throw from the crossroads of the retail park. Traditionally I’m not a labour supporter, but in this case I agree with RLB, BK and our Liberal councillors, that it should not be approved. I am not against the redevelopment per se, just not in it’s current form. If the tower was shorter, say to the same height as nearby towers and more provision for local services, that would be bett6.
By Anonymous
Rebecca Long-Bailey and anyone else opposing this development should hang their heads in shame. They are gaslighting the local community, whether deliberately or through sheer ignorance.
The existing retail park is a terrible use of city centre land. Vast surface car parks contribute directly to the persistent congestion on Regent Road and offer no ecological, social or aesthetic value. The proposed scheme would deliver 3,300 homes in a location perfectly suited to high density, with walkable access to the city centre and close proximity to existing tall buildings.
Like most other city centre residents, the occupants are unlikely to depend on private cars. This would ease traffic rather than worsen it and also strengthen the case for investment in better public transport.
This is a chance to build 3,300 homes. If not here, where? On the green belt? On the edge of a rural village? These new homes could give the children of today’s residents a genuine opportunity to remain in the area, rather than being priced out to far-flung suburbs.
An influx of new residents would also revitalise local services and attract independent businesses. That’s surely preferable to the handful of generic national chains that currently dominate the site.
By Anonymous
Thank God who needs more seventy stories rabbit hutches in the sky.
By Salford resident
Wait, so a £1bn development has been deferred because of a Home Bargains, Pound Land and some charity shops? Some people deserve to have a rotten retail park on their doorsteps.
Lets hope sense prevails and these plans are unanimously approved and Rebecca Long-Bailey can crawl back under whatever rock she has re-emerged from.
By Mr Mcr
It’s no surprise that this got deferred. I suspect some design tweaks will be made and will then be approved. The bigger question is will it actually get built? I have my doubts.
By Anonymous
‘A billion pounds’, eh? Where is that coming from? Henley hasn’t got enough cash to shine their shoes. You think some bank is going to lend it to them? With what track record?
By Mike Scantlebury author
“Not out of place with downtown Manhattan.” As if Manhattan is some kind of hell hole and not one the most desirable places to live in the world.
By Anonymous
Up they must go!
By Tom
This is ridiculous. I live next to Regent Retail Park and fully support the scheme. The Retail Park is slowly dying and the Sainsbury’s part will remain. Basically, a billion plus investment to save a Boots, Poundland and Home Bargains. This type of decision, friction and delay is why our country is falling apart. The politicians involved should be ashamed of stifling investment to gainer a few extra votes. Shameless.
By Anonymous
Smells like an MP representing their ward (aka sh*te scared that next time round will be voted out). Regent road and surrounding roads are gridlocked and the inner relief is a joke. public transport is non-existent and they vote down a walkable project? Let’s keep Salford as the poor relation to Manchester (literally).
By Mark B
The old housing shortage argument rears its head these will be sold to foreign investors and we will still need 1.5 million houses in 10 years wake up people were being played
By Anonymous
Good. They’ve been told no. People who use NIMBY as an insult can get in the bin.
By Anonymous
I really do wonder how many of you making these comments actually live in this area or even have any connections with what the local community needs. I have lived in ordsall all my life and believe me I am sick of the high rise so called affordable apartments which have been built where ever a single space of land has been available. For one there are not enough parking spaces has it stands now and has for local infrastructure how do you think our small health centre and schools will be able to cope with all this. I also like the fact you total disregard what other people might need have ever thought to yourself not everyone might want to sit on there backside ordering takeaway to their apartments. It’s not just regent retail park were talking about here your ripping the heart not just out of ordsall but salford altogether. Although I do understand to some people mainly from the south these properties would seem reasonable priced. I for one who have worked all my life would never be able to afford to rent never mind buy any kind of this sort of development. All your doing is pushing local people out the area the writings on the wall for the future of our area and I for one am not going to sit back and let this happen
By Mobile1
Outline planning application with all matters reserved except for access. So no height or siting or quantum parameters being approved with the application.
By Anonymous
Who are all these people commenting getting angry about this being deferred? Are they going to live there? Have they bought an off-plan flat? Almost certainly not.
This is just another set of tower blocks, there’s nothing special here. The applicant likely won’t even build it and merely want to sell the site on after getting planning permission is is often the way.
Really not worth getting excited about so on that score it’s very worthwhile holding the applicant’s feet to the fire to ensure it’s the highest quality possible and delivers the very maximum in terms of shops and amenities that might be of use to the wider community.
By Anonymous
A Poundland, Home Bargains and several charity shops have been described as a viable local centre. Hmm, so a thriving community with thousands of residents in thousands of new homes, new public realm (vastly improved public realm) new retail and and a once in a generation transformative development of an international scale is being held back by a viable pound store, Home bargains and a few charity shops? I’m sorry but that’s the sort of spin that’s going to throw away a huge opportunity to create so nothing special, very silly…
By Cristoforo
The MP is sticking up for constituents. The councillors have concerns that not one affordable unit is proposed in this scheme. This is what MPs and councillors are meant to do and they are right to defer until there’s clarity around affordable housing.
The snobbery in some of the comments towards Ordsall and people who shop in cheaper shops at Regents Park is disgusting.
By Anonymous
Typical politician – championing the minority at the expense of the majority
By Anonymous
Every ‘opposition’ they bring up for this is some 70 year old retiree who’s scared of change and finds tall buildings scary. This is ridiculous, people who already have houses shouldnt get a say in how new ones get built, where’s the opinions of the people who might be interested in living there once it’s built? who’ll get block from them by the local neighbourhood watch?
By Anonymous
Disgraceful, Long Bailey needs to be voted out.
By Anonymous
Ordsall has to many apartments from Ordsall lane to Liverpool street even on the Quays it self and they are Not affordable for the locals.
I think good job on Brandon and Rebecca if people don’t like my so called Dirty old town well there is the M602 as your Exit
By Born and Bread
Its not about pound land or home bargings or the three charity shop its the Vets it tkmas its boots for the locals. Its also the number of people who live in Ordsall that see each other and have a chat and catch up t costa it a real community that will get lost.
And I find it so Wrong that others who want it are the ones that’s complaining. There were already housing and flats on that site before they made it into regant retail park and all on both sides of Regent Road was load of smaller local shop which got turn down so why more its just greed not jobs more jobs will go then would ge made.
By Kara
This is where the case for gentle density – townhouses for families, mansion blocks and similar should apply. Shops mixed in on the bottom floors including Home Bargains. Different ages and incomes.
Something needs to be done but sprawl nor skyscrapers are not the answer.
And let’s stop chucking the word ‘parochial’ about – its a sneering term in my view.
By Anonymous
A balance could be struck. More homes will help reduce the housing crisis. Density here will be good and will help make more bus routes into the centre viable. The current use of land as car parking and big boxes is inefficient. At the same time, for Manchester and Salford to mature, we can’t just build flats with small commercial units. We need interesting hubs of activity for people to want to spend time in, with uses which people use. In other cities, new apartment blocks don’t just have fancy restaurants or florists below them like Deansgate Square. They have launderettes, barbers, gyms, furniture shops etc. We need more of this outward-facing activity which local residents can use. We need proper streets at ground level. Deansgate Square is so hostile and jolty at ground level. Greengate looks a bit better. Ancoats at street level works well. Hopefully the developer can try to attract commercial uses which don’t just cater to the Millennial and Gen Z professional class. Where else would people from Ordsall go for local amenities apart from Sainsburys? In a growing city, we can’t all pile into Market Street on a Saturday.
By Best of both worlds
I assume it’s the usual skyscraper geeks who are getting up in arms about this?
There’s nothing special about this application. It’s just a load of new flats. If this one isn’t approved then another slightly different one will. I tend to be more sympathetic to the residents here who are basically pushing for the site to provide as much amenity as possible .
By Not a skyscraper geek
Now you know how we feel down the road
By Anonymous
Wow, incredible the amount of childish rhetoric this has generated. From ‘aargh NIMBYs to the classic..it must be them..ooh those 70 yr old retirees…’ you can almost hear the keyboards being chewed 😂. Salford hardly has a history of blocking progress. Other people have views too, leave the decision making to the grown ups.Your keyboard will thank you for it !
By Henny Penny
I’m baffled that people consider this a ‘town centre’ and a place for locals to visit, socialise, and rest. 50% of the site is a car park, and the other 50% are poor-quality retail units. If this is the “heart” of Salford, then this shows the current dire state of Salford.
By Anonymous
… and get it built!
By Solve the problems...
A bolder plan would have done a deal with Sainos to flatten it, put the parking underground, build a new store, and put a tower on top. The supermarket is a dump and a grim experience
By And Sainos
Just across the road from the retail park where sacred heart school stood and David Brown Jacksons foundry stood now stands approximately 10 new apartment blocks maybe more, Oldfield Rd and Regent Rd junction new apartment blocks are being built all the way down Ordsal lane possibly 100 apartment blocks have been built with more still going on so how much more has to be built, these whingers griping on about R,L,Bailey should demand that investment goes on the retail park and make it more attractive.
By Salford lad
I like Regent Retail Park as i like wide empty spaces. This is to Salford what Central Retail Park is to Manchester. Wrong place for a retail park. Anything would be an improvement
By MJC
I live locally and was one of the many who objected to the development after initially approving of the idea. However I do believe it will do some good for the area in terms of regeneration, however I do feel more provisions need to be provided or funded to deal with the large influx of residents in the community.
By Anonymous
With no affordable homes provision and seemingly nothing towards infrastructure improvements that will be required for 3300 new homes , the council should reject this project entirely. Future costs to provide these obviously necessary amenities will cost the council millions and disrupt traffic flow for years.
By Bernard fender
Born and Bread, what language is your post in?
By Anonymous
While unwelcome by local residents, councillors aren’t really committed to regeneration of Ordsall district centre. There are parts of Ordsall that are waiting for new social homes but the council sits on their hands. Double standards
By Christopher
I live on Oldfield Rd/Ordsall lane – Ordsall residents have had enough. We have been swept aside the estate is a free car park for the
‘Flat people’. Traffic is horrific. How about the council explain to everyone who the new houses on Robert Hall Street have not been built and the land is abandoned.
By Mel Mellor
I completely agree with the objections. This isn’t going to fix the housing shortage, it’s going to add even more over-priced flats with greedy landlords, raising the rent prices within Salford and pushing local people out. Is there not enough high rise blocks getting built in that area already ?? To take away local peoples amenities and to replace them with expensive coffee shops and barbers (if they’re even filled) is unfair. You all might think it’s a dump but this is peoples lives and where they get their shopping, go to the gym, meet their friends for a coffee. These are budget stores which are accessible to lower income families. Yes it adds to the traffic down Regent Road but there is a lack of sustainable transport routes within that area. Get rid of the parking and make it more attractive or really commit to the regeneration of the amenities. But from previous experience with other developments in Salford this will not be the case.
By Anonymous
There are plenty of new developments in the area and other unused pieces of land that could be used for this type of development.
The shopping centre should be retained and redeveloped as there are less and less places to shop in this area. Some of it could be used for new apartments but the centre should predominantly focused on retail and services to the local community.
By James
No-one in the area wants it. Why? Because it does nothing for the people of the area and is directly taking local amenities away from them. Its gentrification at it’s worst. None of the moaners on here have any idea what they are taking about. Wanna throw a billion to the residents of salford? Go right ahead. That’s not what’s happening here. This is the rich feeding the richer and trampling over the residents to do it.
By Anonymous
@Anonymous August 26, 2025 @ 9:06 pm, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Most people who are progressive and can see the potential of not just this site but this area of Salford in particular want the scheme. The only people who don’t are the crying NIMBYs like yourself who won’t have your precious Poundland or H&B. Saying that I bet you don’t even live within walking distance of the area.
By Verticality
@August 27, 2025 at 10:41 am
By Verticality
Most people who are progressive eh? IMO I think you revealed something here. Can’t say it’s a good look though. But that’s just my opinion.
By Anonymous
Elephant nailed it in the first comment – get it built !
By Grimly Fiendish
TBF this is almost city centre by now..build these and in 10 years it definitely will be.
By Anonymous
I don’t understand how there will be any significant impact on people in the Ordsall estate? The development would be located on the other side of Regent Road, at least 150m to the north of the nearest dwellings on the estate, with Sainsbury’s car park in between! Due to orientation and distance, there would be no overshadowing of these properties. Clearly, Councillors haven’t comprehended those basic details!
By Anonymous
If this was to go ahead, who exactly would occupy these 3,000 plus apartments? I don’t think they would be the local people, many of whom are caught in a benefit trap. There is already a multitude of tower blocks within the area. The Crescent/Oldfield Rd junction has several blocks so close together, they obliterate the skyline and diminish the daylight available to residents. Continuing down Oldfield Road many more tower blocks have been raised, more unaffordable apartments (not flats btw) for locals. The current plan for the deliberate destruction of a shopping centre to build more tower blocks is untenable. Regenerate the area by all means, provide decent shopping/leisure amenities and build more affordable housing that isn’t high in the sky. It’s not China, Manhattan or even Manchester. Keep the area livable!
By Anonymous
Ooh , we want local shops for local people’ ..Royston vasey? Sorry people you’re on the border of an expanding city centre.The idea that the place is for ‘local people’ died years ago and good riddance to it Ordsall was always a dump and now it’s much less so thanks to all of the development that’s gone on and the influx of so many non -local people who strangely enough are now the local people. Many of these people have moved into the many apartments that have been built and will continue to be built here because it’s an easy walk/cycle into the city where they work (when they’re not working from home) .I know because that’s what I do. RLB and her ilk don’t like the changes because the new comers are not her base voters. This will go ahead though..maybe a few changes here and there but it will happen.
By Anonymous