The decision to give approval to the scheme is going to be made tomorrow at the City Council’s Planning Committee meeting.
The Castlefield Forum and Castlefield Estates that own Dukes 92, urge the Council to reconsider the scheme that, if it goes ahead, will disrupt what is considered to be one of the most important heritage areas in Manchester.
They estimate that Renaker could be set to make £30m on the scheme. They therefore argue that they could create a lower rise scheme and still turn a profit of £10m and not have a negative impact on the conservation area.
Sarah Ramsbottom, Managing Director of Castlefield Estates said: “We are not surprised to see a developer applying for a scheme of this scale when the potential profits are so great. But this is a Conservation Area and that means they have to prove the scheme enhances the area. Noone can say hand on heart this “enhances” Castlefield. The site can be developed appropriately and make a profit. Castlefield is the jewel in Manchester’s heritage crown and we urge the Planning Committee to protect the heritage of the city so irreparable mistakes aren’t made that they might live to regret.”
Carol Middleton, Chair of Castlefield Forum said: “We have tremendous support from local residents with 137 Forum supporters signing our objection letter and more than 500 people signing our petition. If this scheme goes ahead it will disfigure what is arguably Manchester’s most important heritage asset. The character of Castlefield will change forever. We believe these two towers will be a permanent blot on the City’s landscape and this is not a legacy we want to leave for future generations.”
"If this scheme goes ahead it will disfigure what is arguably Manchesters most important heritage asset"
Carol Middleton from the Castlefield Forum
DISCLAIMER: The statements, opinions, views and advice expressed in this article are those of the author/organisation and not of ENTIRELY. This article should represent information correct at the time of publication however whilst every care has been taken to present up-to-date and accurate information, we cannot guarantee that inaccuracies will not occur. ENTIRELY will not be held responsible for any claim, loss, damage or inconvenience caused as a result of any information within this article or any information accessed through this site. The content of any organisations websites which you link to from ENTIRELY are entirely out of the control of ENTIRELY, and you proceed at your own risk. These links are provided purely for your convenience and do not imply any endorsement of or association with any products, services, content, information or materials offered by or accessible to you at the organisations site.