£14m bill for scrapped homes

Exclusive Paul R Taylor

December 12, 2007

| Submit Comments | Comments (28) | Previous | Next

A LANDMARK project to revitalise a deprived area of Manchester - which has already cost £14m of taxpayers' money - has been scrapped because of health and safety guidance.

Council chiefs have spent 10 years working on plans to breathe new life into Clayton by building more than 400 homes. Hundreds of people have already moved out of the area because their houses were to be bulldozed.

The plans were for 234 terraces on the Eccleshall Street estate to be replaced by a canal-side development of modern eco-homes with a Georgian-style park at the centre.

Greggs is already committed to relocating its bakery from the site to new premises in Openshaw at a cost of £16m to make space for the new houses.

But the plans are dead in the water as new Health and Safety Executive guidelines say homes should not be built next to chemical plants, although properties already there can stay.

The Eccleshall Street estate, off Ashton New Road, is next to the Air Products chemical factory - and there has been a chemical factory on that site for more than a century.

The new rules were introduced to protect communities in the wake of disasters such as the 2005 Buncefield fuel depot fire near Hemel Hempstead - the largest blaze in peacetime Europe that injured 43 people and damaged many homes.

Strategy

It is another blow to east Manchester, after plans for a super casino - expected to provide 3,000 jobs and generate £100m a year - were put on hold. Development bosses are reviewing their strategy for the area, but their final decision will depend on whether the casino ultimately gets the go-ahead.

They believe they may be able to recoup some of the £14m of taxpayers' money by attracting new firms to the site.

They will still knock down houses they own and if anyone left there wants to go, they will be helped to find new homes.

They will not be able to force anyone to leave, so will be left with a dilemma over streets where some properties are occupied and others are not.

Coun Jim Battle, deputy council leader and ward councillor, said: "This is a great disappointment. People were expecting a new development, but with the new rules from the Health and Safety Executive, that is not going to happen.

"I've spoken with council chief executive Sir Harold Bernstein and if there was a way to avoid those regulations affecting the plans for the regeneration, we would take it, but unfortunately there isn't.

"Therefore, our position is to give the residents advice, support and relocation packages and to ensure regeneration in other parts of east Manchester progresses more quickly."

All residents were notified personally and housing officers will talk to individuals about their options. An Eccleshall Street project office will provide day-to-day management of the area, security firms will patrol the estate to deal with anti-social and criminal behaviour and, where possible, vacant properties will be demolished.

Tom Russell, chief executive of New East Manchester, said the collapse of the scheme was `a difficult and disappointing decision, but it would be morally wrong of us . . . to not take on board the HSE's advice and progress the scheme'.

Deputy Eddie Smith said: "As a result of this setback, we must review our strategy for the future of the area.

"We will consider alternative options that will comply with the new guidance."

What do you think? Have your say.

You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.

460

275

oKOK36Lx8-g

false

Articles

Residents 'left in limbo'

| Submit Comments | Comments (28) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All

edwards (12/12/2007 at 11:18)

a complete shambles. I do really feel very sorry for the folk who are still living in the area. I pass it everyday and there are numerous boarded up houses. I think the honourable thing would be to relocate the remaining residents at no cost to them to as similar a property as possible along with some compensation for the whole fiasco. Or of course they could simply renovate the properties, again at no extra cost and sell them.

Nonstopgazbovered90times (12/12/2007 at 11:33)

Sorry to say this is now becoming the general picture in the UK today. These decent law abiding people deserve better than this. If these houses are gonna stay then the City Council should give these people what they deserve, put external insulation on these houses have them rendered and painted all different bright colours. It saves on heating bills and looks fantastic and I'd come and do it for the right price. The elderly gent in the clip is spot on, you don't see painted walls or that many nice gardens any more. Too many people are just happy to have a roof over their heads and live in a dump. If the council did their bit and spent council tax wisely it'd be a much place to live in. Get a grip. Non stop gaz Offerton, Stockport

ace, manchester (12/12/2007 at 12:05)

Once again the MCC are the ones "Dead in the water" Why on earth does a council who are supossed to look after the welbeing of its ratepayers keep giving these chemical companies certificates of safety? why dont the council refuse these companies licences for their sites ,stating that they dont meet the new regulations? that way the companies would move out of the area,giving people a healtheir lifestyle and a safer enviroment .Who would really want to buy a canalside georgian home looking onto a chemical site with all the dangers.?MCC are a bunch of donkeys....lets see if they print this.

ace, manchester (12/12/2007 at 12:10)

MCC and its stupid planning dept? Who in their right mind would want to buy a modern eco-homes facing this chemical company? To even think that people want to live next to these dangerous chemical companies in this modern age?Clayton has even got rid of its coal pit and other outdated ways of living and doing business.But to think for one moment that people in clayton want to live by the canal overlooking a large chemical company is beyond thinking?

thaitanium (12/12/2007 at 12:29)

"£14m bill for scrapped homes"

Sounds about right to me, another bright move on behalf of the council.
Only 2 types of money yours and someone elses money.
Yours your careful with and if it's anothers money who cares?
My guess is thet the amout of heads that will roll because of another fiasco on the council's part will be a grnd total on none.
Try doing this sort of cock up in private industry your feet wouldn't touch the floor on the way out of the door.
Still in the Peoples Republic of Manchester council who cares?
I have not been back to the U.K. for while (thank God) but do they still have on the side of the vans the sign saying "Protecting jobs providing services"?
If so they could save a few bob in paint just get rid of the "Providing services " bit.

Dave (12/12/2007 at 12:37)

Ace, with regards to your first message it is not the responsibility of MCC to licence these premesis, as this remit falls to the HSE under what is known as the Cotrol of Major Accident Hazrds (COMAH) Regs 1999. However you do make valid points on the other issues, surely it would be more cost effective to sell off the land to create an industrial estate with the funds raised used to offset the cost of new buldings/ relocation setlements for current/ previous tennants.

better off red (12/12/2007 at 13:04)

ignore the housing and plant some trees.
this a great opportunity to convert brownfield into greenfield.

do not let this opportunity slip away.

In the know (12/12/2007 at 13:11)

This area that runs alongside Ashton New Road is also set to become a stop for the tram. If it is unsafe for houses is it also unsafe for the tram or doesn't that matter.

The incompetence of these balloons has no boundaries.

ace, manchester (12/12/2007 at 14:02)

Dave.
Planning comes under MCC they can refuse.

selfexiled (12/12/2007 at 15:53)

When the HSE came on the scene in the early seventies ,a then boss of mine said "if they had been around when adam was a lad we would all still be living in caves"There is to much of this H&S run by people who would find a risk assessment was required for opening a
bottle of milk just to justify their existence.I have done some research on the accidents and fatilities in the construction industry in man hrs calculated on the job ,there is little improvement in the last 30 years and the fatalities are unfortunatly rising in comparison.

ace, manchester (12/12/2007 at 16:35)

Do not allow MCC to use this excuse to try and con you all into beleiving that the casino is the only way to solve this problem?It isnt.The best way to solve this problem is rid the area of chemical companies and find alternative employment.Why move the only local employer (Greggs the bakers) why not offer them land locally in the area so they dont have to move very far.and then offer other local companies help to invest in the area? Chemical companies dont have a place near people and communities.I think the people of clayton and surrounding areas have had enough of living with these chemicals over the last 100 years. They need clean safe areas well away from these dangers.

mr. cynical, manchester (12/12/2007 at 17:51)

Well whoopy doo,let's offer advice and support to the poor people screwed by the incompetence of our beloved council.Banners and party poppers at the ready.Oh,by the way,I wonder who's going to pay for this latest mess up as the powers that be have admitted they only "hope" to recoup part of the £14 million.

Peter de Boer (12/12/2007 at 20:18)

Living in the Eccleshall Street area myself i would like to comment about this article from a residents point of view.

First of all the decision to cancel the redevelopment of the area comes just 1 month before the first phase was planned to be built and meant for rehousing the current residents in the area. Even more delays after years of waiting is extremely frustrating and is pushing even more out of the area and creating an even worse scenario for those who are left.

Second and more importantly the council is using its own valuers to determine the market value of the properties. Regretfully the valuations of the council are considerably lower than what independent valuers are valuing the properties at, but since it's described as "voluntary acquisitions" the council is not required to buy the properties which puts the residents in a very poor negotiation position. In other words you or sell your house far lower than it’s worth or live in a continuously deteriorating area.

ace, manchester (13/12/2007 at 09:14)

Peter de Boer
But surely you knew this is how the council works to purchase cheap homes?They have done this for years ripped the home owners of manchester off for years.VOTE THEM OUT.but the best way is to stay put and fight them .MCC are a law onto themselves .

Robert Sheldon (13/12/2007 at 10:11)

What is to be done with the huge area of land that will exist when the Clayton Aniline site is cleared. Obviously the planned housing development cannot now go ahead as the site is closer to the Air Products factory than the doomed Eccleshall Street proposal. Has Manchester City Council got a brain? Has Air Products got a conscience?

Mr Angry, Bury (13/12/2007 at 10:21)

Totally agree Ace, Regeneration schemes always fill me with dread, they stink to high heaven of corruption.

Poulson et al revisited

A conercerned parent, Manchester (13/12/2007 at 10:22)

A comment from Lees or Bernstine...? No I thought not.

ace, manchester (13/12/2007 at 11:31)

All the talking in the world could not compensate these people who have lived in these streets?Its time something was done and now.These chemical plants needs demolishing to take away the blight that they have on these peoples property and lives they have lived with these factories for generations,And now is the time to rid communities of these factories that threaten our health and standards of living.Surely its time to live in a clean enviroment after all we have a new stadium and shopping complex and soon new homes and new companies opening giving people employment.WE NOW LIVE IN THE 21st Century .Clayton aniline has now gone surely its time these other chemical companies did the same.

The Bobelesque (13/12/2007 at 12:09)

Why don't they build, say, a Super Casino on the site?

Or perhaps a retail park?

Or a car park?

The Bobelesque (13/12/2007 at 12:19)

ace: poppycock! The vast majority of people living anywhere near there moved in AFTER the works was built.

If they demolish all the chemical works what we do for chemicals?

Ah, I know. Get India and China to make everything then tell them off for polluting the atmosphere whilst wepride ourselves on our much reduced carbon output.

ace, manchester (13/12/2007 at 14:13)

The Bobelesque
Most of our chemicals have been imported for the last ten years at least and why should we have such dangerous chemical companies in the centre of communities?why dont we move these works outside our citys.And yes quite a lot of these people moved into their homes after the works was built,But then weve just found out in the last twenty years that some of these chemicals are cancer causing and cause for concern with other health problems.Just like the workers at clayton aniline who have just won their court cases for damages that caused their cancers...

ken and sue, langworthy (13/12/2007 at 16:44)

its only tax payers money have you any comprension of how much waste of tax payers money is hemoraging from local councils you know these councils that are supposedly geting the best deal for its residents .councils are far too powerful lack expierience . are being dictated to buy property developers the chemical works as been there for over a century as it realy cost 14 million and ten years to relise it might be dangerous to build housing the incompitance beggers beleif

Douglas mcleod (13/12/2007 at 17:54)

I think you had to live there to make an informed comment. I can, because I did live there, and it was horrendous. My brother lived on Langness st, and believe me, in the eighties and late seventies, those few streets, Foxdale, braddon, John williams st, etc etc, stunk like rotten fish.The houses in question are victorian terraces, unlike Openshaw village (where i have also lived)which was built circa 1978/79. More often than not, these firms would pump toxins out at night whilst claytoners and openshaw folk slept. You would often see bright pink and orange smoke spewing from the great, and now deceased Analine chimney. And for your information, Analine used to manufacture dyes, notably chrysiodine, a bronze coloured dyestuff, famously used to dye anglers maggots, which, in turn gave them skin and bowel cancer, being a carcinogenic compound!!!

I suggest you speak to people who,live there. I recall the Analine AND Anchor chemical works both blowing up in the eighties. The Analine was such a potent disaster waiting to happen, it had its very own fire brigade on standby internally.

Dug mcleod

Douglas mcleod (13/12/2007 at 19:17)

It is a complete tragedy. I grew up in this area of Clayton, and will always have a soft spot for clayton. I spent many happy years as a lad fishing on the canal and (god forbid) swimming in it in the early eighties. The chemical factories (rhone pulenc, Analine, Anchor, Victor wolf, etc, etc) always loomed in the background, often spewing out bright orange and pink smoke as locals slept at night, and leaving the area stinking of ammonia, fish, and often leaving starnge blue specks on window sills and cars. I am dead agains having Clayton knocked down, those terraced houses are sound structures, I live in one, and they should be renovated and preserved!!! Clayton has a rich industrial heritage, and terraced houses are beautiful buildings! I often still do venture down bebbington st, and am sadened to see most of the houses boarded up. Why?? Would it not be cheaper to spruce them up,and relocate the industry that is a blight on the landscape??

I was born on Stoke st, and want to be able to show my two year old where I lived, played, and schooled. Clayton needs major surgery, and it should start with the chemical factions being removed, and the residents getting priority!!

Dug mcleod,
Clayton stock, and proud of it!!

ace, manchester (14/12/2007 at 14:51)

I remember when clayton/openshaw/beswick/bradford was swarming with engineering/chemical/Works and the air used to smell terrible and people near the stuart street power station had black faces because of the soot from all the chimneys in the area .Its now time to get rid of all these terrible factories forever.Close them down and replace them with cleaner jobs in the communities,we dont need chemical works near people anymore.MCC should refuse planning permission and help close these places down by helping resfusing safety certs on the premises where communities are.

()

Report

News