Manchester WILL get tallest tower after council approve it second time
Developer Salboy sought the green light for its 246m-tall 'Nobu Manchester' tower last month, with the skyscraper taking its name from the luxury hotel it will house along with 452 apartments.
It was set to become Manchester's tallest tower when it secured planning permission on April 10, overtaking Renaker's Plot D tower, which will be 213m tall when construction finishes.
READ MORE: Girl, 13, 'topples into reservoir in front of her dad while taking photo'
READ MORE: Boy, 13, beaten up by 'five men' with 'bats and weapons' on busy Manchester road
But 'changes to access' to the buildings made during the planning process meant a 'perhaps overcautious' Manchester council decided to 'reconsult' neighbours, according to Dave Roscoe, a senior figure in the council's planning department.
That meant the application was re-assessed in full on Thursday (May 29). After opening for consultation again, the Music Venue Trust said 'further acoustic testing should be undertaken' on nearby music venue Rebellion, which feared complaints from new residents.
'It is a long-established Mancunian cultural space, being a home for live music since 2013 and hosting in excess of 220 events annually,' a council report prepared before the meeting said of the Trust's objection.
Mr Roscoe said at Thursday's town hall meeting both Rebellion and convention centre Manchester Central — which initially opposed the development — would undergo more acoustic testing to assess the effects of noise from the venues would have on Nobu Manchester.
Councillors again voted to approve the development.
Simon Ismail, Salboy boss, said: 'As the location of not just the tallest tower outside London but a large number of high quality affordable homes, Viadux has the potential to become a symbol of this city's aspirations and confidence in itself. Viadux now promises to shape not only Manchester's skyline for years to come, but the city's sense of identity on the global stage.'
A similar situation unfolded with another apartment block nearby, set to be built on Whitworth Street West.
The £118M, 44-storey tower is also near Rebellion, and the Music Venue Trust said its 'operators must be actively included, and venue operations appropriately surveyed' the same report added.
'Without consideration of the venue this proposal would have an adverse impact on the cultural organisation's ongoing viability and would result in homes with unacceptable amenity and quality,' it went on.
Applications to keep restaurant, performance venue, and bar Diecast open permanently on Store Street, and a new SEND pupils' unit as William Hulme's Grammar School in Whalley Range were also approved.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
House stymied as Speaker Johnson's handpicked committee rebels over Epstein
A rebellion over the Jeffrey Epstein files by Republican leadership allies on the House Rules Committee is giving Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) one of the trickiest conundrums of his Speakership so far. Members on the panel — often called the 'Speaker's Committee' in reference to it being a tool of leadership — held up action on a host of planned legislation this week because they were terrified of Democrats forcing more tough votes on releasing the Epstein files. Democrats are trying to force a vote on a bipartisan resolution that would compel the publication of the files. Johnson's handpicked GOP Rules Committee members, meanwhile, are pressing him to bring up an alternative, nonbinding resolution to release the documents. But it's not clear that the GOP-crafted measure could garner enough support in the slim majority to pass. Sign up for the latest from The Hill here Stymied by the Epstein debate and unable to bring up anything but noncontroversial bills under suspension of the rules because of the standstill, House GOP leaders canceled votes scheduled for Thursday — sending House members home for August recess one day early. Unlike other fights during Johnson's Speakership, the problem this time isn't hard-line conservatives in the House Freedom Caucus, but rather members Johnson has counted on in the past to push his priorities through the Rules Committee and to the House floor. Rep. Erin Houchin (R-Ind.), who sits on the Rules Committee, raised concerns with having to vote on the Democratic-led amendment during a private meeting with leadership and other top House leaders Monday, two sources told The Hill. She advocated for voting on the Republican resolution or a different measure for transparency, one of the sources said, which have key differences from the Democratic-crafted measure. And while members of the hard-line conservative House Freedom Caucus who sit on the panel — namely Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) and Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) — are also advocating for more Epstein disclosures, multiple sources tell The Hill it is primarily concerns from other members holding up committee action. Johnson has publicly defended the holdup in the Rules Committee by saying Republicans will not allow Democrats' 'political games.' 'We are not going to let them use this as a political battering ram. The Rules Committee became the ground for them to do that. We're not going to allow them to engage in that charade anymore,' Johnson said in a press conference Tuesday. But by acquiescing to his members' demands to stall planned House action over fear of the Democratic committee votes, Democrats are getting a win in their endeavor to squeeze Republicans on the issue and keep it — and GOP infighting — in the headlines. Demands from Rules Committee Republicans for a parallel alternative to Democratic amendments marks a stark departure from the normal business in the House. The normal legislative game in Congress is for the minority party to try to force the majority party into politically tricky votes, and the majority party to dismiss those efforts — a dynamic that Republican strategist Brendan Buck, a former aide to former Speakers Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and John Boehner (R-Ohio), alluded to in a post on the social platform X. 'Respectfully, Rs on the Rules committee need to toughen up a bit and vote down these amendments. That's sort of your job,' Buck said. 'I promise you won't lose your seat over a few procedural committee votes.' The Speaker has the sole authority to appoint Republican members to the panel — and to remove them. One option for Johnson, if he were to take a tough stance, is to replace the members who are nervous about the Epstein votes. But Johnson, who has become known for being exceedingly patient with and sympathetic to all corners of the House GOP, is letting the members take the stand for now — hoping the upcoming August recess will create the time and space to resolve the Epstein issues. Asked about the possibility of replacing the Rules Committee members who are holding up action, Johnson told The Hill: 'No, I haven't considered that at all.' 'They serve at the Speaker's request, and so long as they're willing to volunteer for that service. It's not an easy job. So we'll see,' Johnson said. For now, Johnson is stuck in a difficult balancing act of weighing the eagerness among members to cast a vote in favor of releasing the Epstein documents, the outcry from the MAGA base, and his vested interest in placating Trump, who has urged GOP lawmakers to drop the matter — all while trying to manage the House floor. The Speaker is largely deferring to the efforts by the Trump administration to offer transparency on the matter. Relenting to the outcry from the base, Trump last week directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek the release of grand jury transcripts in the Epstein matter. And the Department of Justice said Tuesday it would seek new information from Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's ex-girlfriend and accomplice. Between those actions and the nonbinding Epstein disclosure resolution the Rules Committee Republicans advanced last week, leaders had hoped the now monthlong Epstein drama may die down in the House this week. Johnson said he would not bring the nonbinding resolution up before the August recess. That's peeving some Rules members. Norman, a Rules Committee member who is part of the Freedom Caucus, is openly calling for a vote on the GOP-led resolution. 'I led Republicans in a serious resolution — that protects victims — to expose the truth about the Epstein files, just like President Trump promised. But leadership is stalling,' Norman wrote Tuesday on X. 'The American people deserve action, not excuses. Let's vote on it before August recess and get it DONE!!' But it's unclear that could pass in the razor-thin majority, given several Republicans throwing their support behind a bipartisan measure from Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). Their measure would have more legal weight to force release of documents. Massie and Khanna are planning to use the discharge petition measure, a procedural gambit to override leadership and force measures to the floor with 218 signatures. Discharge petitions are rarely successful, but with 11 Republicans so far in support of the measure, Massie and Khanna are projecting confidence they can force the vote when the House returns in September. Johnson on Tuesday expressed his frustrations with Massie, who has become a top GOP antagonist of Trump in Congress, for spearheading the push. 'I don't understand Thomas Massie's motivation, I really don't. I don't know how his mind works. I don't know what he's thinking. Thomas Massie could have brought his discharge petition any time over the last four and a half years,' Johnson said, adding the ultimate Southern dig: 'Bless his heart.' Asked what her panel was doing Tuesday, House Rules Committee Chair Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) told The Hill: 'Nothing, right now.' The holdup is frustrating Republicans in other corners of the conference. Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.), the lead sponsor of an immigration enforcement bill that was scheduled to come for a House vote after being approved by the Rules panel, expressed her disappointment it was delayed over the Epstein drama. 'I do think that we do need to come to some sort of resolution, though, sooner rather than later. We cannot let this drag on,' Bice told reporters Tuesday. Rep. Gregory Murphy (R-N.C.) lamented that the topic is taking away attention from other GOP priorities. 'This is so myopic. We should be working on the things of trade, health care, all the things that matter rather than bringing out information which potentially and probably will damage a bunch of absolutely innocent lives,' Murphy said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Bloomberg
7 days ago
- Bloomberg
Labour Suspends UK MPs Who Led Welfare Reforms Rebellion
Labour suspended four of its Members of Parliament for breaking party discipline following a large-scale rebellion over welfare cuts earlier this month. Neil Duncan-Jordan, Brian Leishman, Rachael Maskell and Chris Hinchcliff confirmed their suspensions on Wednesday afternoon, arguing they were representing their constituents in opposing cuts to disability benefits. A person familiar with the matter said all four had the whip suspended for repeated breaches of party discipline.
Yahoo
16-07-2025
- Yahoo
Why suspended Labour MPs clearly hit a nerve with Starmer
After a tricky few weeks for the government, in which backbenchers overturned plans to cut back welfare spending, now a heavy hand to get the party into line. Three newly-elected MPs, Neil Duncan-Jordan, MP for Poole, Brian Leishman, MP for the new Alloa and Grangemouth constituency, and Chris Hinchcliff, for North East Herefordshire, . Rachael Maskell, MP for York Central, who was first elected a decade ago, is the fourth. Politics latest: They will all sit as independent MPs and will not be allowed to stand for Labour at the next election, unless readmitted. All appear to be surprised - and upset. Three more have lost plum roles as trade enjoys - Dr Rosena Allin-Khan, Bell Ribeiro-Addy and Mohammed Yasin, all on the left of the party. All were active in the rebellion against the government's welfare reforms, and voted against the changes even after a series of U-turns - but were among 47 Labour MPs who did so. When MPs were told after the welfare vote that Number 10 was "fully committed to engaging with parliamentarians", this was not what they were expecting. We're told the reasons for these particular suspensions go wider - over "persistent breaches of party discipline" - although most are not high profile. In the scheme of things, Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell rebelled against the Labour whip hundreds of times under New Labour, without being suspended. But these MPs' pointed criticism of the Starmer strategy has clearly hit a nerve. Maskell - who was referred to, jokingly, in the House of Commons earlier this month by Tory MP Danny Kruger as "the real prime minister" - led the rebellion against cuts to winter fuel allowance which triggered a U-turn which she said would still leave pensioners in fuel poverty. There was an attack on the government's values. Duncan-Jordan, a trade unionist who won the Poole seat by just 18 votes, led the welfare rebellion, telling Sky News the proposed cutbacks were "not a very Labour thing to do". Hinchliff, who has also opposed the government's housebuilding strategy and plans to expand Luton airport,had told his local paper he was willing to lose the whip over welfare cuts if necessary. He also has a marginal seat, won by fewer than 2,000 votes. Read more: Leishman, a former pro golfer, has also been vocal about government plans to close the refinery in his Grangemouth constituency after promising to try and make it viable. They are MPs who the leadership fear are going for broke - and that's concerning as more tough decisions on spending are likely to come. But after a poorly-handled welfare vote, in which MPs seemed to be in the driving seat forcing changes, will this instil a sense of discipline over the summer break? While some MPs will see this as a deterrent to rebellion, for those whose chances of re-election are small, it may continue to be seen as a price worth paying. To other Labour MPs, the move is confusing and may be counter-productive. One Labour MP on the left told me: "So, we're suspending people for winning an argument with the government?" Another, in the centre, feared it looked divisive, saying: "We need to go into the summer focused on the opposition - not involved in our melodramas." Number 10 wants to show rebelling comes at a price - but many Labour MPs with concerns about their political direction will want to know the prime minister is planning to listen to concerns before it gets to that point.
