Maryland directors reignite Shudehill proposals
Buoyed by the approval of Salboy’s 17-storey Glassworks nearby, Interland Holdings has moved to progress plans for a 19-storey scheme at the Manchester transport interchange.
Interland, whose directors are listed as Maryland Securities’ Jacob, Ebrahim and David Jabreel, has submitted a raft of fresh planning documents seeking tweaks to proposals first lodged in 2018.
The Shudehill scheme proposes the creation of three blocks, rising to 19 storeys at its tallest point.
The project will see elements of existing historic buildings retained, including 29 Shudehill and the façade of the Rosenfield Building.
Designed by Buttress Architects with planning advice from Avison Young, the project has a gross development value of £57.6m, according to a viability appraisal by Cushman & Wakefield.
The resurrection of the proposals, four years after plans were first submitted, follows the approval of Salboy’s controversial Glassworks office project, which “establishes the principle of high-density development in this location”, according to an updated planning statement.
“It is considered that this revised proposal will make a significant contribution to the ongoing regeneration of this part of the city centre alongside that [Salboy] scheme,” the statement adds.
A design and access statement by Buttress adds that Glassworks “establishes a new precedent for height in the area, which could be supported by providing height on the Shudehill development site to better frame the interchange space.”
To find out more about this project search Manchester City Council’s planning portal using reference number 121195/FO/2018.
Nothing against this height in principle, but this design is incredibly dull and cheap-looking. There is a render not seen on this article which shows this proposal and the incorporated façade of the Rosenfield Building – the difference in quality is stark.
Is this now forever our lives – the design of our city ruled by developers that maximise profit at the expense of quality design that we can all be proud of?
Also, again there is to be no affordable housing or balconies? This Council – in my opinion – really doesn’t care if it permits this.
By Byronic
This a truly grim corner of the city centre – a scheme of this scale and form would help improve the feel of the area considerably.
By Anonymous
The site does need developing, but I agree with the earlier commentator that the designs shown in the renders are uninspiring.
This is such a prominent location, for anyone arriving in Manchester through the Bus/Coach station this will be the first part of the city they see upon disembarking – it should have a bit more of a ‘wow’ factor.
By Frank
This will definitely be an improvement to this part of town but I think the City Council should exert a bit more influence on the design.
By Digbuth O'Hooligan
Boring and cheap looking. We can do better than this surely in such a prominent and upcoming part of the city centre. The scale and density of it I haven’t got a problem with, it the cheap horrible cladding that’s the issue.
By Steve
Affordable housing in the city centre? Why? There is plenty being built on the outskirts as part of the regeneration of Victoria North. City living is something to aspire to and earn, not be given for free.
By Big Dub
Such a prime site and they can’t even be bothered to incorporate some sort of industrial design into it despite having a fantastic warehouse that they’ve retained on the side like a wart.
Why not channel some unique vibes into and make a feature of the warehouse like Kampus.
Yes the site needs developing, but this is just not good enough. Bore off.
By Anonymous
very uninspired design.
By bob
It looks awesome..
By Jeff Blair
Uninspiring and depressing design!
By Anonymous
It’s looks like other cheap student accommodation that has popped up around the city.
Why not keep some of the existing industrial feel to the design?!
There are also a number of independent creative businesses situated in the existing building that will be forced to find new premises. Maybe they should include a creative section that allows them to stay, along with new people/businesses that will come to the area.
By Jake s
It is the standard retort from the Architects, how many times have we heard this? The planners will allow this because they do not want to confront a planning barrister, cost being the main antagonist. The planners in Manchester are not fit for purpose.
By Phil Bell
It’s such dull boxy architecture. Everywhere I look the same design at work. Incredibly regimented. Surely we can do better than this?
By Andrew Readman
Looks absolutely fine, I honestly don’t understand what the moaning is for. What do they think an apartment building should look like? Could certainly do with some balconies but the scale and shape is fine. No question it will improve the look of the area.
By Anonymous
It’s as if every time a new development is given the go ahead in Manchester we are designated with the ‘also rans’ of the architectural design teams.
Each one of these developments is a brilliant opportunity for the architects and for Manchester to create something unique and in its own way beautiful.
In other cities around the world designs are inventive, and most importantly of all, sympathetic to the history of the city and its immediate surroundings.
Manchester is fast becoming a drab, dull, repetitious Legoland devoid of soul.
By Anonymous