Malmaison Pearl Assurance House 3

GALLERY | Malmaison plots Pearl Assurance House hotel

Charlie Schouten

The hotel operator is to open its second site in Manchester city centre by converting and extending Pearl Assurance House opposite Albert Square.

The plans, put forward by developer Greenlane Properties, feature a one-storey roof extension and a seven-storey new-build extension wrapping around the existing building, creating a 70-bedroom hotel, named Hotel du Vin and to be operated by Malmaison.

A rooftop terrace and bar is planned, while a front-of-house facilities on the ground floor will extend to around 5,000 sq ft, featuring a lobby, bar, and bistro. In total, including its extensions, the development will cover 41,400 sq ft. No car parking is proposed.

The seven-storey extension to the rear will be clad in grey stone, designed to match the existing building’s materials.

Pearl Assurance House, dating to 1955, counts Costa among its ground floor tenants, while the upper floors are largely vacant. The hotel’s own bistro is likely to replace Costa, while a Starbucks was also formerly on the ground floor, but has since been replaced by a vape shop.

Working with architects Leach Rhodes Walker and Stephenson Studio, alongside planner Avison Young, Greenlane has now submitted a planning application for the scheme to Manchester City Council.

The professional team also includes Stephen Levrant Heritage Architecture; Regeneris; ERAP; and Gray Scanlan Hill.

The site will be Malmaison’s second in Manchester; it already operates a site next to Piccadilly Station.

Click any image to launch gallery

Your Comments

Read our comments policy here

My lord that’s a horrible building – if that get’s built literally over looking the town hall while everyone was moaning about St Micheal’s, I’ll lose the will with this industry entirely.

By Daveboi

It’s already there. They’re just adding a couple of floors.


Fits in well with the rest of the street?

By Blind Pew

Do they torture people in the basement

By Rich X


By MancLad

Terrible design nestled in amongst some of the finest, most ornate buildings we have in the city centre. Modern architecture stinks. Who actually puts this out? Are they having a laugh? MCC planners need to get a grip.


Do the complainers on this post not know the city? This is a revamp/ extension of an existing building and an improvement over what currently sits there. You only need to look on Google Streetview. My only negative is that it obscures the view of the town hall clock from Pall Mall.

By get perspective

It’s interesting how people don’t realise the only outwardly visible change is the extension to the top floor. People are getting precious of a building they didn’t care enough about to realise it’s largely an existing building. The Pearl Assurance building was built in 1955 after the original building on this site was bombed during the war, is that old enough for you? Personally I think the extension looks great. If anything it is the lower part that looks ugly but hey, its one mans opinion that will make no impact what so ever on the development of this project. People need to get off their high horses and be happy Manchester is a booming city.

By Egg

You must realise that most people who comment on here aren’t happy that Manchester is a booming city, it really grinds them.

By Dan

its great that Manchester is booming! the only issue I have is that there is the odd building which gets knocked down which shouldnt of been! I was in Tommy ducks in the final days!

By Northwich

Some seriously ill informed comments on here. Have the Daily Mail posters started venturing into commercial property?

By Job Nockey

Investment is great but knock the building down and start again.

Who says everything has to be angular?

By Acelius

Stephenson Studio must be the design architect and LRW the executive architect as can be seen across a number of buildings in the city. Surely SS named first rather than LRW.

By Anonymous

Manchester is booming !!
Take off your rose tinted glasses and look around it’s a complete and utter mess…..
Sarah who lives in Manchester

By Sarah

Not sure what all the fuss is about.

Nice improvement.

By Dingaling

I love how everyone has somehow assumed the complaints, such as my own, somehow don’t know the city or realise it’s a reno of an already existing building…

We’re all entirely capable of reading the story you muppets. We left our comments in the context of the story. Bit strange to take comments like, within the context of the story, to mean anything other than “if the extension on top gets built”. How have the likes of “get perspective” managed to add their own flavour entirely to the other comments, taking comments entirely out of context and just deciding what the comment meant.

Do the users like “Egg” genuinely believe words like they leave, like “only outwardly visible change is the extension to the top floor” – well DUUUUUUH, that’s the whole story, we’re commenting on the visible changes to the building, which believe it or not, do need to be built.

And they are still crap, still ruin the area, and still ruin an already decent building.

And again, people moaning about St Micheal’s while letting rubbish like this pass, rubbish like whatever the hell the building GCHQ is in pass – the construction industry is full of NIMBYS or absolute charlatans.

By Daveboi

@daveboi, apologise if I have hit a nerve. No need for name calling, it’s unbecoming. My comment stemmed from your use of the phrase ‘my lord that’s a horrible building’ no reference to an extension but the entire building. It’s also a little dramatic to ‘lose the will with this industry entirely’ over a arguably small extension to a building.

By Egg

Providing they use decent materials I don’t see what the problem is

By Dough Ball

I think it’s great, so much going on in Manchester atm. It’s the place to be!

By Nat

@Egg – when did I call you a name?

I’m also not sure why you assume I am attempting to be ‘becoming’, of course calling people muppets and charlatans is unbecoming – that’s kind of the point of doing it
And are we now arguing as to what the definition of building is?

Because within the context of talking about physical alterations to a building, I’m really not sure why you seem to struggle with the idea of calling it a ‘terrible building’.

If they re-clad part of the town hall in Corten, I’d also stop and go “my god, that’s a horrible building”. The fact it’s been redesigned since initial construction is neither here nor there.

It is, by definition, a building.

The physical alterations, by definition, require building.

This single project hasn’t made me dislike the industry..If you paid more attention you’d realise I often leave comments about how crap this industry is on PNW.

Working in it for years has.

Morally corrupt, full of arrogance, everyone looking to turn a quick profit and the cost of just about everything and everyone else.

By Daveboi

@daveboi, I’m not wanting to be drawn into an argument here. You are clearly very passionate about your position which is commendable and I guess it is from a position of love for the city. I respect that, but that’s not to say others peoples opinions that are different to yours are not equally valid. Even though you say you’re not name calling, I would have thought the term ‘Muppets and Charlatans’ in the context of your comments is name calling. In a relatively professional forum that is the definition of unbecoming and undermines your argument.

With regards to my earlier comments, when you referred to ‘the building’ I may have misguidedly bunched you in with other commenters on this site who sometimes don’t read the story and just look at the pictures and make snap comments or don’t like new purely because its new or are precious over old buildings simply because they are old.

I assume the majority of the readers on this website are actively working in the construction industry and I too can be jaded at the climate the industry as a whole is with maximising profits over good design but that is a slightly different subject. In the context of this article we differ on taste of design. I quite like this project. You don’t and that’s fine. Neither of us are going to make any difference whatsoever to the development of this project and by being anonymous keyboard warriors (I do realise the irony of writing this under a pseudonym) and just come across as bitter and jealous. We should be building each other up, not tearing into eachothers work. If you aren’t a fan, perhaps constructive feedback not just ‘ it’s still crap’. Just a thought. Anyway, have a great day. signing off :)

By Egg