Premier House, PAG, P. Jon Matthews Architects
The hotel element was approved in August. Credit: Jon Matthews Architects

Second part of £200m Renaissance overhaul progresses

Dan Whelan

The office element of the three-part revamp of the Manchester site has been given the go-ahead, while a planning application for the 27-storey residential portion is expected soon. 

The vacant Premier House is to be partly demolished and revamped to provide 40,000 sq ft of Grade A office space, under approved plans from Property Alliance Group and US Investor Starwood Capital. 

In addition, the office scheme will feature:  

  • An improved entrance on the corner of Deansgate and Blackfriars Street  
  • New retail/leisure floorspace at ground floor level creating a new active frontage  
  • Refreshed facades across all elevations to modernise and enliven the appearance of the building 

The approval of the second part of the project leaves just the 300-apartment tower left to be approved. 

The hotel portion of Property Alliance Group and Starwood Capital’s £200m redevelopment of the Renaissance site was approved by the city council in August. 

SH Hotels & Resorts, an affiliate of US-based investor Starwood Capital, is to operate the 216-bedroom hotel under its Treehouse brand. 

Jon Matthews Architects is leading on design and Avison Young is the planning consultant. 

Renaissance, Manchester, P.PNW

Work on the project is underway. Credit: Place North West

Your Comments

Read our comments policy here

Out with the old and In with the new. This is called progress.

By Darren Born Bred

A missed opportunity…

By MrP

Whatever they do has to be a huge improvement on the carbuncle that has blighted this corner for decades. Pity they couldn’t progress the original plans but £200m buys you a lot of improvement .

By OldJed

Glorifying one of Manchester’s most hideous monstrosities. The US based investors have been duped.

By MJ

Current plans are more environmentally friendly than knocking it down.

By Meeseeks

The whole thing needs knocking down, its just kicking the can down the road for another 20 years by slapping some B&Q furniture on the side. Its an awful building and will remain an awful building and a massive missed opportunity.

By Jon P

People need to get over not liking the aesthetics of this. We’re in the era of climate emergency, if a building like this is structurally sound I frankly couldn’t care less if people don’t like how it looks – there is no case for knocking down a concrete building, rebuilding it from the ground up and adding a whole load more carbon emissions in for purely aesthetic reasons. Retaining and reusing is the right move here, absolutely no question

By Alex

@Alex – This development has still resulted in the demolition of quite a few aspects the original structure. Should the developers have retained these too?

I believe in retrofitting buildings; but it’s clear that every town and city, if it is burdened with an eyesore its whole populace hates, should have the right to get rid. Not everything should be retained, just like how everything shouldn’t be demolished.

Retrofitting is great when the building can be transformed completely (like the Manhattan building on George Street). It is obvious that this building, due to the original incompetent architect that designed this, cannot.

By Byronic

This building is not going to be knocked down, too expensive too environmentally unsound. What else shall we do? leave it to fester for another few decades in the hope someone will put their hands in their very deep pockets and pull it down, or perhaps we could have a Whip round or a GoFundme page ? No?..Do get over it then.

By Anonymous

@Byronic – Ideally, yes if the bits being demolished are structurally sound everything should have been retained and reused in my opinion.

I agree that not everything can be retained, but the default should be to do so unless there’s an extreme circumstance or it is structurally unsound.

I’m not a huge fan of the building myself but people thinking it’s an eyesore is irrelevant in the face of climate emergency. I get why people don’t like it, but in the grand scheme aesthetic concerns aren’t the most important thing anymore. It’s not ideal but it’s the truth now.

By Alex

Not that much wrong with the original design of this building after a good clean up and new windows. We should celebrate architecture of every era! Totally agree with Alex on the environmental benefits of avoiding demolition.

By Mike

Embarrassing

By Rex

Rex, £200m worth of embarrassing? I only wish my town had £200m to spend on one project. embarrassing or not!

By Gnasher

Great news. Now if we can get Speakers house built on the opposite corner it’s a win win.

By Anonymous

A stain on the city. There is no imagination in Manchester.

By 1981

Terrific that they are actually doing something positive (and expensive) with this long time stain on the city. Will be a huge and very welcome improvement at last.

By Tommytantrum

Glad this has started at last. It’s been too long.

By Anonymous

Excellent news. Speakers House now please.

By Anonymous