Plans lodged for 100,000 sq ft office overlooking Parsonage Gardens
A 14-storey replacement for 1 North Parade and 5 Parsonage in Manchester, featuring a 7,000 sq ft ground floor restaurant, is being progressed by Beaconsfield Commercial.
A planning application for the 100,000 sq ft office project has been submitted to Manchester City Council more than five years after Beaconsfield first mooted the idea of redeveloping the site.
Designed by Squire & Partners, the scheme overlooks Parsonage Gardens and would see both 1 North Parade and 5 Parsonage knocked down.
Beaconsfield explored the possibility of refurbishing the buildings but found that the cost of a refurbishment would be greater than the rental returns that could be achieved. Neither building is listed.
The development, first proposed in late 2020, started out life at 17 storeys and with a more contemporary design.
However, following feedback from Historic England, the scheme was reworked from a material standpoint so that it would be more in-keeping with the vernacular of the conservation area.
Deloitte is advising on planning matters and Planit is the landscape architect. The project team also features GIA, Crookes Walker Consulting, RLB, Chroma Consulting, G&T, Curtins, Miller Goodall, Orion Fire Safety, and Heritage Architecture.
To learn more about the scheme, search for reference number 144653/FO/2025 on Manchester City Council’s planning portal.
Beaconsfield’s scheme is by no means the only one coming forward within the St Mary’s Parsonage regeneration zone, which could change significantly over the coming years.
Bruntwood SciTech had plans to replace Alberton House approved in 2021 and demolition of the building completed recently. Gary Neville’s Relentless Developments is waiting in the wings to take that project forward.
Relentless has also recently acquired Reedham House, which has permission for a part-refurb, part new-build office scheme secured by Property Alliance Group, and is development manager for Investec on the high-profile Kendals project.
Elsewhere, Oval Real Estate has consent to redevelop Albert Bridge House into a mixed-use scheme featuring both offices and apartments in buildings up to 49 storeys.
Horrific attempt to destroy our heritage and a beautiful building with some horrid PoMo building. This must be refused.
By Byronic
Pretty depressing what’s replacing a rather handsome building. Another historic building lost in Manchester
By Jon P
Completely agree with the above. The existing building is worthy of retention even if it weren’t in a Conservation Area. This must be refused.
By Urbano
Dreadful. We need to keep heritage buildings, clearly little has been learnt since the 1970s.
By Dr B
Disgusting attempt at uglifying the city even further by erasing every last bit of historic built heritage we have!
By Anonymous
If the rents cant be achieved to cover the renovations (if it was ever a serious consideration) why chose to replace with a dated PoMo style office that will jar with the rest of the Gardens. Were extra floors or facading considered? The existing building is a great example of its period and its part in Manchester’s built environment for over 100 years. These buildings are what created Manchester’s unique character, and for this reason should be protected and refurbished.
By GetItBuilt!
Oh, brilliant, another heritage gem bulldozed in the name of “progress.” Because what every city really needs is one more soulless glass-and-steel box to remind us that character and history are apparently optional. Sure, I get it, those 1960s eyesores had to go. But these buildings? This wasn’t an eyesore; it was architecture with actual personality. Heaven forbid we preserve something with craftsmanship and cultural value when we could have yet another corporate clone stamped out of the same blueprint. Bravo, developers, Manchester just got a little blander and sadder.
By Steve5839
Preferred the old design but this is still very nice. Great looking development to replace the god awful building already there. Ignore the NIMBYs and grey haired people who want cities to look exactly how they did 150 years ago, get it built and keep moving forward!
By MC
It looks like one of the boring 80s blocks on Albert Square, but stretched upwards. If there’s any case for bulldozing the decent C19 buildings currently there, it surely involves replacing them with something far better than this. If Historic England can’t be bothered trying to save historic buildings, they really shouldn’t be interfering to make replacement ones worse.
By Rotringer
Ugly as sin. Must do better
By Don cheglioni
They can’t replace the existing building it would be a crime
By Mike
This is why everyone calls it Manchattan
By Anonymous
What an absolute archit*rd, replacing some brilliant heritage buildings. Shame on the lazy developers – and architects. Awful, awful, awful
By Disgrace
I echo the other commenters. This building should not be replaced, especially by something as lazy and ugly as this. The old red brick buildings are part of our history and our culture. You barely find them in other cities in the UK, let alone anywhere in the world. Once they’re gone, that’s it.
This stuff is more important than developer portfolios.
By M. I. Grant
This proposal is depressing, it looks like a 1980s social housing sheltered scheme.
By Anonymous
Absolutely shocking. The lack of a tapering at the top part of the brick element is so bad, it looks exceptionally cheap & value engineered. The very top aspect is also so dated & thoughtless to be honest.
By The Squirrel's Nuts
The online skyscraper city cladding monitors will probably have a meltdown over this.
By Anonymous
There may not be any historical value to the existing buildings, however at least they were not designed using MS PAINT
By Bernard Fender
This looks like a cheap design from the early 90’s that should be in Salford Quays
By Steve
“Hello, it’s the 90s… We want our architects back.”
By Tom
I’m not a person who is fixated with saving heritage buildings provided that the replacement building has architectural merit and is better than the original building. Unfortunately this proposal is dull beyond belief. I thought this type of design had been left behind in the 1990s, this dreadful design proves I’m wrong. It’s so disappointing.
By Anonymous
Back to Pomo office blocks
By jrb
The destruction of Manchester’s finest buildings continue
By Salford Fred
MC – you say this design is “very nice” this site needs better than very nice. Parsonage gardens is a little hidden gem and it needs architecture to reflect its status. This design is dull beyond belief, it should be refused.
By Anonymous
Very ironic the comments describing the building as ghastly / depressing with little comment about the burgeoning lifeless glass apartment towers across manchester? it’s good to see more office investment in key areas. Clearly PNW readers care more for £320,000 1-bed apartments being built than actual progress in the city.
By Kath P
Absolutely horrific in every sense. The current building must remain in situ. Get it listed!
By Heritage Action
‘Ignore the NIMBYs and grey haired people’ !😂There’s a lot going on in the head of someone using that as an argument! Please PNW can we let the adults comment on this site and leave that kind of nonsense where it belongs!
By Em T
Don’t worry everyone. It will never get built.
By Mr Unviable
Could the “architects” have taken any less inspiration from the historic buildings around it? Have they even visited the site? Looks like they feed a few prompts in Chat GPT and it spits out the blandest, cheapest, looking office block known to man…. that will be knocked down again in 20-30 years time.
By Anonymous
Not sure the viability argument stacks up. Seems like it’s in reasonable condition. Either way the important heritage value of what’s there and the conservation area should be the over riding factor. Buildings like this are such a strong part of Manchester’s identity!
By Craig
Hate what this development stands for. Pick another site and renovate the existing.
By NO
Absolutely appalling. This should be opposed on the grounds of height, scale, massing, and loss of important heritage buildings…. not to mention townscape harm, contravening conservation area policy, amenity impacts, and sustainability.
By Anonymous
Benidorm by the Irwell.Its the naff unsophisticated modern Manchester
By Bruce Jones
Quite like the design actually although I’d prefer they renovated the original. Don’t worry Bruce they’ll build something in your town one day..maybe 😉
By Anonymous
Is this an Orbit Developments building ?
By PJ