Historic England attacks plans for 76-storey Manchester skyscraper

Historic England needs to get a grip, its not exactly being built next to the colosseum, stonehenge or the pyramids is it…

What a very strange argument. You’d never see this from the streets around St Ann`s. Cities are not museums, this is proposed on unbuilt and under utilised land next to existing tall buildings and will create jobs, homes and investment and push Manchester further up the European rankings.

Shut up and get on with building it. Manchester needs this development.

If you read between the lines, I think what they’re saying is that it needs to be even taller to avoid building something mediocre near historically significant buildings

Manchester has lost control of it’s historical reference in order to make it a healthy investment opportunity for the very few. Sold it’s soul to the dollar.

In no way should the beauty of the Townhall, Midlands hotel, Manchester central be overshadowed by an apartment block. In similar fashion to John Rylands by the new St Michaels scheme.

What a load of rubbish. Organisations like this should really pick their battles more carefully or their arguments and whole existence is undermined. This will be a game changer for the city. Get it built. Well done to all involved.

Wasn’t St Paul’s cathedral turntables building in the Britain at one point – historic England would have opposed that building

Following their advice would turn our living breathing city into a mausoleum. They really don’t live in the same reality.

Historic England and needless naysayers. We cannot allow ourselves to be bogged down in a false nostalgia of the past. The only way to grow wages, the economy, is to build build build.

It is an open secret that Manchester Central will eventually be redeveloped as well which makes some of Historic England’s comments rather pointless.

Historic England…move on! All old and new architecture complements each other. Get it built!

Strange that St Michael’s which is located next to St Anns adn Rylands is okay, but this which is no where near it isnt.

Have Historic England actually been to Manchester? This building couldn’t possibly impact on St. Ann’s Church it’s on the other side of the city centre.

The plot is miles away from Albert Square.
@historicengland – drop your little man on Google Maps and let me know how imposing beetham tower is on the square. Obviously the new build is taller, but how much of it is really going to be visible?

Like it or loathe it, this is the way Manchester is heading now and HE’s intervention here is very much “after horse has bolted”. My only concern is that it’s just another identikit tower amongst all the others going up. Just wish there was more of a difference in tower architecture around the place.

I thought they were replacing The hanging Gardens of Babylon or at least building it on top of Rylands library but no, it’s the the Old Bauer Millett car showroom close to the Beetham tower and all of those other tall buildings at the end of Deansgate. Go away Hysterical England . You have a place but it’s not here.

They’ve got some nerve! Get it built higher, that’ll teach ’em!

This is exactly the same approach taken by UNESCO regarding Liverpool Waters. The only difference is, the City of Manchester will preserve the past but not allow it to stifle the future. Whereas the City of Liverpool inept planners sided with UNESCO. The end result being, still empty and under developed historic dockside waterfront. Manchester always takes a positive and balanced view in my opinion. I am envious that it not happening in Liverpool. That said, Manchester should just press ahead regardless.

it’s OK in London of course. No history near the Shard!

Manchester city centre is becoming a Manhattan of amazingly ugly boxes. It reeks of MONEY. A rich person’s playground. Horrible.

Read the D&A Statement on this one….its meaningless, no story, no identaity , not reference whatsoever to Manchester or its immediate context. Same as all the other D&A’s for the repeat prescription glass towers. “…..the skyscraper featured inclined faces designed to ‘catch light differently, creating a dynamic response to changes in light conditions’….”….what has this to do with Manchester and its context. The development is shoehorned onto the site. HE aren’t always right but everything they say on this one is unarguable.

Absolute nonsense, get it built! Come on Manchester!

We don’t need this ugly thing anyway .

Manchester needs this building, hopefully it gets built.

I’m not against development but it would be nice to have something other than a box. Interesting buildings give a city character, otherwise you could be in any city, anywhere.

As a Liverpool resident self appointed and opinionated organisations such as HE should be given short shrift , Liverpool has been held back by this lot and Unesco . City’s are developing all the time and should be allowed to change without being shackled to the past . The council and planners should pay no attention.

Surely they should be investing their time, energy and resources into dealing with the countless historic buildings in the region that are at grave risk of collapse then fighting needless battles such as this. The tower is not in a conservation area, it doesn’t immediately impose on any historical landmarks and well it’s a bit late to be contesting tall buildings over on that side of the city.

As for the comment about the St Michael’s tower impacting on the library, not sure how that argument works, given to appreciate the library means standing with your back to the new development to begin with..

Silly left wing organisation

It’s an awful attempt at architecture, will blot the landscape and add nothing of worth. Anyone who thinks this is a good idea is a moon head.

Manchester isn’t rome or athens or Bath or York it is a modern city with hundreds or different styles or architecture old.and new combined thank god we don’t have any world heritage sites or nothing new would get build jog on

Building the slums of tomorrow, today….

Please no no no no

Historic England = nimbies united. Amazing how they still can’t find anything useful to do.
1. There was ALWAYS going to be a skyscraper over there. Those were always the plans.
2. The area is designated for skyscrapers
3. The only view it would block is from the towers of deansgate towards the town hall and this is ONLY true for 1/4th of 3 of the deansgate towers. The other 9 towers have that view blocked anyways as is it.
4. The contribution to the local economy would be singificant in direct and indirect way. Lart of this money would be then used exactly for restoring old buildings. Half of Manchesters old buildings are in disrepear because of poor cost to value ratio. This skyscraper is not only not harming them but will actually help fund fixing them and put Manchester on the map. If we want a better life we have to embrace change.

Headline: Group based around historic buildings, moans about modern buildings.
My favourite part of this is when they complain it would ruin the city because you could see it when also looking at the buildings they prefer (e.g. old buildings). So, their basic argument is that they don’t think anything but their stuff is good and they just don’t want to see it. Which is really just their opinion. You don’t have to look far to see some of the most popular and loved photos are those that show juxtapositions of old and new together like Castlefield’s Victorian Great Northern Goods Station with the Deansgate Skyscrapers.
Considering Historic England are based in London, I ask them to stop meddling into our affairs up north. We’ve been held back by people in London restricting us from expanding for decades. Blocking business opportunities, infrastructure expenditure and now even telling us what buildings we should have.

What a surprise

Absolute rubbish. Stop stumping Manchester’s growth with your narrow mind and historic views. Manchester needs this, and it needs to go bigger, not smaller!

The SkyscraperCity “Get it built” fanboys are busy at their keyboards again…
Historic England very rarely get takes a firm position against a development in Manchester, often giving significant weight to economic and viability arguments, and then being criticised by the heritage lobby.
There isn’t a shortage of sites for very tall buildings around the city centre, so it might be worth at least taking HE’s concerns seriously, and wait to see the renders and daylight studies…

Where is Giant Skyscraper fan? I’ll pre- empt him and say it should be 100 storeys!

I wish the Architects involved in these schemes for Manchester would come up with unique designs so they would be a statement to the rest of the World.

I think that ships sailed

Manchester is becoming a visual treat as a result of the juxtaposition of old and new. It needs to continue this improvement with towers like Viadux 2. I really can’t see the fuss. Yeah but there goes views of the Eiffel Tower.

More downdraught on passengers at Deansgate tram stop. Needs to include a wind canopy to deflect it.

I do recognise and respect the need for Historic England and they are an important organisation to have as part of the development and planning process. However I do feel they should pick their battles. As others have said this is a skyscraper nestled in amongst other skyscrapers and in my opinion it will enhance the cluster by providing a clearly-defined “peak”. I have a feeling that if Historic England had been around when Manchester Town Hall and the Liver Building etc had been planned and built, they would have taken issue with those buildings as well. What we create today could become the landmarks of tomorrow. In 100 years will Historic England take issue with a building proposed close to but taller than this one on the grounds of Viadux 2 having become a Manchester landmark?

No surprises to see the tall building fan boys out in force defending the plans for this latest – ever higher – characterless glass box. Manchester’s heritage should be protected by keeping towers of this scale further out of town. We don’t pretend to be Paris or Rome and we get stuff done here, but places that make the town recognisable as Manchester – Albert Square, St Peter’s Square, St Ann’s – need to be protected and not overshadowed.

Another bland anonymous tower designed in the “bigger is better” laddish style. No thank you. Another nail in Manchester’s coffin.

Correct me if I am wrong but didn’t Manchester refuse to allow Ancoats, the world’s first industrial suburb, to be listed as a World Heritage Site? These people are a menace. Their interference has been instrumental in hindering Liverpool’s, progress. This tower is an incredible vote of confidence in Manchester. Get it built.

Just get on with the building fs
These “historical experts” don’t want Manchester to succeed. We all know Manchester always has skyscrapers that look “the same.” HOWEVER this skyscraper is unique and brings on a new iconic look being added to the skyline.
So it would be very unfortunate to not go ahead with the building of the project

I hope this is actually a joke
Manchester needs to go ahead of time to compete with the other cities in the UK other than London. This skyscraper will definitely add a great impact on the skyline

Deansgate Square is an awful place to walk through, this will be the same

There is nothing more exciting than driving into a city full of skyscrapers, bending my neck in every direction, looking up through the windshield to see how tall they are. Skyscrapers displays a city’s wealth and stamp its place in the world. I would love to see more huge office developments in Manchester city center…300-meter-tall office developments with spires, antennas and pinnacles. Historic England is adverse to any modern development of any size so that they can exist. Anyway, onwards and upwards. What a focal point this tower would be!

Why not build in the shape of an historic Manchester mill chimney

If another few towers in the region of fifty and sixty floors are constructed nearby, Viadux2 will look more proportional methinks. Hope this passes.

So London gets the Shard and the Gurkin. Manchester another boring glass cuboid…where’s the design.. the real architectural landmark.. 5/10 must do better.

I’m sorry but this doesn’t obstruct any historical buildings, The Midland or Town Hall are far enough for it to take attention off them. Literally every major city in the world has a mix of old and modern, I don’t think it’s a bad thing at all to have a modern backdrop to historic architecture.

What is the cladding?

A city is a place for people to live and work, its not a piece of art and it can’t stay the same forever. Besides, in a billion years the sun will go nova and flatten everything assuming its still standing so why worry about a development now?

Put a steeple and a big clock on it and say its always been there.

Ha, Historic England, if you can’t build this in the middle of Manchester City Center then show us a more appropriate place. Its actually going to be built within an already established cluster of very tall buildings so to read those objections I find it frankly hilarious.

@Peter Chapman I disagree with your analysis. It should be 110 storeys!

Not tall enough!

Unbelievable, what have they to say about these builds in London? Nothing seemingly. This will be an outstanding effort by one of the leading, new and ambitious developers in the UK. It will be built with a fabulous specification and Manchester needs these kind of sky scrapers. The efforts of Developers like Domis/ Salboy and Renaker have transformed the skyline in Manchester.

What they’re trying to say is “to make this worthwhile, it needs to be 300m+”

Do these busybodies not think about the lads and girls livelihoods. Who would build this?Those installing the lifts? The people making, and selling the furniture? The plumbers? Electricians? Glaziers? The list is endless. This mega project is an economic necessity, in a booming city. Structures like this bring further wealth, and high earners. If they were building this in York, I would have similar objections. Manchester is the economic epicentre of the North of England, it needs an infrastructure to match its importance.

Does it indicate an excessive supply of ego on the part of the occupants?

Let’s be honest. If someone had planning permission to build this along Liverpool’s waterfront we’d all fall head over heels for it.

This is what Manchester needs to become a very big city. The economy is on the rise building is on the rise. I like coming through Manchester and seeing big developments and having something big that isn’t IN LONDON would be great. World class arena is built. We just need the tallest scraper now. COME ON MANCHESTER 🐝🐝🐝

The buildings discussed here, whilst I wouldn’t say are any new or exciting designs, of which I would enjoy to see raised in Manchester compared to the frequented box design which has been seen in the recent past, are yet still welcomed, especially on the plot where it is suggested. This development would have no impact on St Annes Church, whatsoever and would be visible from the town hall, as well as all of the new buildings, not in my view a problem. Especially as the project is including a number of affordable homes which is frequently avoided in newer projects.

What a crock of, well you know what. How does one building harm another. We are keeping the old buildings and building new. It happens all over the world. Old and new side by side. This building wouldn’t block the view of any of the buildings mentioned. I don’t think they have been to Manchester. Maybe they are London based and are getting jealous of our growing, world class city.

Historic England have an office in Manchester, so they must have first hand knowledge of the area and the impact it will have?

If they have an office in Manchester they must know that this is close to the Gt Jackson st area that has been zoned for lots of tall buildings. Of course you can see it from St Ann’s it’s the city centre . They’re really going to throw a fit if/when they start that 240m+ one at the end of Regent Rd. You could probably see that from space.

I wonder how many Salboy employees/compatriots are cluttering up the comments in angered opposition of HE’s fair and reasonable review. The truth is that it’s an unoriginal development, aimed at competing with Renaker’s domination of the Manchester skyline. In reality, both developers are spoiling the city in the hunt for profit and will eventually reduce manchester to a ghost town, full of overseas investment-rich towers that price the good people of the North out of reasonably priced city centre accommodation.

I’m shocked that so many people are actually happy to live in these monstrosities! They are like prisons in the sky. Across the UK tower blocks from the sixties and seventies are still being demolished and for good reason. These new ones will be the slums of the future.

Just build it nobody gives a crap about old buildings

“Build it and they will come”

🙂

Oh dear, some very living in the past comments here’tower blocks from the sixties’ ! Lol ! I know the modern world isn’t for everyone but let’s not chew those keyboards too hard and calm down !😉

Old with new looks amazing build it

Why would such a tall building not be suitable? They should go for tallest in UK

The proposed development is out of scale. I don’t think anyone denies the need for more residential development within the city. But this hideous monstrosity will be yet another photocopy building, which definitely detracts from the skyline. Build something impressive, unique that will become a symbol for Manchester. Enough with these boring one dimensional architectural towers! (Oh, and please can we see the results of the daylight modelling and the impact on their own neighbouring development!)

Manchester is a fantastic city, a 76 storey building would be amazing…there’s something about very tall buildings that portray a sense of confidence for business and investment!