Lovely... more of our history being demolished for yet another eye sore!

we don't need more hotels.

it looks its going to be an eyesore www.cabe.org.uk/design-review/pillo-hotel

and who is paying for this.

TOWN HALL BOSSES ARE FLYING TO ABU DHABI in an effort to attract new business for Manchester. Council leader Sir Richard Leese and chief executive Sir Howard Bernstein are among 22 delegates from the city travelling to the United Arab Emirates next week, which will coincide with Manchester City’s friendly match against the national team.

The building is derelict.

Hotel percentages in Manchester are higher than most cities and the city has lost out to conferences and events in the past due to lack of quality capacity.

The construction will provide jobs and have a knock on effect for small local businesses, the hotel will then provide permanent jobs and opportunities.

Or we could just leave it as a derelict rat abode?

It may be currently derelict, but surely that imposing Victorian warehouse could be "imaginatively refurbished" couldn't it? It adds to the Victorian historic character of Whitworth Street West - it just looks right and that's what tourists want to visit Manchester for, not to see 18 storey budget hotels. (There's plenty of wasteland, still surrounding the city centre, where those things could be built!) Plus this proposed building is totally out of proportion to the other buildings along this characterful stretch, as is that monstrosity they're presently building at 2-4 Oxford Road too.

Leese & Bernstein are relentlessly making the cityscape of Manchester "less & less" CHARACTERFUL and "more & more" BLAND. They haven't got a clue!

Ah, more complaints from typically negative reationary MEN readers. "CHANGE!? WE HATE CHANGE! LEAVE EVERYTHING AS IT IS"

Tall buildings are cool, they bring lots of local investments, add to Manchester's emerging skyline, and, with it being a hotel, will offer a greater choice for tourists! What'a not to like.

"Oh but history..." screw history. How can we expect to keep up with the rest of the world if we're too busy trying to protect Victorian Manchester, which by the way, was only achieved my the victorians replacing historic farms and the historic village houses where piccadilly now is.

yeahhhhhh another useless building, together with the countless amount of apartments and houses.. oh that no-one can truly afford and once again IGNORING WHAT OUR CHILDREN NEED. New and improved play areas etc etc. But ignore the children as you can't make money off them. Pathetic really

Lord Ryan Am I to understand that you have no interest in the wonderful picturesque cities of Europe such as Barcelona & Florence and would no doubt be happier if they were to demolish their heritage and build wonderful modern buildings.

Lord Ryan Am I to understand that you have no interest in the wonderful picturesque cities of Europe such as Barcelona & Florence and would no doubt be happier if they were to demolish their heritage and build wonderful modern buildings.
steve wilson
6/11/2009 at 13:32

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Have you ever actually been to either of these cities? Apart from the limited tourist areas, the architecture is nothing special and they would be jealous of many of our buildings.

The last time I was in Barcelona I stayed in a brand new hotel which was in a square in Raval, that's just off Las Ramblas. Old buildings had been made way to make way for this modern one and the arrival of the hotel has done wonders for the square and streets surrounding it. There's still a way to go so they're looking at doing more similar projects.

This is how Manchester has to behave, forget about the naysayers who are/were against everything (Beetham Tower, Civil Justice Building etc, Deansgate No. 1). Remember the fuss made over the Radisson Edwardian? It would ruin a wonderful building etc etc, well it's not turned out too badly has it?

If it was the only Victorian warehouse in Manchester then fine, keep it as is. However we've had plenty of conversions and are not in danger of losing that heritage. Just because it was built in Victorian times does not make it automatically great, it's not a strong example of Victorian architecture and has no significant features - which is probably why it has been left to rot when others have been converted.

Architecture is bascially art and so there will always be strong opinions. This building will help regenerate that side of the locks, where businesses are struggling. Not only will it help existing businesses but bring more money into the area.

Di Hulme, as a parent of a small child living in the city, I would also like more playgrounds but certainly not there near such busy roads! Areas like Castlefield are more suited to this and, as far as I'm aware, there is not a penny of public money going into the building of this hotel so your point is like lambasting people for going on holiday as we've haven't found a cure for cancer yet, it's not relevant.

So obviously people will have differing opinions but try to stay fact based and relevant or it just looks like a big whinge.

Typical knee jerk reaction, 'knocking down more of the city's history', 'destroying our heritage' etc etc. Well it's an admiarable viewpoint & there are plenty of historically important & aesthetically pleasing old buildings that need to be protected BUT in this case, it's a viewpoint that's totally misguided: The building that's going to be knocked down might be old but it's also an uninspiring hole with no reason to save it from the wrecking ball.

That said, it's interesting that the MEN don't provide a picture of the new building. Let's hope the architect is not, and has no connection to, Ian Simpson Architects.

Oh, and to the person who says, 'children need more play areas' well, yes they do but probably not next door to a pub, across the road from half a dozen bars & adjoining one of Manchester's busiet roads!

Got to say, something needs doing with that particular site, of course if some architect came up with idea of a restore then all well and good, but they havent, and it will great for that part of town. All around that back area near AREA 51 and Atlas bar needs a clean up. The hilton has rejuvenated that part of town.

If there is a real demand for more hotel beds then fine. But is there? I seem to recall the one recently opened on Princess Street going pop due to low demand. There are 5 or 6 hotels being built on top of what has recently been opened.

The only real issue for me is the height. My home is on Whitworth St West and all recent developments have been restricted to 9 floors by the local planners for a reason. Now that seems to have been abandoned for this one building. Why? And no doubt the prescedent will mean that more skyscrapers will be built nearby too.

castlefieldres yes but what are your opinions of Florence,Rome,Venice ,Madrid,Paris need I go on?

castlefieldres yes but what are your opinions of Florence,Rome,Venice ,Madrid,Paris need I go on?
steve wilson
----------------------------------------------------------------

The architecture in Florence, aside from the immediate area surrounding the Duomo, is nothing to shout about and a lot of it downright shoddy.

Rome is the outdoor museum of the world and beautiful as such, but don't kid yourself that there are no modern buildings where older ones had been.

Madrid is a city of badly built and designed buildings, split up by the odd amazing square or roundabout! Funnily enough the best building in Madrid is the post office!

Paris obviously has some lovely architecture but again this is inbetween buildings that would never have been allowed in Manchester - for good reason.

I've only been to Venice twice so can't really comment, however I would say the absolute nature of Venice (it's crumbling), means the kind of building mentioned is not possible.

I'm not quite sure if you're trying to catch me out Steve but I find it a tad silly comparing our city to those anyway. Yes Manchester is great, it is not in their league and quite frankly a building as ordinary, non descript and crumbling as the one we're talking about would not be mourned.

This has given another opportunity for the hobby protesters to come up with ill thought out arguments and then get alarmist when people don't agree.

castlefieldres The only point that I am trying to make is that over the decades many buildings of architectural merit have destroyed and replaced with out of context monstrosities;whilst their are many fine buildings on Manchester you must surely agree that the landscape has been blighted by the likes of the changes to Piccadilly Gardens as an example.

I also believe that our Victorian heritage should be preserved;after all it helped to shape Manchester into the great city it is.

Lord Ryan Am I to understand that you have no interest in the wonderful picturesque cities of Europe such as Barcelona & Florence and would no doubt be happier if they were to demolish their heritage and build wonderful modern buildouings.
steve wilson

You would be correct in that assumption. I like old Manchester, but to allow the past to prevent progress? No way.

castlefieldres The only point that I am trying to make is that over the decades many buildings of architectural merit have destroyed and replaced with out of context monstrosities;whilst their are many fine buildings on Manchester you must surely agree that the landscape has been blighted by the likes of the changes to Piccadilly Gardens as an example.

I also believe that our Victorian heritage should be preserved;after all it helped to shape Manchester into the great city it is.
steve wilson
6/11/2009 at 18:23

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The building mentioned is this article is certainly not of any architectual merit, so I don't understand where you're coming from on this.

If this is your wider view of planning policy in Manchester then you didn't make that clear. As I said earlier this building is nothing of note and we cannot keep buildings erect, almost, just because of the era they were built in.

I liked the old Piccadilly Gardens but from a viewpoint of nostalgia, I visited Father Christmas there many times, however times change and it was a bit of a dump if we're honest. The new whole Piccadilly area has been transformed, all the way upto and including the train station - which having been to many in European cities - is absolutely brilliant and easy to use.

Manchester has done a wonderful job of preserving it's Victorian heritage and should be applauded as such, however I think you're argument is crumbling quicker than said building on Whitworth Street West.

Moan moan moan moan moan....

castlefieldres if you believe that piccadilly gardens is anything other than an eyesore then there is really nothing I can say!

In no way did I mean play areas should be built in the area they have approved for another hotel, I'm talking generally.
I am a mother of four children and wouldn't send my children to play in such a busy area.

What are people on in Manchester or what planet are they on, how can you compare Manchester with Paris or say that Picadilly Gardens have improved.
It appears that the lunatics have taken over the asylum in complete despair for a once proud city.

I hope it is a no smoking hotel,eh Mr Leese?

Shame, i do love the look of that warehouse but it has lain empty for many years.