North West Property Matthew Ord

Revised plans for the £200m St Michael's mixed-use project in Manchester city centre, which has been brought forward by a consortium including Manchester United legends Gary Neville and Ryan Giggs, have been recommended for approval by council planning officers. Housing secretary Sajid Javid will decide whether call in is appropriate for this application.

The St Michaels' Partnership refreshed its proposals in December 2017 after the first application to regenerate a 1.5-acre site between Jackson's Row, Bootle Street and Southmill Street, designed by Make Architects, was heavily criticised by Historic England and members of the public.

"This is a finely balanced judgement as the impacts on the historic environment are high, as are the public benefits."

Hodder + Partners was appointed to carry out an independent review of the original scheme and, following Make's resignation from the project, was appointed to lead the design and development exclusively.

Radically altered plans were subsequently unveiled which featured a single tower and retained the Sir Ralph Abercromby pub and the former Bootle Street Police Station frontage.

The revised scheme still has a gross development value of £200m. It features 148,000 sq ft of grade A office space, 30,000 sq ft of food and drink space, 189 luxury apartments, a 216-bed five-star international hotel with a gym, spa and pool, a 30-bed boutique hotel, a synagogue designed by Fairhursts, a public square as large as Lincoln Square outside the Sir Ralph Abercromby pub, and a rooftop garden open to the public through a separate entrance from the street.

The original scheme came up against major opposition including 1,520 objections via letters and emails, and a 4,000-signature petition against the project. However, the revised plans – while they have still attracted concern – do not appear to have raised issues with as many locals.

Out of the 191 responses received on the scheme, 173 lodged objections. While this percentage is similar to the original (94 vs 91), it is far fewer numerically.

The three most common concerns raised are

the development remains too large and is out of scale

the proposals are unacceptable in heritage terms and have a fundamentally detrimental impact on the historic environment

the degree of harm caused is not outweighed by the benefits

It is estimated that at least 90 per cent of the replies received refer to at least one of these issues, with one stating that the main tower would be an "international embarrassment".

The 18 letters of support note that the scheme is "much improved" and "less imposing".

A report to councillors ahead of their meeting on 8 March recognises the issues raised, and states that the one to have generated the most concern "is the height of the tower and its impact on the historic environment".

"It would respond to demands from businesses, residents and visitors, and aid the city's economic growth and prosperity."

"It has to be acknowledged and accepted that the tower, in particular, would have a significant impact and in some instances…this is harmful to the historic environment," it added. "There are a number of amenity bodies who believe that the level of harm caused would be substantial.

"The harm would vary for each listed building but Historic England has concluded that individually and cumulatively this harm would be less than substantial, although for the Albert Memorial, it would be at the upper end of that scale. Officers agree with this conclusion.

"Less than substantial harm should be avoided but where it cannot be, it should be mitigated or minimised and clear and convincing justification is required to overcome the great weight that must be attached to preserving heritage assets. Should members accept that the level of harm is less than substantial, they must be satisfied that there is a clear and convincing justification for this harm and it should be outweighed by public benefits."

The report adds that the judgement that has to be formulated is "whether these public benefits outweigh the harm that would be caused to the designated heritage assets".

"This is a finely balanced judgement as the impacts on the historic environment are high, as are the public benefits," it said. "Having considered all of these matters very carefully, officers do believe that these public benefits would outweigh the significant harm that would occur."

On the back of this, the report notes that the proposals represent an "opportunity to address an identified need for a prestigious mixed use scheme of the highest quality at a strategic location in the heart of the city centre".

"The development would create a new landmark for Manchester, setting new standards in design and quality of accommodation, which will reinforce the city's position nationally and internationally," it said. "It would respond to demands from businesses, residents and visitors, and aid the city's economic growth and prosperity.

"The uses proposed would make an important contribution to the economic growth of the city. Manchester's ability to hold major conferences and events relies on the availability of high quality hotel accommodation as well as restaurants, large-scale banqueting, etc. There are limited a number of sites in the city centre that are suitable for a 5-star hotel as adjacencies are of paramount importance.

"The proximity to the convention quarter is seen as being critical. The availability of Grade A office accommodation is limited and could constrain the growth of the city going forward."

Councillors have been minded to approve the application, although secretary of state Sajid Javid would like the opportunity to consider whether to call in the application.