By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Allies and Morrison wins planning for £1.5bn Coventry masterplan


Allies and Morrison’s huge Friargate development opposite Coventry train station has been given the green light by the local authority

Coventry City Council’s planning committee approved the £1.5 billion outline proposals late last week.

Under the plans, the 37-acre site, bordered by Station Square, Manor Road, Warwick Road, Greyfriars Green and Grosvenor Road, will be transformed to into a massive commercial sector housing 300,000m² of office space in 14
new buildings.

The Friargate development, featuring 26 buildings in total, would also include hotels, homes, retail and restaurant units, as well as public spaces and a new square in front of the Grade II-listed station.

Developer Friargate Coventry LLP submitted the plans, predicted to take 10 between 15 years to complete, to Coventry City Council in early October.

Councillor Gary Ridley, cabinet member for City Development, said: ‘I am delighted that the outline planning application for this impressive and important development is in. It is another major step in the development of our great city and it will create thousands of new jobs for local people.

‘This development will link perfectly to our plan to develop the south of the city centre first and it will create an impressive, green connection between the railway station and Greyfriars Green.’

Terry Farrell & Partners had drawn up an earlier masterplan for the site back in 2007. However developer Cannon Kirk dropped the proposals.

 

Previous story (12.10.09)

Allies and Morrison submits masterplan for key Coventry site

A huge new £1.5 billion office, housing and leisure development opposite Coventry train station has been unveiled by Allies and Morrison

Under the plans, the 37-acre site bordered by Station Square, Manor Road, Warwick Road, Greyfriars Green and Grosvenor Road, will be transformed to accommodate 300,000m² of office space in 14 new buildings.

The Friargate development featuring 26 buildings in total, would also include hotels, homes, retail and restaurant units, as well as public spaces and a new square in front of the Grade II-listed station.

Developer Friargate Coventry LLP submitted the plans, predicted to take 10 between 15 years to complete, to Coventry City Council on Friday (09.10.09).

Councillor Gary Ridley, cabinet member for City Development said: ‘I am delighted that the outline planning application for this impressive and important development is in. It is another major step in the development of our great city and it will create thousands of new jobs for local people.

‘This development will link perfectly to our plan to develop the south of the city centre first and it will create an impressive, green connection between the railway station and Greyfriars Green.’

Terry Farrell & Partners had drawn up an earlier masterplan for the site back in 2007. However developer Cannon Kirk admitted at the time it had ‘major issues’ with funding.

 

Readers' comments (12)

  • looks like a shopping complex...surely this is taking 'retail therapy' too far...

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • JustFacades.com

    well done A&M

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • too bulky. maybe ideal for somewhere in london but not for coventry, wrong scale, wrong sense. A&M are excellent at certain type of buildings but lack of ability to adapt to different situations.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Again, Morrison's big bulky dull architecture is chucked at a small city. This is a repeat of what;s not worked all over the UK in the 80's. Why do these guys keep on doing th same mistakes even now?

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Farells had presented a bold new vison for the city

    1.building visual links to the spire
    2.innovative approach to the city centre
    3.buildings with varitey and colour
    4.day and night mixed use for the city
    5.buildings lit at night with different colours
    6.the style of the buildings was contemporary and imaginative

    Present day masterplan is a blight on the city centre skyline as the buildings do not contribute especially against the backdrop of the spire.

    I urge the Coventry city council to look towards the future and reconsider Farells masterplan rather than going back to the 80's which allies and
    morison masterplan is doing to the city.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Is that Coventry "City of Inspiration"? I ask???

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Is that Coventry "City of Inspiration"? I ask???

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • As a Coventry resident, I think this is exactly what this area needs. If Dave Edwards had actually bothered to look at the scheme properly, he would have realised that this masterplan achieves all of the points mentioned, except being lit at night with different colours (and that, in my opinion, is a blessing). Views of the centre and in particular the spires are, if anything, opened up and created; a key street in the masterplan, for example, is oriented precisely to frame views of the spires.

    Although there was much to commend the previous Farrells masterplan, it failed on a number of levels. It actually blocked key views rather than created them, and large parts of it (the western part of the land bridge across the ring road) were physically, not to mention financially, undeliverable. It’s desire to join ‘desire lines’ too literally created mainly triangular and irregular plots that were commercially unviable. What it did do well was present a rather tacky and unrefined bling.

    As for density, it’s precisely the lack of urban density that makes cities such as Coventry such miserable places. This is not suburbia, it’s the centre of the 9th largest city in the UK!!

    What Coventry needs is the sober, realistic and deliverable masterplanning that A&M are good at. This is a well conceived scheme, which will deliver a high quality, diverse mix of uses in a legible and enduring urban form.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • All buildings are boxes.
    some part of it has landed from manhattan
    superblock influences
    no inspirationfrom nature
    factory and a box mentality place i.e imagine the plight of people working in those boxes.
    no integration of nature or elements of nature into the station masterplan.
    no joy of being there ie. fun, mundane experiences of 60's building typology.
    no landmark buildings
    no buildings which define the skyline of the building
    no building says look at me this is coventry building
    provided coventry as station is such an important gateway.

    think of visitors first impression!!!!!

    open up phaidons book of contemporary architecture ie. built in 21st century and prejudge the scheme and think and act.

    Just a pile of vertical stacks offices for coventry workers. (Spiderman seems to be missing from action in these blocks!!!)

    Hope the Coventry city council looks at some world class architecture and masterplans and prejudge this scheme.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Masterplans aren't about putting forward buildings, they're about putting forward a framework for FUTURE buildings, and this masterplan does that very well.

    There's nothing worse than a masterplan that has ridiculous shapes, un-developable plots, and 'landmark' buildings (what does that even mean?). If a building becomes a 'landmark' in the future, that's fine, but a masterplan can't, and should not, deliver this.

    I'm not sure what 'inspiration from nature' means exactly, but if you mean 'organic shapes', that has no place in an urban scheme. If you mean integration of landscape elements, trees and suchlike within a scheme, then it looks very much like this scheme succeeds in this respect.

    Actually it looks like Allies have completed a pretty good piece of place-making here; The station is set at the end of a long vista in what seems like a fairly generous square (and these spaces don't WANT to be too big in Coventry, otherwise they'll be dead), and the route from the station to the city centre is clearly defined and legible.

    This is a masterplan that balances realistic ambitions, placemaking and setting, and I for one applaud it!

    TH

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • "Masterplans aren't about putting forward buildings, they're about putting forward a framework for FUTURE buildings, and this masterplan does that very well."

    Could anbody check the statement above and the given visual and please refer to the buildings in the masterplan none reflect the meaning nor the expression of buiildings.

    "There's nothing worse than a masterplan that has ridiculous shapes, un-developable plots, and 'landmark' buildings (what does that even mean?). If a building becomes a 'landmark' in the future, that's fine, but a masterplan can't, and should not, deliver this."

    Please put your head above the neck and take a look at world cities like
    rotterdam, (kop van zuid)
    newyork, (manhattan has gugenheim a landmark!!!)
    abhudhabi
    shanghai
    tokyo

    and Coventry Ahhhhhh!!!

    'inspiration from nature' means taking cues from nature and building in nature and not put landscape in between buildings which i am sure is the basic neccesity of an urban renewal project.

    If this masterplan is given to Architects like
    Zaha haidid
    eisenmen
    Gehry
    MVRDV
    OMA

    Think what will come out a class masterplan and not some dumb 60's boxes.God knows what's happened to Coventry it was the architecture laboratory of the world at one point (even before amsterdam).

    I think the coventry city council has lot its design edge and thinking and chosen a masterplan that degenrates the city rather than regenarte it.

    >>>>>>>>>coventry this is a wake up call!!!!!!

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • "Masterplans aren't about putting forward buildings, they're about putting forward a framework for FUTURE buildings, and this masterplan does that very well.

    There's nothing worse than a masterplan that has ridiculous shapes, un-developable plots, and 'landmark' buildings (what does that even mean?). If a building becomes a 'landmark' in the future, that's fine, but a masterplan can't, and should not, deliver this."

    I couldn't agree more. I live in Coventry, and this scheme looks exactly what this site needs. There is another Masterplan that has been put forward, for the city centre, by a company called Jerde which has a giant purple egg as its "icon". It looks ridiculous and will never be built.


    "Could anbody check the statement above and the given visual and please refer to the buildings in the masterplan none reflect the meaning nor the expression of buiildings."

    The buildings in these images are representative only, none will have been planned out in any detail. Each plot will be developed independently. If you know Brindley place in Birmingham, it is clear schemes like this are sucessful. It was developed from another masterplan laid out by the Birmingham Big City Plan. Each plot in the masterplan was developed by different design teams, two of those involved were Allies and Morrison and Glenn Howells.

    Finally name dropping architects such as Gehry really is a waste of time. It is widely accepted that his work lacks any depth of thought and relies on its computer generated forms and shiny cladding to garner support in the architectural press, and get first year students excited.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

Related Jobs

Sign in to see the latest jobs relevant to you!

The searchable digital buildings archive with drawings from more than 1,500 projects

AJ newsletters