Housing secretary Angela Rayner has granted Marks and Spencer permission to demolish and rebuild its store at 458 Oxford Street in London in a highly significant decision in the UK retrofit against new development debate.
Earlier this year the High Court quashed the previous government's refusal of planning permission for a new Marks & Spencer shop on Oxford Street after a judicial review. The retailer was given leave to appeal at the end of last year.
M&S has argued the previous government "wrongly applied" planning policy and raised six counts against the decision, which were all recognised by the High Court, meaning the case was able to proceed to the next stage, judicial review.
The former Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Secretary of State, Michael Gove, threw out the retailer's ambitions to knock down its flagship 1929 Art Deco store and replace it with a 10-storey retail and office block, in a decision the retailer branded "utterly pathetic".
Among the reasons listed by Gove were a consideration for new policy to prioritise retrofit and refurbishment of buildings where appropriate, and the substantial amount of carbon the construction of the new structure would emit.
Today deputy prime minister Rayner said in terms of the loss of buildings and the impact to the surrounding historic environment, the "benefits of the proposal outweigh the harm to the significance of the designated heritage assets".
She acknowledged that the scheme's embodied carbon and the fact that the required demolition would, in part, fail to "support the transition to a low carbon future" weighed against the proposal, but said those issues were outweighed by the "advantages of concentrating development in such a highly accessible location", the employment and regeneration benefits, and the "potential harm to the vitality and viability" to London's West End if the scheme was refused.
The Marks & Spencer Marble Arch site is at the junction of Oxford Street and Orchard Street, close to Selfridges, and the company has operated there since 1930. Its Pilbrow & Partners designed scheme proposes lower ground and ground plus nine storeys, including plant equipment, and basement levels that include accommodation for leisure facilities. It would add four storeys to the existing height.
The case has been followed closely by developers and landlords, with it becoming a key test of changing parameters for demolition and new build, as opposed to refurbishing existing buildings.
Ben Standing, partner at law firm Browne Jacobson, has said: “This decision is beyond one M&S store; it’s about shaping the urban landscape and redefining how we approach building preservation and development.”
So where does this leave M&S, the government and UK real estate?
Stephen Springham, Head of UK Markets at Knight Frank, said the decision provides the greater certainty around the retrofit versus rebuild debate that the industry has been crying out for.
"It was clearcut that M&S had proven that, using whole life cycle modelling for numerous retrofit and rebuild scenarios, redevelopment is the most sustainable long-term option for this particular site.
“Taken in conjunction with new guidance at local authority and regional level on when it is appropriate to permit demolition, we are starting to gain a better understanding of the grounds upon which future decisions will be taken. Consistency is vital for the UK’s economic recovery and inward investment. Knight Frank and the wider property industry are calling for the national planning policy to mirror guidance that has been provided by The London Plan, The City of London and Camden and Westminster City Councils, when the revised policy is published later this year.”
Alistair Watson, UK head of planning and environment at law firm Taylor Wessing, says: "To riff off one of the quotes from legendary football manager Bill Shankly – the trouble with some politicians is that they know the rules, but they do not know the game of planning. SoS Gove didn't get it. This SoS clearly does.
"The secretary of state's decision to agree with the inspector's recommendation and the High Court to provide a planning permission for M&S is as straightforward as it comes. This is a major development scheme which has a variety of economic, social and environmental benefits, all of which were backed up with expert evidence in a full public inquiry. Logic and common sense have prevailed over political ideology. The planning system at its best.
"The downside is that we have had to wait this long, and in the meantime, the wider real estate development industry has had to sit patiently, and watch opportunities go by until we got some certainty from the Secretary of State on matters such as embedded carbon."
Charles Begley, chief executive, London Property Alliance, said: “I hope with this decision we can finally end the uncertainty which has acted as a drag on investment, damaging growth and the jobs that go with it. It is disappointing it has taken so long, which sends a negative message to those willing to invest in London and beyond. The Government now needs to ensure that planning reform supports sustainable redevelopment, and whilst giving stronger guidance to local councils, needs to set itself strict timelines to deal with contentious decisions once it intervenes to prevent a repeat of this long running saga.
“The fact that the property industry had been waiting the outcome of this case for clarity is clearly a failure of national policy. The application itself had unfortunately become a lightning rod for the ‘retrofit v redevelopment’ debate, but we need to recognise that a more nuanced approach is needed and policy must allow and support a range of interventions on a case-by-case basis.”