Architectural Retrofitting vs. Demolition and Rebuild

AKA Michael Gove, M&S, and the fight for net zero

Back in April last year, there was a right kerfuffle surrounding the M&S flagship store at Marble Arch. Then everything went quiet. Until recently, that is, when Michael Gove published a bombshell decision regarding the fate of the building. Nobody, perhaps not even Gove himself, would disagree that he’s a Marmite figure, but we’re not getting into all that. His intervention, however, in the controversial demolition proposal for M&S’s 1920s pearl of Oxford Street, is a story that’s been growing sideways.

In case you’re not up to speed, in a nutshell, the bulldozing and rebuilding of the original Lyons Tea House had initially been approved. This was partly because, although the M&S building was designed by A.F.A. Trehearne and C. Norman, creators of other 20th century foxes such as London’s Africa House, it’s not listed and therefore not protected under heritage rules.

However, the planning permission suddenly came up against enormous opposition. Enter stage left, Catherine Croft, director of the Twentieth Century Society who immediately applied for Orchard House to be listed. Following swiftly behind her came Save Britain’s Heritage, who commissioned a subsequently damning report by sustainability and carbon expert Simon Sturgis.

The Sturgis report found that the proposals not only did not comply with either the UK Government’s net zero legislation, or the Greater London Authority’s stated policy to prioritise retrofit, but also ran counter to Westminster City Council’s declaration of a climate emergency.

The report was also adamant that “a comprehensive retrofit on this site [was] an opportunity to explore a new form of architectural solution for sites such as this.”
Plus, the construction of the replacement building was projected to release an eye-watering 40,000 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere.

At the point we left the story in spring of last year, the London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, first said he was reconsidering his decision to allow the project to go ahead, only days later to announce that he wasn’t going to get involved.

The End… or so we thought.

Just as we were becoming involved with other distractions like Barbie’s Dreamhouse, in comes a breaking newsflash from Architects’ Journal on the 20th July this year: “Gove rejects M&S Oxford Street demolition”.

AJ reported that Gove set out his decision for refusal in a letter pointing out that “the Pilbrow & Partners' 10-storey replacement scheme conflicted with policies on heritage and design.”
The article also highlighted Gove’s concern with the embodied carbon impact and waste involved in the plan, “something raised extensively by the AJ’s RetroFirst campaign and by SAVE Britain’s Heritage at last year’s public inquiry.”

Ultimately this has led the architectural industry to a new and interesting crossroads in the retrofit chronicles. Despite Gove’s decision being branded as ‘pathetic’ and ‘nonsensical’ by furious M&S chief executive Stuart Machin, the news has been welcomed by other retrofit campaign groups.

The most prominent are currently fighting DSDHA’s proposals to flatten and replace Selkirk House, a mothballed 17-storey former Travelodge hotel near the British Museum in London, as well as the Barbican Quarter Action (BQA) campaign. The BQA are eager to persuade the City of London to retrofit the 1970s blast from the past Bastion House, and the former Museum of London buildings, instead of bulldozing them to oblivion.

Their stance, and that of many Londoners, is that good examples of an era’s architecture don’t have to be listed to be culturally significant - they are visible reminders of our history, and if they’re retrofitted, they don’t have to be regarded as derelict ghosts of the past.

Further to this, a subsequent article in AJ investigated whether the M&S Oxford Street demolition refusal is a climate crisis turning point.

AJ spoke to Nicola Gooch, a solicitor at environmental and viability law firm Irwin Mitchell.
“If nothing else, the M&S appeal decision highlights the urgent need for a clear national planning policy position on the issue as soon as possible,” she told them, also pointing out that “there is almost nothing in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) about how to factor carbon reporting into the planning system.”

However, AJ brought up that there is, in fact, one existing section of the NPPF that may yet prove to have long-term significance: Paragraph 152.

This particular paragraph has grabbed the attention of Estelle Dehon KC, a prominent public law barrister specialising in planning and environmental law. She believes that part of Gove’s conclusions – his underlining of the importance of Paragraph 152 – could have a huge impact.

The paragraph 152 details how the planning system should “support the transition to a low carbon future.” In fact, it says the system should “encourage the reuse of existing resources, including the conversion of existing buildings.”

“This is a big moment in policy terms,” says Dehon. “The secretary of state has given power to paragraph 152 – it’s a policy whose time has come.”

Even more interestingly, she is now giving the following advice to developer clients: “You have to be able to demonstrate clearly from the beginning that you took alternatives to demolition very seriously. M&S was unable to show that, and SAVE brought that out well at the inquiry. That’s the big take away for the development community – there must be full consideration of alternatives to demolition and that’s also something to which local authorities need to be alive.”

There’s a lot more to this debate, and the AJ article is well worth a close read to understand the opinions on all sides. Plus, M&S has just launched a High Court appeal against Gove’s Oxford Street refusal.

To be continued…

With this surge of interest in the creative repurposing and retrofitting of architectural stars of the past, where do you stand?

If you’ve got the ideas that will push retrofitting towards a positive and welcome future, then we’ve got the jobs to take advantage of your talents. Call the mustard BE team now on 0117 929 6060 to find out what we’ve got on offer.