Marks & Spencer has argued there is no viable alternative to its plans for redeveloping its Marble Arch flagship on Oxford Street, W1, after it was found during a public inquiry that a heritage group’s own alternative proposals also required significant demolition.
An eight-day public inquiry into the controversial redevelopment concluded today (4 November).
“Impossible to retrofit”
During a session, architect and carbon expert Simon Sturgis, who authored a report commissioned by heritage group Save Britain’s Heritage, put forward a proposed alternative for deep retrofit refurbishment.
However, under questioning, Sturgis conceded that that proposal also required some degree of demolition, including modifying the front of the Orchard House facade and the removal of a 1930s staircase, both of which the heritage group previously argued should be protected. M&S said this illustrated the impossibility of retrofit at the site.
Nonetheless, Save maintained that M&S’s plans for demolition “cannot be justified on either heritage or climate grounds”. Matthew Fraser, the barrister advising the heritage group, said the proposals would “cause real harm”.
M&S said the poor layout of the three buildings on the site today, with Orchard House accounting for just under 30% of the site, rendered a retrofit (as proposed by Save) as neither deliverable nor viable.
The retailer added that its lead architect, Fred Pilbrow, considered 16 alternative proposals for the site, with only the established scheme proving to be viable.
In his closing remarks, Russell Harris KC, the lawyer acting on behalf of M&S, said: “Leaving the buildings as they are or to make them the subject of light touch is not sustainable or viable.”
He added: “There is, it is agreed, no sustainable ‘do nothing’ option. If the secretary of state agrees with this consensus, then the debate is little more than academically interesting for some if not others.”
Carbon payback pledge
M&S presented an updated assessment estimating that it would deliver a carbon payback in 11 years, with further reductions possible. Its proposed scheme has a planned lifespan of 120 years and seeks to deliver a net positive contribution to the environment once complete from 11 years onwards.
However, Save argued that M&S’s plan was “not consistent” with the UK’s legally binding commitment to be net zero by 2050, the London Plan or Westminster City Council’s policies.
The retailer said its proposal would use less than a quarter of the energy of today’s structure, promote circular economy principles – with 95% of the existing building materials to be recovered, recycled or reused – and, on completion, be among the top 1% of new buildings in London for sustainable performance. The proposed investment would also create more than 2,000 new jobs and 10,000 sq ft of new public realm across the site.
Retailers and organisations that have shown support for the redevelopment in recent weeks include Selfridges, Ikea, the Portman Estate and New West End Company.
Architects, developers and academics providing evidence in support of Save’s case included Tyler Goodwin, chief executive of Seaforth Land; Charlie Baxter, managing director of Alchemi Group; Griff Rhys Jones, presenter of TV series Restoration; London Eye architect Julia Barfield; and local councillor Jessica Toale.
Other supporters who submitted statements to the inquiry in favour of Save’s case included architects at HOK, developers Jacob Loftus and Ashley Nicholson, Create Streets founding director Nicholas Boys Smith, actor and local resident Kristin Scott Thomas and representatives of Heritage Declares and Architects Climate Action Network.
Pilbrow & Partners’ proposals were initially given the thumbs-up by Westminster City Council in November last year, before they were called in by Michael Gove in April.
M&S previously said it would leave the Marble Arch site if its proposals for the scheme were blocked.
Harris said: “No party is asserting that there actually is another, better way of achieving these or substantially similar benefits either through refurbishment or at all. The highest it is put is that there might be.”
Sacha Berendji, operations director at M&S, said: “Two years ago we launched our proposal to redevelop Marble Arch and deliver a significant and sustainable investment into Oxford Street, which has been supported at every stage.
“Extensively setting out our case again to the inquiry has confirmed to us that this is absolutely the best and only way to deliver a Marble Arch which is fit to serve and support our customers, colleagues, communities and the planet for the next century and beyond.”
See also: Mayor refuses to intervene in Oxford Street M&S demolition
To send feedback, e-mail pui-guan.man@eg.co.uk or tweet @PuiGuanM or @EGPropertyNews
