Save Britain鈥檚 Heritage hails 鈥渉ugely important decision鈥� as Pilbrow & Partners plans are considered to emit too much carbon
Michael Gove has refused permission for Marks & Spencer to rebuild its flagship Oxford Street store in a landmark ruling which will send shockwaves through the built environment sector.
The communities secretary today announced he is ignoring the planning inspector鈥檚 recommendation to approve the Pilbrow & Partners-designed scheme following a high stakes public inquiry.
The plans would have seen the demolition of three buildings currently occupied by M&S, including the 1929 Art Deco Orchard House, and the construction of a 10-storey replacement store and office block.
The case has become a cause c茅l猫bre for net zero and heritage issues and Gove鈥檚 decision is expected to be highly influential for the future of major demolish and rebuild projects.
It hinged on whether a full rebuild or a refurbishment of the existing store would be more sustainable, with the retailer arguing the greater energy efficiency of the new building would offset the embodied carbon emitted by a rebuild.
In a 127-page report on the decision, the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) said Gove had concluded that the proposed redevelopment would emit 鈥渇ar more鈥� carbon emissions than a refurbishment unless the UK鈥檚 grid was decarbonised.
The report said Gove believed that if the redevelopment was delayed until the grid had achieved net zero, the extent of embodied carbon emitted by manufacturing materials and from vehicle emissions would be 鈥渕uch lower or eliminated鈥�.
鈥淗e agrees that the proposed development now would result in far more carbon emissions than after the UK has achieved a net-zero grid, because a fully renewably sourced electricity grid should allow most construction vehicles, and the manufacture of concrete, steel and other materials, to be undertaken using renewable energy rather than fossil fuels,鈥� the report said.
M&S has argued the 鈥渇ailing鈥� existing store suffered from an inefficient building envelope, and its proposed replacement would use the latest techniques for energy efficiency and could achieve a BREEAM Outstanding rating.
But DLUHC鈥檚 report said that while Gove had taken into account the retailer鈥檚 arguments that the building would emit less carbon over the course of its life than a refurbishment, there is uncertainty over the calculations.
鈥淭he understanding of [whole life carbon] assessments and the tools available for calculations are still developing, and therefore it is no surprise that there was disagreement over the lifetime carbon usage for the proposals and, more particularly, for a refurbishment,鈥� it said.
On the scheme鈥檚 heritage impact, Gove is said to have concluded there would be no 鈥渄irect effect鈥� on heritage assets but that the plans would result in harm to the significance of nearby assets, including the neighbouring grade II*-listed 1909 Selfridges store.
Gove argues the height and appearance of the corner of the proposed scheme would be 鈥減rominent and distracting from the Selfridge鈥檚 fa莽ade鈥�, especially when compared with the deferential appearance of the existing Orchard House.
This harm is believed to be 鈥渁t the upper end鈥� of the less than substantial category, and includes the impact of the proposals鈥� upper storeys on views from North Audley Street.
Gove is said to consider the harm to Selfridges to carry a 鈥渧ery great weight鈥� and to disagree with the planning inspector鈥檚 assessment that this harm carries only 鈥渕oderate鈥� weight.
The secretary state added that the unlisted Orchard House 鈥減ossesses architectural and historic interest鈥� and 鈥渃ontributes positively to the settings of Sefridges and the historic retail character of Oxford Street鈥�.
The report said Gove agreed with Historic England鈥檚 assessment of the proposals to be a 鈥渕issed opportunity to retain, reuse and adapt the good quality elements of the site鈥�.
The case against the proposals was led by Save Britain鈥檚 Heritage in the public inquiry which concluded in November last year.
Save director Henrietta Billings described Gove鈥檚 move as a 鈥渉ugely important decision that rightly challenges the way we continually and needlessly knock down and rebuild important buildings across our towns and cities.鈥�
She added: 鈥淩epurposing and converting buildings we cherish and saving thousands of tonnes of C02 in the process is a no brainer. This is a massive positive step and we salute the Secretary of State.鈥�
Simon Sturgis, the group鈥檚 expert witness at the inquiry and founder of carbon consultancy Targeting Zero, said: 鈥淐ongratulations to Michael Gove for a very important and influential decision. This shows that the government is serious about the climate crisis and understands that real change is needed if we are to achieve net zero by 2050.
鈥淲e must now progress with nationwide guidance on planning and building regulations (eg Part Z) to support this decision and deliver carbon reductions across the entire built environment industry.鈥�
1 Readers' comment