Tags & Spencer wants to tear down and rebuild his Marble Arch store in an Art Deco style. Photo: Vuk Valčić/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
Michael Gove has been accused of “misinterpreting” planning rules Marks & Spencer is facing a heated row over the redevelopment of his Marble Arch store.
M&S will begin High Court proceedings on Tuesday against the government over the Housing Secretary's decision to block a multi-million pound refurbishment of its store. Art Deco department store on Oxford Street.
The legal challenge is based on claims that Gove «misinterpreted and misapplied planning policy». The Housing Secretary has been accused of an inconsistent approach to planning decisions, leading to confusion over what developers need to do to get the green light for projects.
The case will be closely watched: Gove's decision to intervene in the Marble Arch redevelopment has «cast a dark shadow over commercial development projects», according to Robert Gowing, senior planner at Hogan Lovells.
«The prospect developers face is a real one «uncertainty about what information is needed to support redevelopment proposals,» he says.
Across the country, projects have been put on hold as developers await the outcome of the M&S case.
Uncertainty has gripped the sector in part because there was widespread support for the Marble Arch redevelopment. The scheme has the support of the council, the Mayor of London and the independent inspector, as well as neighboring businesses.
Signs & Spencer has put forward plans to demolish his Marble Arch store and build a new building that meets the latest environmental standards. The company argued that the building's age (construction began in 1929) and its maze-like layout made it unsuitable for renovation, meaning a complete renovation was the only option.
M&S's plans to redevelop its Oxford Street site included office and retail space. Photo: Pilbrow and Partners
However, Mr Gove said demolishing the building and replacing it with a new 10-storey development “would not support the transition to a low-carbon future and would generally fail to encourage the reuse of existing resources, including the conversion of existing ones
Campaigners pointed to Ikea's redevelopment of the former Topshop store in Oxford Circus. The Swedish furniture giant is in the process of refurbishment of the building to become its new flagship in central London.
This suggests the possibility of renovating older buildings, although last year Ikea was forced to delay the opening of the site because the necessary renovations turned out to be more intensive than initially expected.
Meanwhile, uncertainty has hit the property sector as companies struggle to understand what Gove's M&S intervention could mean for their projects.
More recent decisions have added to the confusion. Last week the Housing Secretary approved plans to demolish the former ITV headquarters on the South Bank and build a £400 million office complex.
Critics claimed the project would produce more carbon emissions than 4,000 office workers worked in the new complex. the house had to come from Surrey within 30 years.
On Monday, M&S chief executive Sacha Berengi said: “When our proposal to build one of London's greenest and most energy efficient buildings in the heart of the West End is rejected and other projects with fewer sustainability benefits go ahead, it makes it impossible for developers to interpret planning policy by freezing investment and leaving many to wonder, “Why bother?”
M&S has said it will be forced to reconsider its future on Oxford Street unless it is allowed to demolish and redevelop the Marble Arch site. He warned the scandal risks worsening the fortunes of Oxford Street, which has been struggling with rising crime and has been overrun by American sweet shops in recent years.
Sweet shops have changed the face of Oxford Street in recent years. Photo: Mike Kemp/In Pictures via Getty Images
However, the consequences of this case extend much further than London's West End. Property executives say the dispute has become a «lightning rod» for the ongoing debate over how the industry should approach sustainability.
Alistair Watson, partner at Taylor Wessing, says: “There is general confusion that needs to be cleared up. Each scheme is individual, but the basic principles: first demolish or repurpose the building, that in this case can help us determine what we need to do.”
Charles Begley, chief executive of the London Property Alliance, which represents 400 developers and investors, said: “Without more guidance and standardization to understand the full picture, as well as the long-term impact locally, councils and communities have been left behind.” It's an insulting position to try to resolve this, and conflicting messages from the national government further confuse the issue.»
Gowing agrees that more clarity is needed on «how decision-makers at all levels will assess the evidence for the carbon impact of demolition versus refurbishment.»
All this confusion risks exacerbating the decline of major streets all over the country. The British Retail Consortium estimates that 6,000 stores have closed over the past five years.
Earlier this year, retail chiefs told The Telegraph that many stores across the UK were at risk of becoming «wastelands» due to a lack of incentives for retailers to invest.
Richard Pennycook, a former head of co-ops who is co-chairman The British Retail Council said planning issues were the biggest barrier to urban regeneration. The problems plaguing Oxford Street are also occurring in other places across the country.
The government has committed £13 billion to level up, including rebuilding town centers and high streets, local transport and cultural and heritage sites.
In October, the Department for Cohesion, Housing and Communities published its long-term plan for cities, with 55 cities set to benefit from £1.1 billion of investment under the scheme. In his foreword to the document, Rishi Sunak said he shared the public's «anger and frustration at high streets with empty shops and areas blighted by crime and anti-social behavior.»
The Department for Excellence, Housing and Communities said , which cannot comment on the M&S case while the proceedings are ongoing.
The High Court hearing is expected to last two days and will include arguments from lawyers on both sides. M&S will have to convince the courts that an error was made in the government's decision-making process, rather than in the decision itself.
A decision is expected in a few weeks.
However, there is a possibility that the decision on The M&S Marble Arch scheme could take another few months. Either party will have the opportunity to appeal.
Whatever the outcome, M&S says things cannot remain as they are. The current turmoil has stalled investment and is «a disaster for the economy and the transition to net zero,» Berendji says.
Свежие комментарии