Last night, Westminster’s Planning Sub-Committee (3) approved the demolition and redevelopment of 10–18 and 20 Victoria Street by three votes to two. The Piercy&Company-designed scheme will replace two post-war office buildings with a 260,000 sq ft, 13-storey development, providing 120,000 sq ft of additional office floorspace alongside new commercial uses at ground level. The decision is an example of Westminster City Council applying its ‘retrofit first, not retrofit only’ approach, a principle which WPA has long advocated.
During the committee discussion, members debated whether the public benefits of redevelopment were sufficient to justify demolition under Test 4 of the Council’s Retrofit First policy. Labour councillor Nafsika Butler-Thalassis argued that “the case for demolition has not been met”, questioning whether the claimed benefits, including the creation of 12,000 office jobs, were genuine and stating there was “zero evidence that these would be provided” and the only evidenced jobs were in construction, that are temporary. She also questioned whether the public benefits were sufficiently compelling to outweigh the carbon impacts of demolition, including a proposed financial contribution of around £1 million.
Officers clarified that the first three sequential tests are not hurdles that must be passed before proceeding to Test 4. Rather, applicants must demonstrate that demolition is justified under one of the policy’s tests. In this case, officers concluded that Test 4 had been met, citing a range of public benefits including additional office floorspace, jobs, ground-floor retail uses, active frontages, public realm improvements, financial contributions and other planning benefits. Officers argued that these benefits outweighed the impacts associated with demolition and embodied carbon.
Members expressed disappointment with several aspects of the proposal. One councillor described the application as “really, really disappointing”, citing concerns that the claimed public benefits were insufficient to justify demolition, that the scheme performed poorly against sustainability objectives and that alternative retrofit options had not been explored fully. Disappointment was also expressed over the absence of affordable workspace. Officers said they had sought affordable workspace provision but noted that there is existing affordable workspace provision elsewhere in Victoria, including nearby developments but some members remained unconvinced that the overall package of public benefits was strong enough to justify demolition.
The committee also debated whether sufficient consideration had been given to retrofit-led alternatives. Officers emphasised that Test 4 is a legitimate route under the Retrofit First policy rather than a fallback after “failing” the earlier tests. They confirmed that retrofit remained technically possible despite the presence of asbestos, and that the building could continue to operate as offices. However, they said redevelopment was being pursued to deliver higher-quality accommodation. Members also heard that an independently commissioned engineering review had concluded that the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to support its case for redevelopment.
The vote split along party lines, with Conservative members supporting the scheme and Labour members opposing it. Chair Cllr Rachael Robathan cast the deciding vote for approval, acknowledging that, while “the case for demolition is only just met,” “the design is attractive” and “having very high-class office space in this location will be very important.”
