Mixed-use building refurbishment at 55 Baker Street, London W1U

The site and surroundings

The site is a large unlisted building occupying the block between Baker Street, Dorset Street, Blandford Street and Rodmarton Street, with nearby homes and heritage assets.

“The site comprises a large, unlisted building that, with the exception of the terrace of townhouses on the east side of Rodmarton Street that are outside of the application site, occupies the street block bounded by Baker Street, Dorset Street, Blandford Street and Rodmarton Street.”

“In heritage asset terms, the site is not within a conservation area although the boundary of the Portman Estate Conservation Area is nearby to the west, north and south-east of the site. Grade II listed buildings in the form of Nos. 100-106 Blandford Street (even) and No. Dorset Street are located to the south-west and north-west of the site, respectively. The terraced buildings on either side of Gloucester Place (Nos. 21-75 Gloucester Place (odd), No.”

Officer report

Planning history

The building resulted from a 2006 permission, while the application report identified no recent relevant history for this proposal.

“The building is the result of the comprehensive remodelling of a 1950s building called Michael House (formerly the headquarters for Marks and Spencer) that was completed in 2007 pursuant to permission dated 1 March 2006 (Ref: 05/05091/FULL) (‘the 2006 permission’). This scheme, also by Make Architects, replaced the three recessed bays on the Baker Street frontage with three glazed ‘masks’.”

“Shops, restaurants and the entrance to the basement gymnasium make up the Baker Street frontage and part of the side returns onto Dorset Street and Blandford Street. The terrace of townhouses on the east side of Rodmarton Street formed part of the 2006 permission. Access to the basement level car and cycle parking is via two ramps from Rodmarton Street, whilst two off-loading bays for the building are also accessed from Rodmarton Street.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended conditional permission because the design, heritage effects, residential amenity, energy performance and biodiversity benefits were considered acceptable.

“The proposed extensions are acceptable in design terms and will not harm the setting of either the Portman Estate Conservation Area and any of the listed buildings with which there is intervisibility. Whilst the proposed roof extensions will result in some material losses in daylight and / or sunlight for the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties, none of the losses are of such severity that the amenity of the occupants would be materially harmed.”

“Accordingly, the proposal is considered acceptable and would be consistent with the relevant policies in the City Plan 2019-2040 and London Plan 2021. It is recommended that planning permission is granted, subject to the imposition of the conditions listed at the end of this report and the completion of a Section 106 agreement to secure the obligations set out above which are necessary to make the development acceptable.”

Officer report

Main planning issues

The main issues were the extensions’ design and heritage effects, daylight and sunlight for neighbours, sustainability and biodiversity net gain.

“The acceptability of the proposed alterations and extensions in design and conservation terms, including upon the setting of the Portman Estate Conservation Area and upon the setting of the numerous listed buildings around the site. • The acceptability of the proposed roof extension upon the amenity of residents living close to the site, most particularly in terms of daylight and sunlight. • The acceptability of the sustainability of the refurbished and extended building.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Councillors and local groups raised concerns about light, deliveries, construction noise, height, glazing and residents’ amenity, while several technical consultees raised no objection subject to conditions.

“CLLRS SCARBOROUGH AND ARZYMANOW: - Loss of light. - Increase in deliveries which is presently a problem as the deliveries still arrive before the conditioned time and wait in Rodmarton Street with their engines running. - Noise during construction…”

“MARYLEBONE ASSOCIATION: - Concerns over the excessive height of the proposed additional storeys and their impact on neighbouring buildings especially to the residents of Rodmarton Street to the west. - Questions the sustainability of the high levels of glazing and the need for excessive cooling plant as a result. - Requests that the impact of the glazing and its reflection on local properties be modelled to determine if the design needs modifying to reduce its impact.”

Officer report

Residents’ views

Fifteen responses were received: twelve objections and three neutral responses, with concerns about land use, amenity, design, sustainability, transport and construction.

“No. Consulted: Total No. of replies: No. of objections: 12 (including a letter written on behalf of nine occupiers of a bock of flats). No. in support: No. neutral: 3”

“Amenity: - Noise, pollution and disruption during the course of construction. - Loss of daylight and sunlight. - Overlooking. - Impact of reflected sunlight from the glass in the existing building upon heat within neighbouring homes. - Requests that conditions are imposed limiting hours of use of proposed terraces. - The proposed roof extension should not be occupied by restaurants or other entertainment venues. If consent, they should be closed after 21.00.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Two members of the applicant team addressed the committee in support of the application.

The vote

The committee resolved unanimously to grant conditional planning permission, subject to the legal agreement and its stated fallback arrangements.

“1) That conditional planning permission was granted subject to the completion of a legal agreement securing the following:”

Minutes