Marylebone Planning

Westminster City Council consults us on every planning application for the area, approximately 1,000 applications annually.  We encourage all developers to engage with us at the earliest opportunity before any pre-application meetings.  We ask that developers and owners give careful regard to the impact their proposal will have not only on the historical or architectural interest of the building, but also on the environment, streetscape and the amenity of neighbours. Generally, we do not object to proposals which have architectural merit, where materials and detailed design take into account and enrich original features and are in proportion to the existing building and streetscape.  See our planning guidelines.

Index

Live console of the Planning Sub-Committee's activities.

Developments On Site
Developments Due on Site
Developments in Planning
Developments in Pre Planning

Objecting to a Planning Application

CONFLICT STATEMENT  We are fortunate that Marylebone Association Planning Sub-Committee consist of eight local active professional Architects/Town planners.  However, from time to time conflicts of interests do arise.  Where this it the case the Association's comments feature a  "declaration of interest":  The Association would like it noted that a member of their planning panel has links with this application. This member has not been involved in making the submission.  Where an application is considered significant for Marylebone, the Association's response is agreed by the main committee.

25 Baker Street by Hopkins Architects, Derwent London and The Portman Estate -this is a £400m project that totals 293,000 sq ft of mixed use space (office,retail and residential). The pedestrian link, Loxton Walk, connects Baker Street and Gloucester Place through the centre of the new building. Laing O’Rourke have completed the main fit out and tenant fit out is ongoing - the project is due to complete fully in Q1 2026.

Debenhams– the proposal by architects, Allford Hall Monaghan Morris, part retains the frame and combines with a new build element - all for mixed use (retail and offices above). Date for completion to be confirmed; expected Q1 2026.

29Marylebone Road - ADP Architects for University of Westminster - proposal for anew innovation and enterprise hub. WCC Planning Committee approved the application on the 16th May 2023 but restricted the roof terrace use until6pm to restrict any detrimental amenity impact - site works in progress. Date for completion Q3 2026.

25Marylebone Road - Methodist Church House - proposal by Anomaly Architects to convert to offices as retrofit. WCC approved the application on the3rd July 2023 with numerous Conditions to mitigate potential negative impacts on Bingham Place - site works in progress. Date for completion Q32026.

1-7Harley Street - new medical building behind retained facade was approved by Westminster Committee in November 2020; site works in progress. Date for completion Q4 2026.

Seymour Leisure Centre Refurbishment – the proposal is for a 10,000 sq ft new community hub and will include the new Library, offices as well as new sports facilities.Following early engagement and community consultation with WCC (as this is a Council application) over 3 years the application was submitted and we raised significant concerns in respect of sustainability, energy use, entrance & circulation, uses and design & heritage issues. Despite the concerns raised the application was approved at Committee on the 11th July 2023 - this was very disappointing and we saw this as a missed opportunity to create an exemplar community facility. WCC closed the Centre on the 22nd February2024 and it is scheduled to reopen in 2026. The general refurbishment is progressing on site with the site accommodation/ welfare facilities built out over Bryanston Place. We undertook a site visit with the contractor, Wilmott Dixon and the architect, Make, which was very informative - we look forward to returning in autumn 2026 to see the project as it nears completion.   Due to current programme delays due to site discoveries the opening will be delayed until Q4 2026 or Q1 2027.

66Portland Place - RIBA HQ - extensive refurbishment project (to improve accessibility throughout the building, the removal of the gas boilers and the creation of a new cafe with access from Weymouth Street) by Benedetti Architects at a cost of £58.8m. The application was approved under delegated powers on the 11th June 2025. Site works have now commenced and are due to complete in 2028.

Developments Due on Site

Temporary Theatre on Marble Arch Island - proposal for a theatre for two years from March2026. The applicant submitted a Pre Application to WCC and they have received positive feedback - the application was submitted however we never received the consultation documents despite being the statutory consultee - the application was approved by the Strategic Committee on the 9th December 2025. Site works are due imminently as the opening is scheduled for March 2026.

64 Marylebone High Street - St Marylebone Church Of England School - proposed refurbishment works to create a dining hall and rebuild Memorial Garden wall - we supported the application in principle with concerns; the application was approved 5th Sept 2025. Site works due 2026.

206 Marylebone Road - proposals to redevelop the old NCR building on the north side of Marylebone Road - the plan is to retain the 1930’s facade, demolish behind the facade and the rear 1960’s building and rebuild a new office building. The application was submitted in June 2024. We had significant concerns in respect of the proposed extent of demolition and objected accordingly. The application went to WCC Planning Committee on the 4th February 2025 and was approved. Site start expected 2026.

43-45 Portman Square - proposed redevelopment of the south east corner building with a significant roof extension. Early proposals were received and preliminary comments returned with concerns about the scale of the roof extension. We submitted formal comments in respect of the scale and materiality of the new roof. The principle of retrofit is supported. The application was approved under delegated powers on the 7th April 2025. Site start expected2026.

38-70 Baker Street, 64-66 Blandford Street and 43-45 Dorset Street by Allford Hall Monaghan Morris – the scheme will create a mixed-use scheme providing Class E commercial space (retail, restaurants, offices), a community space, and21 residential units within a new 7/8 storey building. A Special Majors Committee was convened for the 6th August 2024; there was considerable debate between the Councillors and much criticism of the scheme (impact on residents, scale, design quality) however on balance the harm was felt to be outweighed by the perceived community benefits and the application was unanimously approved. We are continuing conversations with the applicant in respect of the detailed design to improve the overall quality. Start on site expected in mid 2026.

M&S Marble Arch - proposed complete demolition and redevelopment of their Marble Arch buildings by Pilbrow & Partners. The application was approved by WCC Committee, the Mayor revisited the Stage 2 Report and gave his approval. The application was then called in by the Secretary of State and a Public Enquiry commenced on the 25th October 2022; the Inspector delivered his report in July 2023 which recommended approval - however the Secretary of State decided to turnover this recommendation and refuse the application. M&S launched a Judicial Review on 31st August 2023 - on the 1st March 2024 a High Court judge ruled on 5 out of 6 points of law that the Secretary of State’s decision to block the redevelopment was unlawful. The then Secretary of State, Angela Rayner, approved the application on the 5th December 2024. Site start expected 2026/2027.

Swiss Embassy - the project proposes a comprehensive retrofit redevelopment of the Bryanston Square building and the 1970’s extension; the scheme was approved at WCC Planning Committee on the 16th April 2024. Site start date is expected in 2028.

33 Cavendish Square - major redevelopment of the whole city block by KPF Architects and BEAM - an initial meeting was held on the 23rd January 2024with very early feasibility ideas discussed. We met the design team again on24th March 2025 to review the developing designs and the scheme was exhibited publicly for a second time in early July. We have received the evolved designs for the Oxford Street block which only show a marginal improvement. The planning documents were submitted on the 18th August. We have a number of concerns (massing, scale and detailed design) with the submitted application and have met the team to discuss the issues. Modest amendments have been made however our objection remains and our comments/ objection have been submitted to the WCC Officers. The application was approved by the Strategic Committee on the 9th December 2025. Site start unknown.

55 Baker Street - proposed modernisation, refurbishment and roof top extension of the complete office building - we met the design team in early June to review the proposals in detail and the application has now been submitted - we have submitted a number of concerns to WCC in respect of the increased massing and detrimental amenity impacts to the neighbours on the adjoining streets. The application was unanimously approved by WCC Strategic Committee on the 28thOctober 2025 - concerns were raised in respect of the massing and detrimental amenity impacts but these were deemed to outweighed by the economic and sustainability benefits of the proposal. Site start unknown.

Cavendish Square Car Park – 270,000 sq ft of mixed use development with 4 levels all underground – approved by Westminster Virtual Committee on 28th April 2020- site start date unknown. We understand that a new revised application is being prepared and await to hear further news.

Heritage Partnership Agreement - Howard de Walden Estate submitted an HPA to cover specific works/ repairs to 311 listed buildings to their Estate. We welcome the HPA as a means to establish acceptable and necessary design details to renew our Listed Building stock, creating more sustainable, future-proofed properties. We welcome the rigorous conditions proposed as part of the HPA, ensuring that the scope of work is clearly defined, that work will be monitored, and the provision of an end-of-year report to describe exactly what work has been carried out on each of the Listed Buildings. The HPA was unanimously approved by WCC Committee on 15th April 2025. We look forward to seeing the end-of-year report when actioned.

126- 134 Baker Street - an additional storey is proposed to the building just south of Marylebone Road. Design discussions have been undertaken and the application has been submitted to WCC and is pending a decision. We reviewed the design and had a number of concerns - our comments were submitted to WCC and we await their decision. We anticipate that the application will be approve under delegated powers in early 2026.

Chapel Street - a new Train Crew Accommodation (TCA) facility at Edgware Road Station is proposed that is sited on a current car park - the application is currently out for consultation from WCC.

Developments in Pre Planning

31-37 Duke Street - proposals to redevelop the end of a city block opposite Selfridges to create retail and offices by DSP and Stiff & Trevillion - the applicant has undertaken a consultation exercise and we recently met with the design team - various design details were discussed and we look forward to seeing design development prior to submission in early 2026.

Avon House - this is a significant redevelopment of a block bounded by Oxford Street, St Christophers Place and Stratford Place. We are due to meet the design team to review the initial proposals in February 2026.

Marble Arch – The Portman Estate are developing proposals to enlarge and improve the public realm at Marble Arch and reroute traffic flows; these are at an initial design stage and are being developed with Publica, TFL, Crown Estate, Royal Parks and WCC. MA is supporting the proposals and has written a letter of support to The Mayor.

16 -18 Connaught Place - a Grade II listed William Whitfield building from 1985just off Edgware Road (northwest of Marble Arch); proposals to renovate and extend the existing building are at an early stage and a community consultation has been initiated. We have had a meeting to review initial design proposals and raised concerns about the scale of the extensions and their potential harm to the listed building. We anticipate a further meeting when designs have evolved.

The Wallace Collection have appointed Selldorf Architects, based in New York, and Purcell to undertake an ambitious £30 million revamp of its Manchester Square headquarters. The architect will draw up a design brief for the master planning of the museum’s Grade II-listed Hertford House base; the project will revamp the main Ground and First Floor exhibition spaces, upgrade the visitor facilities in the main entrance and on the lower-ground floor. Proposals will also support the museum’s ambition to become carbon zero by 2050. Gardiner& Theobald are the project managers and we are awaiting a meeting date to be fully consulted.

One Chapel Place - a significant demolition and new build office building adjacent to a Grade I church - an initial meeting was held and concerns raised in respect of its excessive scale at 11 storeys. Further meetings were expected however the applicant aggressively submitted the application and our comprehensive objection was lodged. The application was then amended and 2floors removed - the application was sent out for a second consultation and we objected again on similar grounds. We understand that the site has now been sold to Great Portland Estates and the application has been withdrawn - we look forward to seeing a new scheme in the future.

Objecting to a Planning Application

FINDING OUT ABOUT IT

When Westminster Council receives a planning application they are supposed to notify those neighbours who they think may be affected by it, but this depends on the judgement of planning officers and not everyone who thinks they ought to have been informed gets a letter. Nonetheless, you can object to any planning application, whether or not you have received a letter.

The other ways to find out about local planning applications are keeping an eye out for “Yellow notices” on the street. But the best way of finding out is to look on the Council’s website. http://idoxpa.westminster.gov.uk/online-applications/. You can register online an receive email automatic updates of new applications and track and receive updates on the status of applications.

The website also allows you to view and download the details of those applications and provide your comments to the Council.  

MAKING AN OBJECTION

The way to object to a planning application is comment online or write to the Planning Department, either by post or by e-mail (If you are emailing or posting you should quote the planning application number shown on the Council’s letter to you or on the Council’s website).  Any comments you send online, in writing or by email will be listed on the Council website alongside the planning application and supporting documents.  Your contact details will not be published.

Your objection will have most effect if a number of people write in to object, but do not organise a petition; it will not carry any weight and is a waste of time. Also avoid using a ‘standard’ letter, objectors should use their own words. Objections will not carry the same weight if they are seen to have been written or produced in a standardised form.

Westminster always request comments within a time limit (usually within 21 days of notification), but in practice they will take into account any representations received before the application is actually determined. So it is not too late to comment provided a planning permission has not actually been issued. It is obviously best to make your views known as early as possible.

There is no restriction on what you can say about a planning application, but your Council will not publish or take account of any material which they think is libellous, racist or offensive. There is no point in putting things in your letter which are not relevant to planning, because by law the Council can only take into account the planning issues and must not allow themselves to be influenced by other considerations unless they really are relevant to planning.  

It therefore makes sense when objecting to a planning application to concentrate on those aspects of a development which are likely to be unacceptable in terms of their visual impact, effect on the character of a neighbourhood, possible noise and disturbance (not construction), overlooking and loss of privacy. The likely effect of the development on the residential amenity of neighbours is clearly an important consideration.  Westminster cannot refuse permission for a scheme because of construction noise but they can restrict the hours of work to reduce disturbance to residents and other sensitive neighbouring occupiers.

If the proposed development is in a designated Conservation Area or would affect the setting of a Listed Building, there may be further grounds of objection relating to the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area or on the setting of the particular Listed Building.

Westminster is one of the most over planned parts of the country with policy for just about everything. In any event, the effect of the development on the character of the neighbourhood remains a factor which may lead to the refusal of planning permission, so you should not hesitate to raise issues of density and possible over-development of the site as well as the adverse impact which the proposed development might have on the character of the neighbourhood or on the residential amenity of neighbours.

Design (including bulk and massing, detailing and materials, if these form part of the application) is recognised as an important factor in the acceptability of a development proposal. If you think the development looks ugly, then you should say so, especially if it is over-bearing, out-of-scale or out of character in terms of its appearance compared with existing development in the vicinity. As mentioned above, a higher standard of design is expected in a Conservation Area, or where it affects the setting of a Listed Building. Westminster is under a legal duty to have particular regard to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character and appearance of a Conservation Area. Similarly, a development which would adversely affect the setting of a Listed Building is unlikely to be acceptable.

Concerns about highway safety may also be raised, but it should be borne in mind that such issues are subject to careful technical examination by qualified engineers employed by the highway authority, and so objections based on road safety fears are unlikely to carry much weight unless it is also the independent view of Westminster’s own highway engineers that the development would adversely affect highway safety or the convenience of road users.

To summarise, the following are the grounds on which planning permission is most likely to be refused (although this list is not intended to be exhaustive) :

• Adverse effect on the residential amenity of neighbours, by reason of (among other factors) noise & disturbance (but not construction), overlooking, loss of privacy, overshadowing

• Unacceptably high density / over-development of the site

• Visual impact of the development

• Effect of the development on the character of the neighbourhood

• Design (including bulk, massing, detailing and materials)

• The proposed development is over-bearing, out-of-scale or out of character in terms of its appearance compared with existing development in the vicinity

• The loss of existing views from neighbouring properties would adversely affect the residential amenity of neighbouring owners

• In Conservation Area, adverse effect of the development on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area

• If near a Listed Building, adverse effect of the development on the setting of the Listed Building

• The development would adversely affect highway safety or the convenience of road users (but only if there is technical evidence to back up such a claim)

The following points, on the other hand will not be taken into account in deciding on the acceptability of the development in planning terms:

• The reasons or motives of the applicant in applying for planning permission (for example if the development is thought to be purely speculative)

• The behaviour of the applicant

• Nuisance or annoyance previously caused by the applicant

• Concerns about possible future development of the site

• Any effect on the value of neighbouring properties

PLANNING POLICIES

The aim of planning is to help ensure sustainable development and growth.

Planning decisions are never taken in a vacuum. The officers or councillors who determine a planning application do not just do so on a whim. They are required by law to determine such matters in accordance with “the City Plan”, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. There are several key policies and documents that planning applications in Westminster are determined by. These make up Westminster's development plan and include:

1. Westminster’s City Plan
   

2. Unitary Development Plan (UDP)
   

3. London Plan

Westminster’s City Plan is the key policy document for determining planning applications in Westminster. As the most local and up-to-date policies, these should be looked at first, and take priority over Unitary Development Policies.

DELEGATED DECISIONS

If you believe there is a risk that a planning application to which you object may be approved by a planning officer under delegated powers, you should contact your local Councillor and ask them to get the application referred to committee, so that it can be properly debated. This does not guarantee that the application will be dealt with in that way, but there is a good chance that it may be referred to committee in these circumstances.

LOBBYING COUNCILLORS

As a general rule, the only safe way of ‘lobbying’ councillors is to write an identical letter to all members of the planning committee (or the sub-committee which is going to determine the application), and make it clear in the text of the letter that this is a letter which is being written to all the members. You cannot be sure that the councillors will actually read the letter or take any notice of it, but you will at least have communicated your views direct to councillors, rather than having them ‘filtered’ or summarised by officers in their committee report.

ATTENDING THE PLANNING COMMITTEE

Where a planning application is determined by Westminster Planning Sub-Committee you may attend the meeting, you should register to speak if you want to make comments at the meeting.

GETTING AN APPLICATION 'CALLED IN'

If a planning application is extremely controversial and raises issues then there is a possibility that the Secretary of State may be persuaded to call-in the application for his own determination under s.77 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. It is only very large developments, likely to have an impact over a wider area. The Secretary of State has a wide discretion as to whether or not a planning application should be called in, but such call-ins are now very rare. Mere strength of opposition is not enough to secure a call-in; it must be clearly shown that the potential impact of the development is likely to be felt over a very wide area, extending beyond the locality in which the site is situated. In other words the proposed development must be of ‘strategic’ importance.

CHALLENGING A PLANNING PERMISSION
If planning permission is granted, objectors have no right of appeal against that decision. There is only one exception to this. If there is a serious legal error in the Council’s decision, or in the way in which it was reached, a legal challenge can be brought before the High Court by way of an application for judicial review, seeking the quashing of the decision. However, the Court’s jurisdiction is strictly confined to dealing with an error of law; they will not ‘second guess’ the decision maker and substitute their own view as to the planning merits. If the decision to grant planning permission was lawful, the Court will not intervene, no matter how ‘bad’ the decision might appear to be in purely planning terms.   An application for judicial review is not to be embarked upon lightly.  The costs can be counted in many thousands of pounds, and the chances of success for the objectors are very slim.

Should you require further support from the Marylebone Association please contact Neil Wilson  neil.wilson@marylebone.org