Town planning in London, planning proposals and applications, and planning decisions

Unfortunately, officers have recommended approval for this building, which might even be acceptable in height and massing if not for the very bad façade design:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/plea-save-flagship-london-marble-arch-marks-and-spencer-demolition-b967737.html

While the original building is hardly a thing of beauty, its design is far, far superior to the unimaginative crap that's proposed. See page 35 of this PDF:

https://committees.westminster.gov.uk/documents/s44625/ITEM%2001%20-%20456%20-%20472%20Oxford%20Street%20London%20W1C%201AP.pdf

What concerns me is that it's likely that this is one of a wave of new development in Oxford Street on the heels of Crossrail. As we know from the construction boom of the 00s, the associated lorry traffic causes considerable risk to cyclists, which one would hope would be mitigated now by the Direct Vision Standard, but I have yet to see much evidence of it working. If there is more development of this kind, we can expect more cyclist deaths again. There will always be large development sites in Central London, but it's the potential for a boom that's concerning.

The other thing I really don't like is the renewed amalgamation of several sites into one building footprint. Needless to say, the original building undoubtedly did the same, and this is not an extreme example of this tendency. There is also plenty of previous in Oxford Street and overall the effect won't be as debilitating as what's been happening in Soho, e.g. in Berwick Street Market or in Broadwick Street, but it's still not something that benefits the cityscape, which is at its best where there are many entrances and smaller buildings with a wide variety of uses. Obviously, some concentration is inevitable, but if done to excess, and Oxford Street is at a critical level, it can make streets exceedingly unattractive.