As we prepare for the BCO conference and UKREiiF 2026, the conversation with respect to retrofitting historic buildings has shifted from whether we should act, to how quickly we can.  

With new policy weight being given to embodied carbon, the case for keeping and upgrading what we already have is strengthening fast, and for those of us working within built heritage, that means creating vital opportunities to transform historic assets into the next generation of sustainable, high-performing workplaces. This is the end of the ’demolish-by-default’ era; the task now is to tackle office obsolescence by making the most of what heritage buildings already offer: character, durability and a lower-carbon starting point. 

The policy landscape has undergone a fundamental shift. The Draft NPPF and emerging local plans are placing unprecedented weight on embodied carbon, signalling that the ‘public benefit’ of retaining and reusing existing structures can now carry substantial weight in the planning balance. Scotland’s NPF4 (February 2023) moved early in this direction at a national level, and the direction of travel is clear across the UK. For owners of ageing office stock, particularly where assets are listed or within sensitive historic environments, this is not simply an extra reporting line; it is changing what is consentable, what is investable and what is competitive. In practice, a planning-led retrofit strategy is becoming the route to unlocking viable refurbishment, extension or change-of-use, while managing heritage constraints and viability pressures in a high-interest environment. 

This shift is landing in the context of a definitive two-tier office market. The flight to quality is no longer just about design; it is increasingly a shift to performance; energy, comfort, adaptability and ESG office market credibility. Retrofitting heritage can meet that bar, but it requires a clear story about why interventions are necessary, proportionate and beneficial. Where well-judged additions are needed, the strongest schemes are those that use heritage significance as a framework for change, so that upgrades, additional space and modern services are seen as enabling long-term use rather than eroding special interest. For example, our work at Sackville House in London has focused on using a planning-led retrofit approach to reposition a listed asset toward market-leading, Grade A office space, while extending, altering and celebrating the building’s defining character. 

That opportunity is not limited to straightforward office refurbishment. In some cases, genuine sustainability and long-term value will come from bolder decisions, targeted office asset repositioning, mixed-use intensification, or carefully justified office to residential conversion and to other alternative uses where the market has moved on. We are seeing this play out across a range of heritage contexts, from repositioning and extension strategies for landmark listed offices, to adaptive reuse approaches that unlock new life in constrained historic settings. The common thread is keeping buildings in productive use: the most sustainable building is often the one that remains occupied, maintained and valued. For heritage assets, adaptive reuse can be the difference between managed evolution and slow decline, especially where vacancy risk and rising upgrade costs threaten long-term viability. 

As embodied-carbon policy tightens and occupier expectations rise, retrofit-first is moving from slogan to strategy. The future of our city centres depends on converting existing historic buildings into places where people actively choose to work, so that heritage becomes not a constraint, but a platform for delivering the next generation of sustainable office buildings. 

We look forward to continuing the conversation at the BCO conference and UKREiiF.