Smithfield & Billingsgate: the managed decline of London’s markets
- Conrad O'Callaghan
- Feb 2
- 4 min read
UDRO report: how the City of London engineered the closure of two historic institutions
When receiving applications as part of UDRO’s 2025 recruitment drive, a project that was continually referenced was the permanent closure of Smithfield’s Meat Market and Billingsgate’s Fish Market. The management team was alarmed by the City of London Corporation’s decision to end two institutions that are landmarks in London, with a combined history spanning one and a half millennia. Therefore, Smithfield Market was chosen as the first of our three major projects for 2025.
A slow motion collision
What the research team discovered, as they delved further into this issue, was that this decision had been a long time in the making: a car crash moving in slow motion that only a select few had tried to prevent.
Our research revealed a troubling chronology.
2008: Thornfield Properties proposed full demolition of the General Market building.
2014: Henderson Global Investors proposed gutting it for offices.
Both were defeated by heritage campaigners.
2015–2020: The Museum of London relocation was approved.
2022: Relocation of the markets to Dagenham announced.
November 2024: The Corporation abruptly cancelled relocation plans.
This chronology showed that there had been two previous attempts to develop the market. This was part of the same complex as the Meat Market, and had been designed by the same Victorian architect, Horace Jones. Tragically, it had become disused due to damage sustained during the Second World War. By the turn of the century, there had still been no attempt made by the City of London Corporation to restore the buildings, and this, in hindsight, was very telling.
The first proposal, made by Thornfield Properties in 2008, sought to demolish the building in its entirety; the latter, submitted by Henderson Global Investors in 2014, proposed a substantial alteration of the building, gutting the interiors to make way for new offices. Both attempts were successfully thwarted by SAVE Britain’s Heritage, in conjunction with the Victorian Society, but are indicative of the Corporation’s attitude towards Smithfield as a whole, and Billingsgate by extension.
Only a year later, in 2015, the Museum of London announced plans to vacate its contemporary London Wall Site and relocate to Smithfield. In 2020, the Corporation gave its approval. This has allowed the Museum to be housed in the General Market Building, and the Meat Market building to be turned into a mixed-use cultural development, all by 2026. Originally, the London Wall Site was to be converted into a world-leading centre for music. However, in 2022, the Corporation had changed its tune, deciding to demolish not only the Museum Building, but also the Bastion House office block that sits on top, to make way for three new office blocks.
This would not be the only case of the Corporation backtracking on previous decisions. In 2022, it was announced that the Smithfield Meat Market and the Billingsgate Fish Market would occupy a new site in Dagenham. However, in November 2024, the Court of Common Council (the main decision-making body for the corporation) voted to cancel the plans. The Corporation offered substantial compensation, including financial support for the traders to move to another location.
UDRO's intervention
Drawing on all the information gathered by our researchers, UDRO directly contacted the City of London Corporation, challenging their decision to discontinue the plans to relocate the markets to Dagenham. UDRO received a detailed response (download available below). This did not sufficiently address a number of UDRO concerns, and enquiries continued via other avenues.
A sub-strategy we adopted was to contact the traders directly and their quasi-representative, Alicia Weston. We had limited engagement from the traders, likely a result of non-disclosure agreements they were required to sign as part of the settlement package most of them subscribed to.
What the two exemples above illustrate is that getting in touch with those directly involved is not always the best way to proceed. UDRO should take note from Alicia Weston’s actions, who convened the Court of Referees, a Parliamentary body, and was able to argue her case directly in front of MPs. Although she was denied standing, the traders were given the right to provide evidence to MPs.
The key lesson: public law strategy must be paired with political pressure. Parliamentary engagement, coordinated press, and national visibility must accompany legal challenge.
Wider lessons for London
UDRO's Smithfield Market Intervention Team released the following statement: "Major developments are never isolated events. The Museum of London relocation triggered consequences for two ancient markets. Heritage is systemic: once one institutional pillar falls, others follow. If London treats its historic infrastructure as disposable assets rather than civic anchors, more closures will follow. UDRO will not allow this pattern to repeat."
There was a direct chain of causation between the site for the Museum of London and the sites for Smithfield Meat Market and Billingsgate Fish Market. This can be extrapolated and applied to London’s heritage more generally. i.e. each development should not be treated in isolation, but as a trigger for a wider series of events that can encompass not just one, but several other institutions.
In the same way that decisions are interconnected, so are attitudes. The City of London Corporation had little regard for the Smithfield Complex, as they were once prepared to consider the demolition of the General Market Building. When one also considers that they altered their plans for the vacant London Wall Site, it was always on the cards that the promise to transfer not only two sites was on unstable ground. It is incumbent on us all to act much more quickly to prevent similar cases from arising in the future.
Comments