Critics of the planned skyscraper in Paddington have welcomed the decision to revise plans.
Developers announced it was withdrawing and revising plans for the Paddington Place proposal in a joint statement with Westminster Council on January 30.
Several groups and organisation had spoken out over the 72-storey building, earmarked for the site of the old Royal Mail sorting office in London Road, near Paddington Station .
The planning application by Great Western Development and Sellar had been submitted before Christmas, and the tower, which would be the fourth-tallest building in the capital, has been nicknamed Skinny Shard and Paddington Pole.
The Labour group in Westminster had raised concerns over several aspects of the development, ranging from lack of affordable housing to impact on the community.
It had called the original plans “unacceptable” and said it failed to deliver significant benefits for Westminster residents .
It said designers must now go back to the drawing board and come back with a radically different plan “that dramatically reduces the height of any new building and significantly increases the number of social and genuinely affordable homes in Westminster”.
Group leader Adam Hug said: “Westminster residents won’t accept only cosmetic changes to the Paddington Pole plans, shaving off just a few floors and hoping no one notices.
"There must be a real rethink about how this important site is used so that it benefits local people. We must all remain vigilant to ensure that this happens.”
Skyline Campaign has also objected to the proposal and said the decision by developers to go back to the drawing represented a victory. But co-founder Barbara Weiss also urged caution. She said: “We’ve definitely won the first round. We’re delighted but also cautious.
“They’re going to come back with a revised proposal, and we hope it’s significantly different. We’re hoping for a mid-rise development, around 10-12 storeys, something that would fit in with Praed Street and the listed buildings around.”
The Victorian Society had also objected. Its senior conservation adviser James Hughes warned: “The new proposals should be a total rethink rather than simply slicing a few storeys off the proposed tower.
“Redevelopment should focus on incorporating the site’s existing asset - the historic former Royal Mail sorting and delivery office.”