Object

Representation ID: 1

Received: 16/11/2023

Respondent: Copthorne Hotel

Key housing sites
Priority sites have been identified for the delivery of new homes.
These are all brownfield sites:
1. Land at Waterfront Way and Level Street, Brierley Hill - 600 dwellings

How will access to the business located at Copthorne Hotel, Level Street be maintained and disruption minimised during construction of these homes?
What actions will be taken to avoid noise disturbance to hotel residents during construction?
What works to improve traffic flow will be undertaken to support the addition of 900 homes in an area which already suffers from traffic congestion along Level Street, Waterfront Way and The Embankment during rush hours and at times of increased trading at the Merry Hill shopping centre?

Object

Representation ID: 240

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Dennis R Whittaker

Policy DLPBHPS1 (Priority Site) Land at Waterfront Way and Level Street. COMMENT 1 -- CONTRADICTORY INFORMATION.
(A) The Brierley Hill Inset Map show this site as including the following BHAAP Development
Blocks:- W1, w2, W3, W4, W5 and about half of P4.
(B.) However, in Draft Dudley Local Plan - Part 1, Appendix 2 Page 438, Blocks W1, W2, W3 and W4 are stated to be removed with, on Page 439, W5 being carried forward as part of allocation OLP BH PS1.
(C.) The SH LAA 2022/2023 states that the Area covered consists of BHAAP Blocks W5 and P4 and gives the area of BHPS1 as 7.6ha gross (5.7ha nett).
However, the area of W5 is 3.8ha and P4 as 0.9ha (Ref. SHLAA 2016/2017) - so, even if the whole of P4 were included in BHPS1, that adds up to only 4.7ha -with 2.9ha gross (1.0ha nett) missing. This needs to be sorted out.

(A) HOUSING DENSITY.
An aim of Policy DLP 1 Development Strategy is to create "sustainable mixed communities".
The SHLAA 2022/2023 and this Policy DLPBHPS1 claims that the site would accommodate 600
Dwellings at a minimum density of 95DPH. Based on Table 8.2 in Part 1 of this OLP Consultation, at that density, about 92% of the Dwellings would be Flats - and not ideal for Families - which are a crucial component of sustainable mixed communities. This density would likely lead to high proportion of transient occupation which would not achieve that aim - which is a matter of some concern.
Based on that scenario, I object to that density of Dwellings

(B.) BUILDING HEIGHTS.
Buildings would need to fit in with Waterfront East which is three storeys. Given the proposed density,
I am not convinced that most of the proposed Buildings would not need to be significantly taller than three storeys.
Based on that scenario, I object to that density of Dwellings.

COMMENT 3 -OBJECTIONS. CAR PARKING?
private Cars are the preferred mode of transport for the vast majority of people -- and for the very good
reasons that I have given elsewhere. So, there must be adequate Parking provision.
Waterfront East itself, is seen by Policy DLPBHOS2 as an Opportunity Site with an Entertainment Zone at ground-floor level. Recently, this sort of use has been gradually expanding. If this trend continues, there will be an increased need for Car Parking provision and, if sufficient were not available, the future
of the Entertainment Zone envisaged would be in doubt. Although, there are some Parking spaces in front of the ground-floor premises, there would not be enough if Entertainment provision returned to anywhere near the levels seen 15years ago.
* I must also point out that, besides Waterfront East, the Car Park also serves as an overflow Car Park for Waterfront West and the Business Park.
Given the high density of Housing proposed, I am not convinced that there would be space to provide enough Parking for the needs of the Housing and that of the Waterfront.
The provision of Metro is largely irrelevant because it will only come from and go to the North whereas the catchment area of the Waterfront stretches in all directions.
Therefore, based on that scenario, I object to that density and extent of Housing.

Comment

Representation ID: 488

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Brierley Hill Community Forum

Housing at the Merry Hill Centre

We would like to see included as an aim in the plan the development of high quality housing within the Merry Hill shopping centre or car parks.
We believe that the centre will never achieve full occupancy again as a result of the changes to retail patterns and both part of the centre and the extensive car parks could be repurposed with a high quality residential offer.
We recognise that the current owners of the site are not considering this option, but longer term we think it is an appropriate aspiration.

Object

Representation ID: 746

Received: 21/12/2023

Respondent: Police Crime Commissioner for West Midlands (PCCWM)

Agent: Tyler Parkes

Policy DLPBHOS1 Brierley Hill Strategic Centre Opportunity Site: Brierley Hill Civic Core, this
policy should acknowledge in ‘2d. change of use, redevelopment or partial redevelopment of the
Police Station Site could include housing.’ (Suggested changes in bold and underlined).
[Objection]

Object

Representation ID: 852

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Sport England

Notes that Part 5 of the policy allocation identifies the impact on infrastructure provision, and whilst open space requirements are included there is currently no provision within the policy for sport and physical activity infrastructure. Raise an objection to the allocation which could be addressed by including an appropriate reference to meeting the needs of the development for playing pitches and built sports facilities in line with the policies and evidence base referenced.

Calculations provided using the Sport England's Sports Facilities and Playing Pitch Calculators.