Part One: Spatial Strategy and Policies (Regulation 19)

Support

Representation ID: 1484

Received: 11/12/2024

Respondent: Sovereign Centros

Agent: Williams Gallagher

We continue to support the overarching provisions of Draft Policy DLP24 which make clear that the priority for Dudley’s Centres
(including Brierley Hill Strategic Centre) is to ensure that they remain focused on serving the needs of their communities while enabling
centres to repurpose and diversify by providing a well-balanced mix of commercial, business and service functions. This includes both
retail provision and a mix of leisure, office, residential and other appropriate, complementary town centre uses that are accessible by a
variety of sustainable means of transport.
We also support the amendment to Policy DLP24 which responds to our comments on the Regulation 18 Consultation Version of the
Local Plan (wording changed at Point 5 to reflect that Merry Hill is a managed shopping centre with both the ground and upper floors
lending themselves well to the provision of a wider mix of uses (where such uses (including main town centre uses falling outside of Use
E)).
For context, and in respect of the Regulation 18 Consultation Version of the Local Plan, we had expressed concern that Point 5 of the
policy (which specifies the types of uses that can come forward at ground and upper floors in town centre locations) was somewhat
ambiguous and could lead to misinterpretation in respect of Merry Hill. Indeed, the ground and upper floors of this part of the Brierley Hill
Strategic Centre (a Tier 1 Centre) do not perform in the same way that a traditional town centre would. To control uses in this way at
Merry Hill (i,e. Use Class E at the lower level and wider uses on the upper floor) has the potential impact on the ability of the owners of
the Centre to adapt and respond to market demand in the interests of its valued customer base.
In reality, and whilst the primary focus of the Centre will be retail for many years to come, both the ground and upper floors lend
themselves well to the provision of a wider mix of uses (where such uses (including main town centre uses falling outside of Use E) which
enhance the viability of the wider Strategic Centre and Merry Hill complex. The fact that the Centre is in one single ownership also allows
the mix of uses to be managed in such a way that promotes and enhances its vitality without leading to the types of impacts usually
attributed to certain non-E Class town centre uses (e.g. anti-social behavior, littering, noise).
We therefore argued that the ground and upper floors of the Merry Hill Shopping Centre should both be allowed to diversify beyond that
of an E Class use where demand is identified, and that such uses are appropriate to its designated town / strategic centre status. Such an
approach would allow the Centre to adapt to the ever-evolving retail market as well as accommodate new and exciting town centre
appropriate uses, that are not necessarily covered by Use Class E, but which drive footfall and enhance the vitality of the Centre in the
same way that a traditional retail / Class E Use would.
It was also argued that the above approach would also align better with Bullet 3 of draft Policy DLPBH1 which noted that the
diversification and re-purposing of Brierley Hill Strategic Centre will be supported by approving development which enhances the viability
and vitality of the centre.

Comment

Representation ID: 1485

Received: 11/12/2024

Respondent: Sovereign Centros

Agent: Williams Gallagher

We do not consider that the Council’s response to our previous comments on this draft policy (made in connection with the Regulation 18
Consultation Version of the Local Plan) to be sufficiently robust to justify no amendments to its wording:
“Noted, however no change” (Page 97 of 231 of the Dudley Local Plan Consultation Statement dated October 2024).
Our previous comments in respect of Draft Policy DLP29 are set out below for ease of reference. Furthermore, we understand an
oversupply of takeaways in a town centre location can lead to a poor-quality retail environment, especially on a high street with broken
ownerships, where there may be multiple shops closed and shuttered during the daytime. A high-quality managed shopping centre
environment however, which is managed in one-ownership, does not carry this same risk. The owners of Merry Hill are incentivised to
maintain a vibrant location for all of its tenants. Hot food takeaways tend to be open all day to cater for shoppers and are generally of a high
quality, with a variety of offers and cuisines.
We would urge the Council to reconsider and provide a more detailed response. We would otherwise request that the Inspector presiding
over the local plan examination (as and when this takes place) review and come to their own conclusions as to the soundness of this policy.
Until such time, we can only conclude that this policy (in terms of its applicability to Merry Hill) is unjustified and thus unsound.
We also query the requirement for a Health Impact Assessment when the criteria relating to the acceptability of proposals for hot food
takeaways is already extensive. It is also unclear as to what such an assessment will need cover.

Reference to Reg 18 Rep - REP ID 501-509