Policy TRAN1 Priorities for the Development of the Transport Network

Support

Representation ID: 22594

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: MH No. 1 Limited Partnership and Ellandi

Agent: Williams Gallagher

I write in respect of the above public consultation regarding the emerging Black Country Plan (the ‘Plan’)
published for consultation between 16 August 2021 and 11 October 2021 and covering the four Black Country
Authorities of Dudley, Sandwell, Walsall and Wolverhampton.

These representations have been prepared and submitted on behalf of MH No. 1 Limited and Ellandi in respect of Merry Hill Shopping Centre. MH No. 1
Limited are the owners of Merry Hill and Ellandi are the assets managers of the centre on behalf of the wners.

Ellandi was appointed as asset manager for Merry Hill in September 2020 and are currently leading a process of reinvigoration and re-positioning of the centre following the turbulent recent period in the retail sector. This includes a focus on Merry Hill shopping centre itself as the priority but also a wider strategic consideration of the additional land holdings around the centre.

Merry Hill Shopping Centre is situated within Brierley Hill Strategic Centre and accommodates over 200 stores and 150,000 sq. m of floorspace in addition to over 9,000 car parking spaces. The centre includes a dedicated bus station with almost 100 local and regional routes serving the centre and Merry Hill will soon benefit from access via the 11km Midland Metro line 2 extension from Wednesbury to Brierley Hill which is anticipated to open in 2023.

The wider area is anchored by the regional shopping centre with the area of ownership covered by these
representations also including a retail park, Odeon cinema and additional underutilised land around the
centre. Overall Merry Hill provides the largest agglomeration of floorspace within unified management in the West Midlands and includes key retailers such as M&S, Next, Boots, TK Maxx, H&M, Sports Direct / Flannels, Primark, Superdrug, JD Sports and Asda. As a result of this, Merry Hill provides thousands of jobs and is of fundamental importance to the Black Country’s economy.

The Plan retains Merry Hill’s inclusion as part of the Brierley Hill Strategic Centre. This is strongly supported
as it recognises the crucial role Merry Hill plays in the sub-regional economy and will help to facilitate the
continued regeneration and improvement of the centre and wider Strategic Centre of which it forms a part.

The overall approach of the Plan is to direct new residential and employment development across the Black Country to support the existing centres and to contribute to their regeneration rather than in supporting
new centres. The Plan recognises that recent changes in the retail sector have led to an oversupply of retail
floorspace therefore the shopping and service needs of existing and future residents can be met by the
existing centre hierarchy. Furthermore, the Plan recognises that in certain circumstances, there may need to be a reduction in retail floorspace in some centres and a shift in concentration on retail uses to ensure they
remain viable.

This approach is strongly supported as it represents a realistic reflection of the challenges faced by the
retail sector and provides the best opportunity to deliver the regeneration and continued health of the Black
Country’s centres. Notwithstanding this, it is recommended that this approach is strengthened and that the Plan makes it clear that its focus is that appropriate investment should be directed to the Strategic Centres in the first instance in accordance with the centre hierarchy.

Aligned to this, there should also be a more explicit recognition within the Plan of the need for flexibility in
respect of the range of uses within the Strategic Centres. This would reflect the dynamic nature of the retail
market where fast paced change through disruptive processes requires responsive policies and planning
decisions that allow centres to benefit from this pace of change. The Strategic Centres are the key drivers
of the Black Country economy and it is crucial that they are able to quickly adapt and respond to ever
quicker market changes. Planning policies at the sub-regional and local level should therefore include in-built
flexibility recognising that the pace of updating Development Plan policies to respond to market changes can often be undertaken quick enough to keep up with this fast-paced change. This approach would be
consistent with Paragraph 82 of the National Planning Policy Framework which requires that planning
policies should:
“d) be flexible enough to accommodate needs not anticipated in the plan, allow for new and flexible working
practices, and to enable a rapid response to changes in economic circumstances.”

Leading on from this, the Plan suggests that the existing Area Action Plans (AAPs) for the Strategic Centres
will be subject to review following the adoption of the Black Country Plan to reflect the updated
development targets and strategic objectives of the Plan. Whilst there is obviously a need for additional policy at the local level to supplement the strategic policies of the Black Country Plan, it is not considered that an updated Area Action Plan is the best mechanism to provide this for Brierley Hill and the other Strategic Centres.

As noted above, the current nature of the market for retail and other town centre uses is changing at an
unprecedented pace. It is unlikely that Development Plan policy is able to be prepared and updated fast enough to remain relevant in this context. It is therefore considered that there are planning policy mechanisms that would be more efficient and responsive than an AAP in helping to shape the future regeneration of Brierley Hill Strategic Centre. This could more appropriately include either a Supplementary Planning Document or Development Framework that would help to guide future development but could be produced much quicker and therefore be more flexible than an updated AAP forming part of the
Development Plan.

To put this into the context of the current AAP, Policy 20 envisages a large scale extension to Merry Hill to
provide an additional 56,500 sq. m of comparison goods floorspace. The plan was adopted in August 2011
following work commencing on the plan in 2006. Over this five year period the global financial crisis occurred
and the development encouraged by Policy 20 was extremely unlikely to be delivered and therefore
arguably already out-of-date at the point of adoption.

Following the global financial crisis, the retail and leisure markets then saw an increase in the development of
large format foodstores with demand for these subsequently declining and supermarket operators
subsequently closing stores. Following this, there has been increases and subsidence in demand for chain
restaurant casual dining and more recently following the Covid-19 pandemic, uncertainty regarding the way
in which people may continue to work more flexibly and increasingly from home part of the time and the
impact this could have on the demand for and the characteristics of office floorspace. This highlights the
speed at which priorities in the retail and leisure markets can change and as a result of this, the difficulty
planning policy has in keeping up with these changes.

As a result of the above and the even more recent acceleration in the rate at which the retail market is
changing it is not considered that an updated AAP is necessarily the best option for provision of more
locational specific guidance below the strategic level of the Black Country Plan. This is due to the length of
time it will take to produce an update to the Strategic Centre AAPs and the likelihood that following this, it
will not be possible for the plans to remain sufficiently up to date.

To resolve this issue, the Black Country Plan should include the suggested option that each Local Authority
could either update the AAP for each Strategic Centre or produce Supplementary Planning Documents
(SPDs) or Development Frameworks to provide local guidance for the Strategic Centres. This will allow for
the more efficient production of relevant policy and in turn allow it to more quickly adapt to any future
trends in the retail and leisure sectors.

The Plan should also make clear that either of these options should be sufficiently flexible and proactive (as
it is considered the policies within the Black Country Plan are) to support the evolution and regeneration of the Strategic Centres without the need for more prescriptive policies that could become out-of-date quickly.

Policy TRAN1 of the Plan covers priorities for the development of the transport network and sets out a
range of specific improvements that are intended to be delivered over the plan period including the
extension of the Midland Metro network from Wednesbury to Brierley Hill. These improvements are
supported to increase accessibility across the Black Country to boost economic activity and increase the
proportion of journeys made by sustainable transport modes.

Policy CSP5 relates to Cultural Facilities and the Visitor Economy and seeks to protect, enhance and expand
such facilities in the Black Country. This aspiration is strongly supported to increase the attractiveness of the
Black Country as a visitor destination building on its distinct character, history and many other strengths. It is
recommended that this policy is adjusted however to specifically note that where such cultural and visitor
facilities are town centre uses, they will be subject to the sequential test.

Paragraph 4.11 includes a list of infrastructure investment required to support development including public
open space, transport provision, school places, health facilities, affordable housing, sustainable drainage
systems, wastewater treatment, and waste management facilities. It is considered that town centre and
public realm improvements be added to this list to help facilitate the regeneration of centres and where
required provide mitigation for out-of-centre proposals.

Policy ENV4 relates to the provision, retention and protection of trees, woodlands and hedgerows. Whilst
the policy is positive in that it intends to increase the provision of trees across the Black Country, clause 13
requires that new developments should make a minimum contribution of 20% canopy cover across the
development site. It should be noted that this will be sought ‘where practical’ reflecting the reality that some
development sites will not practically be able to achieve this aspiration on site.

I trust the above will be taken into account in the progression of the Plan to the next stage. As noted, overall it is considered that the Plan is positive and realistic in its future aspirations for supporting development in the Black Country and subject to the changes identified above will be a sound basis for the future growth of the sub-region. Please contact me on the details provided if there are any questions or if any further information is required.

Comment

Representation ID: 22631

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: National Highways

Transport
It should be noted that we had anticipated that a new transport evidence base would be
submitted in support of the plan. By providing a transport evidence base, we as the
Strategic Highway Authority have a clear and defined reference for working alongside
Local Highway Authorities to plan for and mitigate against the impacts of forthcoming
future development, enabling infrastructure for growth.

A number of the documents that form the evidence submission in support of the plan are
considered dated, or in the case of the Black Country Plan Transport Modelling Study,
are unavailable for review. Therefore, a refresh of the evidence base should be
considered.
We welcome and fully support the plans statements on the need for and integrated and
sustainable transport network that seeks to encourage modal shift to public transport and
active travel.
However, we are uncertain about section of Policy TRAN 1 and what it contains as it is
considered out of date, or referencing schemes which are not committed.
M6 Junction 10
We are working collaboratively with Walsall Council to deliver the junction improvement
scheme at M6 Junction 10. This scheme aims to resolve the significant congestion and
traffic delay experienced at this location. It is anticipated that the scheme will be
completed by 2022.
We therefore conclude that it is not necessary to include M6 Junction 10 in Policy TRAN
1 and it should be removed.
M5 Smart Motorways
There are no plans or commitments for the implementation of Smart Motorways on the
M5 Corridor within the Black Country. In addition, it is unclear the rationale on which this
requirement has been based, as it has not supported with ourselves. We therefore
recommend that this scheme needs to be removed from the Local Plan and Policy TRAN
1.
M54 – M6/M6 Toll Link
The Development Consent Order (DCO) examination for the M54 – M6 Link Road has
now closed and the Planning Inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State has written
its recommendation report which has been submitted to the Government. The Secretary
for State for Transport now has three months to make a decision.
Therefore, we consider the scheme can remain in the Local Plan but the reference needs
to change to remove reference to the link to the M6 Toll. Therefore, the scheme should
be renamed as the M54 – M6 Link Road.

Comment

Representation ID: 23151

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Black Country UNESCO Global Geopark Partnership

Agent: Black Country UNESCO Global Geopark Partnership

We generically agree with the need for a better connected, greener, sustainable transport system as set out in the paragraphs and policies of section 9, and the transformation to lower carbon, healthier transport options. In terms of the Geopark and connecting its many natural and cultural assets to pubic transport and healthy travel we particularly support policy TRAN 5, and feel that perhaps the strategic importance of heritage locations should be specifically referenced in TRAN 6 as the visitor economy and access to areas of special character may influence travel choices.

Comment

Representation ID: 23236

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Member of Parliament

Transport Infrastructure and the enhancement of sustainable and active travel are to be applauded and should be central to any development plan, but it is unclear from within the proposed plan how this will be underpinned by the current document.
A number of the proposed sites across Aldridge-Brown hills currently suffer from severe daily congestion, including Aldridge Road/Queslett Road East, Wolverhampton Road, Pelsall Road/Clayhanger junction and Stonnall Road.
Large parts of the road network cannot cope with the existing number of properties/vehicles, in the case of the proposed Aldridge Road/Queslett Road site the imposition of 960 properties most of which would turn right towards Birmingham would lead to even further increased gridlock in both directions given at the same time more than 1,900 school children are currently seeking to access the existing road network.
Whilst constituents would welcome steps towards more sustainable levels of transportation, it is highly questionable as to whether we can justify attempting to take these vital necessary steps when there is a lack of detailed transport modelling to accompany the proposed plan.
Further, Paragraph 4.9 supports the fact that this has not happened and only remains 'on-going'. Improved sustainable travel will not account for the loss of the natural environment with large swathes of Green Belt being lost for a future generation.

Comment

Representation ID: 23253

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Historic England

Policy Trans 1 we welcome reference to the Council’s transport strategy for the Black Country Area. We are keen to understand what stage the proposals listed within the policy are at, and what assessment has been undertaken to date to understand the impacts for the significance of heritage assets including their setting.

Support

Representation ID: 23383

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: West Midlands CPRE

Agent: Gerald Kells

Policy TRAN1
CPRE supports the aspiration to improve transport across the sub-region. Priority for spending should be on public transport schemes.

Comment

Representation ID: 23384

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: West Midlands CPRE

Agent: Gerald Kells

Expensive road projects, such as The M6 Toll- M54 link road should not be prioritized. We would also strongly oppose any return of the Western Strategic Route (previously called the Western Orbital Route), which was until recently supported by Midlands Connect.

Object

Representation ID: 43869

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Pegasus

10.1 The transport chapter identifies that the delivery of an improved and integrated transport network is fundamental to achieving transformation of the Black County, to deliver housing growth and improve economic performance. It recognises that the Covid-19 pandemic and a shift towards homeworking has had a significant impact on public transport patronage levels, which may take a number of years to recover. It nevertheless reiterates that high quality public transport remains at the heart of the Black Country transport strategy.
Priorities for the Development of the Transport Network
10.2 Paragraph 9.6 identifies that specific objectives should include reducing pollution and road congestion through improvements to public transport, promoting walking and cycling networks and reducing the need to travel. Taylor Wimpey recognises that pursuing these objectives will result in some potential improvements to both pollution and road congestion. However, whether significant improvements to public transport provision on their own will make any material difference to either reducing pollution or road congestion is debatable, particularly when the public transport improvements are likely to relate to the improved bus services provision, e.g. more bus services running along existing routes.
10.3 Taylor Wimpey generally supports the approach identified in Policy TRAN1 (Priorities for the Development of the Transport Network) which includes safeguarding land needed for the implementation of priority transport networks, providing adequate access to all modes of travel in association with new developments, key transport corridors being prioritised through the delivery of new infrastructure to support various transport improvements and the various identified specific transport improvements. However, it is unclear how paragraph 9.20, which predicts that bus services will have recovered at a faster rate than even rail or metro by 2026, has been evidenced. In addition, the emphasis on bus services should recognise that congestion is likely to be a significant factor both on patronage, attractiveness of the bus and journey times.

Comment

Representation ID: 45895

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Transport for West Midlands

TfWM welcomes these key transport priority schemes, but these must be fully cross referenced with the CRSTS scheme allocations and BSIP schemes.

In terms of point 3 in policy TRAN1, we feel this needs to be reworded to state “Key transport corridors will be prioritised through the delivery of infrastructure to support active travel (walking, cycling), public transport improvements (including HS2 Connectivity Package measures).

Concerning the rail schemes under point 4B, Wolverhampton – Walsall – Willenhall - Aldridge rail link are two separate schemes, and so should be presented as two in the policy.

West Midlands Rail Executive in particular, feel the plan needs expanding upon further, capturing several additional rail projects, and the policy text should therefore be amended to the following:
i. Wolverhampton – Walsall service and new Willenhall & Darlaston stations
ii. New Aldridge station and service to Walsall/Birmingham
iii. Midlands Rail Hub
iv. Wolverhampton – Shrewsbury Line Improvements

Additional policies should also be included in TRAN1 (rail section) and these are outlined below with further
details provided in appendix A:
v. Rail line re-openings of Sutton Park Line and Walsall – Lichfield
vi. Future rail network capacity upgrades vii.Train maintenance and stabling depots

And while there is some uncertainty about the rail proposals as referenced above, this doesn’t mean the schemes shouldn’t appear with in the Black Country Plan.

The proposed Walsall – Aldridge rail service along the Sutton Park line to Sutton Coldfield is achievable within the plan period, and with track improvements and platform lengthening at Wolverhampton and an additional platform at Walsall station being explored, and potentially delivered by around 2035, the safeguarding of this land will be essential.

Comment

Representation ID: 46279

Received: 17/08/2021

Respondent: mr mike payne

I live in Streetly, which I believe now has a population of 16 thousand. If we are to have more housing on the Aldridge Road and other sites we will need an expanded schools and health facility. Also can we have more effort given to non-car transport. No Streetly rail station when in the past with less population there was one. The light railway expanded to Walsall would help