Black Country Core Strategy Issue and Option Report

Intu Properties Plc ('intu') supports the vision for the future Black Country as set out in the existing Black Country Core Strategy (BCCS). The three major directions of change and the sustainability principles remain relevant and are supported.

Intu Merry Hill (iMH) has a significant role to play in helping to meet the vision for the Black Country. iMH is a significant provider of goods and services to the local community and wider catchment area. It is one of the Black Country's most significant employers supporting around 6,420 permanent jobs (5,331 FTEs). These employees represent 5.1% of all jobs in Dudley, and over 43% of retail sector jobs. iMH generates £324 million of GVA (direct and indirect) in the local economy.

The existing vision recognises the importance of the successful strategic centres for the economic prosperity of the Black Country. This must remain an integral part of the vision moving forward and the detailed policies that follow will need to facilitate investment at iMH - this hasn't been achieved by the BCCS and it is an issue that must be addressed.

It is incumbent on planning policy to help ensure this long established shopping centre maintains and enhances its role in the future so the economic benefits can be enjoyed by future generations. In order to do this, the shopping centre must evolve and grow and policy must provide for this.

With respect to the sustainability principles nos. 1-4 are generally supported. With respect to no.5, whilst a comprehensive approach to development is a worthy aim and generally supported we don't consider this is a key sustainability principle. Furthermore we consider there must be flexibility in order to avoid the situation that has occurred at iMH where policy pre-conditions have undermined the underlying growth that is being sought and planned for at this strategic centre. If this sustainability principle is maintained, it should refer to a coordinated approach to development - in some cases this might be comprehensive in the way that it's planned, and in others, a broad framework might be a better way to allow the market to respond to opportunities that arise over the plan period.

Intu supports the spatial objectives that underpin the vision as set out in the BCCS, especially in relation to Objectives 1 and 7. Maintaining these spatial objectives is of fundamental importance to the future of the Black Country - with respect to intu Merry Hill (iMH) this is borne out by the significant role it plays in the Black Country economy (as set out in our response to Question 7).

Intu supports the principle of focussed investment in the Strategic Centres (including Brierley Hill) (Objective 1); however intu is concerned that existing Policy CEN3, whilst supporting growth in the Strategic Centres, is preventing the change and investment it was meant to deliver, impeding on the ability to meet Objective 1. Policy CEN3 relates to iMH and was prepared in a very different economic environment and retail market (discussed in further detail at Question 68).

Intu also supports the principle of creating sustainable and convenient links between the Strategic Centres, existing and new communities and employment sites. Intu wishes to play its part in improving accessibility and connectivity to iMH and the surrounding area in line with policy objectives. However within the BCCS, policy CEN3 has placed unrealistic requirements on new development in this respect and, therefore, development hasn't come forward at iMH.

Any revised policy must be formulated to deliver investment in order to achieve the growth required and in doing so deliver the spatial objectives. Bearing in mind the Core Strategy was adopted in 2011 and the growth it was intended to facilitate hasn't occurred, the Council must now proactively drive and support development in line with the core principles of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, paragraph 17, bullet 3). In this case, this means working closely with investors and developers, like intu, to formulate policies that enable them to bring forward viable development over the plan period, with greater confidence. The DY5 Business of Innovation Enterprise Zone will also assist in stimulating economic growth and development alongside planning policy within the Canal Walk (west of iMH), Waterfront and Archill (both north of iMH) and areas of Brierley Hill Strategic Centre.

Intu is strongly of the view that the Strategic Centre must remain the focus for such development over the plan period. Intu is planning for significant new investment at intu Merry Hill (iMH) to ensure it remains a primary retail and leisure destination as part of the designated Strategic Centre of Brierley Hill. Future investment, which it is anticipated will comprise some extensions and new developments, as well as incremental improvement and enhancement of the existing asset, is likely to come forward in self-contained applications. These projects will come forward over the plan period, as demand and occupier interest requires. Planning policy in the future must provide the flexibility to accommodate development coming forward in this way, if growth objectives are to be met and delivered by the market. This response should be read in conjunction with our response to Question 63.

The key issue for the new plan is to bring it up to date so that was is planned for reflects current population and expenditure forecasts and most importantly the future needs of the customers and operators that iMH and the other Strategic Centres serve. We explore some of these issues below in more detail.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) indicates that planning policies should be positive, promote competitive town centre environments and set out policies for the management and growth of centres over the plan period (paragraph 23). Local Plans are expected to define a network and hierarchy of centres that is resilient to anticipated future economic change (paragraph 23, bullet 3) and needs for town centre uses must be met in full over the plan period and not compromised by limited site availability (bullet 6).

Historic retail trends show that retail expenditure growth generally follows a cyclical growth pattern with the underlying trend showing significant growth over many years. This in turn has fuelled significant growth in retail development in the past. The situation has changed with the growth of home and internet shopping and on-going uncertainty arising from the recession and more recently the vote to leave the European Union. Consumer spending grew rapidly in the mid-1990s, but the recession in 2008 had a significant impact on consumer spending and the demand for retail space. Business and consumer confidence was further weakened by higher unemployment, rising costs and less accessible credit at that time.

Comparison goods expenditure grew in real terms (excluding inflation) by 5.3% per annum between 2006 and 2009, but following the effects of the recession expenditure fell by 2.6% between 2009 and 2010. The recovery from the recession was relatively slow with an average annual growth of only 1.5% between 2010 and 2012. Low expenditure growth and deflationary pressures during this period affected the high street, although Experian's figures indicate comparison goods expenditure only fell in real terms in 2009 followed by limited growth for two years.

Comparison good expenditure growth recovered between 2012 and 2014, with an average annual growth of 4.8%. This growth is indicative of positive signs of improvement in the UK economy and consumer and business confidence in 2014. Experian forecast higher levels of growth in the future, with 5.8% between 2016 and 2018 and an average of 3% per annum from 2019, but still at a lower rate than previous pre-recession trends. Experian recognises that the retail sector is vulnerable to changes in the national and global economies.

Special Forms of Trading (SFT) comprises all non-store retail sales made via the internet, mail order, stalls and markets, door-to-door and telephone sales. Based on ONS data, Experian estimate that the value of internet sales is £42.1 billion and other (non-internet) SFT sales is £7.9 billion, with SFT sales totalling £50bn. Experian information suggests that non-store retail sales in 2017 is 10.7% of convenience goods expenditure and 18.5% of comparison goods expenditure. This remains a relatively small proportion of overall retail expenditure. The growth in internet shopping has been historically strong for certain products e.g. electrical goods, books and music. Despite the continued projected growth in home shopping and SFT, Experian forecast growth in comparison goods retail expenditure will be available to support traditional retail floorspace.

Leisure expenditure including eating and drinking away from the home is also projected to grow and over recent years there has been significant investment in this sector, particularly in the development of cinema with food and beverage outlets with many such developments proposed in town centres. This provides for a more experiential 'day out' visit which in turn increases dwell time and supports a strong evening economy. Experian forecast that leisure expenditure will increase on average by 1.4% per annum, a total increase of 23% between 2016 and 2031 over and above inflation.

In addition to new forms of retailing, operators have responded to changes in customers' requirements and market conditions. The discount comparison sector has also grown significantly in recent years. Many high street multiple comparison retailers have changed their format. High street national multiples have increasingly sought larger modern shop units with an increasing polarisation of higher order comparison shopping activity into larger centres. Small and medium size centres have generally become more focused on food and grocery retailing, lower order (day to day) comparison shopping and a much wider range of non-retail services.

The Black Country Strategic Centres must respond to these changes in order to maintain and enhance their vitality and viability. These trends and the implications they may have on the need and capacity for new floorspace must be the subject of further work commissioned by the Black Country authorities, by way of an updated retail evidence base. The comparison floorspace growth at iMH forecast within BCCS may not be required in the future at the large scale envisaged at that time. Nevertheless, over the plan period, intu considers there will be strong demand for new retail and leisure investment at iMH. The reconfiguration and extension of existing space and the development of new floorspace will occur if policy can provide intu and their tenants with the confidence and flexibility to allow this to come forward as the market, and changing economic circumstances, requires.

Intu requests the opportunity to be consulted on this work in due course, so that the evidence base is prepared cognisant of the needs of iMH and the market for town centre uses more generally. In this way policy will have a far better prospect of facilitating appropriate development to come forward in a way that hasn't been the case with Policy CEN3. Furthermore it will enable far more realistic expectations to be set regarding public transport and other infrastructure that new development might be able to support.

Intu agrees that the targets for comparison retail floorspace (and convenience retail floorspace - see response to Question 64) should be revisited as part of this review to take into account current and future trends. This response should be read in conjunction with our response to Question 62.

The updated evidence base study needs to be cognisant of a number of issues:

1. Changes in policy - the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) heralded the biggest single change in national planning policy in a generation, and it raises the bar for local authorities in terms of the positive approach and a greater emphasis on the deliverability of plans; plus it requires that needs for main town centre uses are met in full and not compromised by limited site availability.

2. Demographic changes - up-to-date and authoritative population and expenditure forecasts must inform a future review.

3. Changes in retail trends - the NPPF requires the needs of all main town centre uses to be met in full over the plan period (paragraphs 23 and 161) and the review must do this and not just deal with comparison retail and office floorspace. This must embrace F&B and leisure uses which will be an increasingly vital component of the offer of Strategic Centres and other centres.

4. Polarisation - there has been an on-going trend or polarisation of comparison floorspace into a smaller number of larger centres. In light of this its vitally important the Strategic Centres provide for these needs to guard against any such investment going to larger centres outside the Black Country with a consequent diminution of the offer available to local communities.

In order to meet the requirements of the NPPF, the Black Country authorities must provide a robust and credible evidence base to inform the work on the review of the BCCS, taking into account the changes since previous evidence was prepared. The study should establish existing shopping patterns, based on sound empirical evidence and comprehensive customer survey research, including both customers who use facilities in the Black Country and those who shop elsewhere.

Intu requests the opportunity to be consulted on this work in due course, so that the evidence base is prepared cognisant of the needs of iMH and the market for town centre uses more generally. In this way policy will have a far better prospect of facilitating appropriate development to come forward for iMH in a way that hasn't been the case with Policy CEN3.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that Local Planning Authorities should assess the quantitative and qualitative needs for land or floorspace for retail and leisure development over the plan period (paragraph. 161). Paragraph 23 states that such needs must be met in full.

The need for convenience retail floorspace should therefore be revisited as part of the updated retail evidence base. The evidence base should provide an assessment of convenience goods expenditure patterns and translate these patterns into new floorspace requirements. Should a need for additional convenience floorspace be identified, this should be translated into new floorspace targets in the BCCS review.

As outlined in Question 62, leisure expenditure, including eating and drinking away from the home, is projected to grow and over recent years there has been significant investment in this sector, particularly in the development of cinemas with food and beverage outlets, with many such developments proposed in town centres. This provides for a more experiential 'day out' visit which in turn increases dwell time and supports a strong evening economy. Experian forecast that leisure expenditure will increase on average by 1.4% per annum, a total increase of 23% between 2016 and 2031 over and above inflation.

Non-retail service and leisure uses increasingly perform an important role in the overall offer of a centre, and encourage customers to visit centres. Food and beverage is a fast moving and creative sector, with a steady flow of new concepts emerging. Within this sector there has been a significant increase in the number of national multiple chains. These national chains have sought to increase their geographical coverage. These types of operators (Class A3, A4 and A5) i.e. restaurants, bars and pubs have supported other major leisure uses, in particular cinema developments. Within centres, the demand has increased, including a significant expansion in the number of coffee shops, such as Starbucks, Costa Coffee and Coffee Republic.

National branded pub/restaurant chains have invested heavily and not exclusively in larger centres. Themed restaurants have also expanded rapidly. The key categories for food and beverage offers are:

1. impulse: characterised by their produce range that is typically highly visual and hand-held so that it can be eaten "on the go";

2. speed eating fast food: food that can be purchased and consumed quickly, therefore price is low and ambience is less important. This sector is dominated by traditional high volume fast food offers such as burgers and fried chicken;

3. refuel and relax: a drink and snacks and a short break in a pleasant environment rather than focusing on eating a main meal; and

4. casual dining/leisure dining: incorporating a number of food styles, types and ethnic origins. The ambience and environment of casual dining is as important as the food, drink and service provided. The style is informal but is normally table service.

Given the increasing demand for, and importance of, leisure and food and beverage uses, the updated evidence base should also provide an assessment of leisure and food and beverage expenditure patterns and translate these patterns into new floorspace requirements.

Over the past couple of years, intu has invested £78 million in major new development and extension projects across its UK centres, including (inter alia) investment in restaurant and leisure developments at intu Metrocentre and intu Eldon Square, leisure extension proposals at intu Potteries, refurbishment of intu Victoria Centre and development of Charter Place as part of intu Watford.

Over the plan period, there will be a need for new retail, food and beverage and leisure investment at iMH and the reconfiguration and extension of existing space. The Javelin Group's Venuescore sets out the food/service orientation index for iMH and indicates the strength of the centre's food and beverage offer is currently relatively poor at 89 (national average = 100). There is potential to increase iMH's food/service index to 100 around the national average. This will help diversify the centre, protecting it against changes in the retail market, increase dwell time, complement the retail offer and increase employment opportunities.

This requirement should be directly supported through the BCCS review and policy should facilitate this type of investment.

Intu agrees that there is a need to re-examine the detail and the appropriateness of the existing conditions for retail growth. The existence of these pre-conditions has served to prevent investment coming forward and the underlying growth objectives of the BCCS have not been realised as a result. We comment further below.

iMH contains over 240 retail and leisure units within the covered shopping centre. The adjacent uses include a multiplex cinema, 21 retail warehouse units and 5 restaurants. iMH is located within Dudley Metropolitan Borough, about 10 miles west of Birmingham City Centre. The town centre and retail hierarchy is set out within the Black Country Core Strategy (Policy CEN2 and Table 13), which identifies Brierley Hill (including iMH), West Bromwich, Walsall and Wolverhampton as Strategic Centres at the top of the hierarchy.

The Javelin Group's Venuescore ranks over 3,500 retail destinations in the UK including town centres, retail malls, retail warehouse parks and factory outlet centres. Each destination is given a weighted score for the number of multiple retailers present, including anchor stores, fashion operators and non-fashion multiplies. The score attributed to each retailer is weighted depending on their overall impact on shopping patterns, for example a large department store will achieve a high score. The Venuescore data closely correlates to the actual market size of the shopping destination in terms of consumer expenditure. This Javelin Group data provides a good understanding of where iMH and iMH Retail Park sit in the regional shopping hierarchy, and how they compare with other destinations.

According to the 2016/17 Venuescore rankings, iMH is ranked third out of all the centres located within the sub-region, with a Venuescore of 219, and ranked 62nd when compared with all centres across the UK. iMH was ranked 43rd by Javelin in 2010 and has dropped 19 places in recent years. The combined Venuescore for iMH and iMH Retail Park would be 259 (219 plus 40) compared with Birmingham City Centre's Venuescore of 640. Birmingham City Centre's Venuescore increased from 561 in 2013 to 686 in 2015/16 due to the opening of Grand Central, but then dropped to 640 in 2016/17.

Within Dudley Borough, Dudley town centre's Venuescore is only 60, and the historic part of Brierley Hill has a lower Venuescore of 30. These two centres occupy a much lower position in the shopping hierarchy and serve a much more localised area than iMH. Dudley and Brierley Hill are predominantly service centres rather than comparison shopping destinations.

Javelin's analysis underlines the importance of iMH for meeting the higher order comparison goods shopping needs in DMBC. As a higher order shopping destination, iMH sits alongside the other major shopping destinations in surrounding borough's in particular Birmingham City Centre, Walsall, West Bromwich and Wolverhampton.

Venuescore also assesses the market position of centres based on the retailers present and the centre's relative position along a spectrum running from discount to luxury or down-market to aspirational (i.e. lower, middle to upscale). Birmingham City Centre is a top tier centre and its market position is "Upper Middle", which suggests it has an excellent and high quality comparison retail offer, comparable with other top destinations across the country. Although smaller centres than Birmingham City Centre, Solihull, Leamington Spa and Stratford upon Avon are the only other "Upper Middle" centres in the sub-region. ). iMH is classed as "Middle" in terms of market position centre, suggesting that the retail offer is more mid-market.

In this respect iMH is comparable with Coventry, Wolverhampton, Telford and Sutton Coldfield. Despite its size, iMH falls below many of intu's other regional shopping centres in terms of Venuescore, market position, fashion orientation and fashion classification. There is potential to improve and diversify iMH's fashion offer, to enhance the centre's market position from "Middle" to "Upper Middle" and to improve the fashionability of its offer from "Moderate" to "Forward". In order to do this, iMH will need to evolve, diversify and expand its retail offer to appeal to a wider customer base and attract new retailers not currently represented in the centre. This will ensure iMH continues to offer a strong comparison retail offer and provide additional employment opportunities.

The food/service orientation index indicates the strength of the centre's food and beverage offer is relatively poor at 89 (national average = 100). The tourist orientation index indicates the strength of retail offer that is most likely to appeal to tourists is higher at 130 (national average = 100), but well below intu's other regional shopping centres. There is potential to increase iMH's food/service index to 100 around the national average and its tourist orientation to between 150 to 200. This will help diversify the centre, protecting it against changes in the retail market, increase dwell time, complement the retail offer and increase employment opportunities.

iMH will need to respond and adapt to changing customer need. Over the plan period, significant new investment is proposed at iMH to ensure it remains a primary retail and leisure destination as part of the designated Strategic Centre of Brierley Hill.It is incumbent on planning policy to help this long established centre to maintain and enhance its role in the future so the economic benefits the centre creates can be enjoyed by future generations.

Policy CEN3 was prepared in a very different economic environment and retail market to now. This policy is not fit for purpose and is preventing the change and investment it was meant to deliver. Investment has come forward in surrounding centres in recent years and it is important that iMH is able to adapt and grow to ensure it can compete with these surrounding centres. Further, without investment and development at iMH, embedded infrastructure or that secured by planning obligations or potentially Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) will not be forthcoming. Intu wants to improve accessibility and connectivity to iMH and the surrounding area (a lot of which is within their ownership), in line with policy objectives, but can only do this on the back of new investment in the centre.

Policy CEN3 adopts an 'all or nothing' approach. It was prepared when there were proposals to double the size of the centre with need identified for significant amounts of new comparison and convenience retail floorspace. However, prior to any of this floorspace being provided, policy requires the provision of significant new public transport infrastructure and introduction of car park charging.

Not only are these requirements significant obligations in their own right, their timing (i.e. prior to any new floorspace being delivered) and the requirement that they are delivered wholly by a single developer makes them even more onerous. At the time the policy was considered to be proportionate to the proposed development. It allowed for significant retail growth at Merry Hill, as part of the new Brierley Hill Strategic Centre, but only if the pre-conditions were delivered. Given the scale of growth allowed for at Merry Hill the then owners considered this was an acceptable arrangement.

As set out in response to other questions, the retail market has changed significantly. Intu still has plans to expand and improve the offer at iMH; however it is unlikely that within the lifetime of the BCCS review that the scale of retail floorspace envisaged when the existing policy was formulated will come forward.

A significant proportion of the new floorspace at iMH will be focused on leisure and food and beverage. As evidenced above, these uses are under-provided in the existing centre and these are growing sectors of the market. New comparison retail floorspace will also form a large proportion of the new floorspace, and will take the form of extensions to the shopping centre, and reconfiguration and refurbishment of the existing floorspace to ensure it continues to attract and retain the best possible tenants.

The review of the BCCS should allow iMH to evolve and improve its existing offer and expand without being undermined by the imposition of hugely disproportionate pre-conditions which have prevented new investment from coming forward.

In relation to the provision of improved public transport infrastructure, after many years of delay and uncertainty, the Midland Metro extension now appears likely to be delivered although this is unlikely to be operational at iMH until 2022 at the earliest. Whilst intu is working with Transport for West Midlands (TfWM), there is nothing intu can do to accelerate this timetable. Intu has recently delivered improvements to the bus station so it can form a modern integrated transport hub with the Metro, once it arrives. Whilst intu is supportive of other sustainable modes of travel in line with its Corporate Social Responsibility, the Metro line extension must ensure that appropriate access to iMH is maintained at all times during and post-construction.

Notwithstanding the above progress, the public transport requirements listed within CEN3 could not be delivered by intu's proposals for iMH alone as it wouldn't be viable; therefore the mechanisms, funding and timing of these improvements will need to be revisited within this BCCS review.

Moving to the requirement to introduce car parking charges at iMH, which existing policy states must be in place before any new comparison retail floorspace can be delivered, this requirement is not practicable or deliverable. Parking charges would harm the economic sustainability of iMH. Since the policy pre-condition for car park charging was introduced, the retail industry has changed significantly. Customers now have more choice in terms of where they shop (including high streets, shopping centres, retail parks and SFT) and how they shop for goods and services. The market is more competitive and challenging than ever and a significant change such as introducing car park charging at a well-established centre such as iMH would have a significant impact on the economic stability of the centre. This would have a consequential impact on employment numbers and wealth generation in the area.

Intu undertook a shopper survey at iMH where respondents were asked if car parking charges were introduced at a consistent level with other nearby town centres, whether it would change shopping habits. A total of 47.7% of respondents said they would change their habits. For those who said they would change their shopping habits, following the introduction of car park charging:
* 60% said they would visit the centre less
* 25.2% said they would shop more at retail parks with free parking
* 20.2% said they would spend less time at iMH
* 5.4% would use the internet more

This demonstrates the significant economic impact introducing car park charging could potentially have upon visitor numbers and trips to iMH (and therefore Brierley Hill Strategic Centre) and the knock on effects this would have upon retailers, jobs, wealth creation and regeneration of the wider area. The reduction in visitors and the time they spend at the centre is particularly concerning based on the need to maintain or increase visitor numbers and also extend dwell time.

Further, since April 2017, Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council has been trailing free two hours parking on Council car parks in Dudley, Brierley Hill, Halesowen and Sedgley. The two-hour trial will end on 30 September 2017. We understand the Council will then trial one hour of free parking on all council-owned car parks across the Borough from 1 October 2017, with a view to potentially bringing it in permanently. This serves to emphasise that it isn't the role of the planning system to attempt to control car parking charging at iMH or anywhere else across the Black Country for that matter.

In addition, parking charges are not implementable. Intu's ownership at iMH comprises a number of different types of retail offer including the shopping centre, retail parks and superstores. There are also a number of retail units and the cinema, with their associated parking, some of which are outside of intu's control. These different formats and ownerships, together with the existing lease agreements, some which specifically prevent car park charging being introduced, make the consistent application of car park charging over the area impossible to implement in practice.

Charging would also lead to unsustainable travel patterns. As evidenced in DMBC Monitoring Reports, since the adoption of Policy CEN3, the majority of retail floorspace permitted in the Borough has been of an out-of-centre open A1 retail park type offer - where car parking charging has not been required. No significant new retail floorspace has come forward at iMH, partly as a consequence of the current pre-conditions in Policy CEN3. Without the value created through this retail development, the delivery of the essential infrastructure to support the vision for Brierley Hill has failed to materialise. Policy should instead focus on encouraging the use of alternative sustainable transport methods to assist with creating sustainable travel patterns.

There are no controls on parking at retail parks (and the majority of superstores) within Dudley or the Black Country, and no proposals to introduce them as far as we are aware. Thus, and as evidenced by the recent iMH shopper survey referred to above, should car park charging be introduced at the centre this will encourage more people to shop at out of centre retail parks and superstores, within, and outside the Borough - travelling further by car to locations without good public transport, thereby increasing unsustainable travel patterns. Furthermore, only 7.4% of respondents in the shopper survey said that if car park charging were introduced they would be more likely to use public transport to visit the centre. This is not a substantial increase in public transport usage visiting the centre when compared to the change in number of visitors to the centre identified by the same shopper survey.

Maintaining these types of pre-conditions in policy will undermine future development at iMH and wider regeneration within Brierley Hill, and therefore the underlying policy objectives will not be delivered.

Intu supports the vision for the future of the Black Country, the existing retail hierarchy and the principle of growth in Strategic Centres. However, the pre-conditions of Policy CEN3 have undermined the delivery of investment at Brierley Hill Strategic Centre and therefore the regeneration objectives for this area have not been realised. This needs to be assessed in emerging policy.

Any new or amended policy should roll forward the underlying growth and regeneration objectives for the Strategic Centres and recognise the potential that exists within these centres, including Brierley Hill. This would be consistent with national policy and show effective joint working on cross-boundary strategic priorities across the Black Country, in line with NPPF requirements. Any additional detailed policy specifically relating to iMH must be positively prepared in so far as it must seek to meet objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements and avoid the imposition of any pre-conditions which undermine the regeneration objectives policy is seeking to promote.

Policy should be informed by updated evidence on retail and leisure development needs and the latest position on transport infrastructure investment. It should allow for the phased delivery of infrastructure including that which might be delivered by developers, by Midland Metro and by other means e.g. via CIL payments. The requirement for parking charges must be removed if the economic sustainability of the centre is to be safeguarded in the long term and regeneration objectives are to be met. Without this requirement being removed, investment simply will not occur.

Policy CEN3 also required the adoption of an Area Action Plan as another precondition and this was adopted soon after the Core Strategy. Although the AAP was adopted in 2011, this was prepared on the basis of the previously identified growth and development scenario. Intu would therefore like the Core Strategy Review itself to provide the clarity and certainty from a policy perspective to allow investment to be brought forward immediately, without a requirement for new or revised development plan documents or supplementary planning documents to be prepared, which will merely delay investment coming forward even further.

The BCCS was adopted in 2011 and therefore pre-dates the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Paragraph 26 of the NPPF states that when assessing applications for retail and leisure development outside of town centres, which are not in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan, local authorities should require an impact assessment if the development is over a proportionate, locally set floorspace threshold (if there is no locally set threshold, the default threshold is 2,500 sqm).

Currently, for new comparison retail floorspace in Brierley Hill Strategic Centre (which includes iMH), a retail impact assessment is required for in centre proposals if the proposal would result in the overall targets for comparison retail development being exceeded. For out of centre, comparison and convenience development, a retail impact assessment is required for proposals over 500 sqm (gross) or for proposals below this threshold which are considered to have a significant impact on the centres.

Intu considers this threshold approach should be reviewed given it was implemented prior to the introduction of the NPPF. The threshold approach for Strategic Centres (and other centres) should be informed by robust evidence i.e. the updated retail evidence base. If lower thresholds than the NPPF threshold (2,500 sqm) are to be adopted, there needs to be clear justification and reasoning for this, especially given Brierley Hill is a Strategic Centre, at the top of the retail hierarchy.

The BCCS has served to constrain development coming forward at the Brierley Hill Strategic Centre; and has failed to effectively control out-of-centre development from coming forward over the same timeframe. The first priority of policy must be to positively plan for development in the Strategic Centres as this would be the most effective way of controlling out-of-centre development.

The BCCS was adopted in 2011 and therefore pre-dates the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Section 2 of the NPPF sets out policy for ensuring development is focused within town centres, where it will enhance the vitality and viability of centres and encourage sustainable shopping. The NPPF requires LPA's to meet the needs for retail, leisure, office and other main town centre uses in full, adopting a town centre first approach. Only when suitable and viable town centre sites are not available, should edge of centre or out of centre sites be considered. Paragraph 24 states that local planning authorities should apply a sequential test to planning applications for main town centre uses that are not in an existing town centre and are not in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan.

Planning policy as it stands has not controlled out of centre development, with the majority of retail floorspace permitted in the Borough being an out-of-centre open A1 retail park type offer. Revised planning policy should therefore positively promote and encourage town centre development to allow it to be delivered, in accordance with the NPPF. As far as Brierley Hill Strategic Centre is concerned, future planning policy must avoid the imposition of pre-conditions which undermine the underlying growth objectives and constrain development from coming forward.

Intu considers Part a) of Policy CEN8 to be an unnecessary form of control that isn't justified within the existing Policy Justification; nor does it flow from the stated Spatial Objectives. It isn't the role of the planning system to dictate or influence the pricing of parking in Strategic Centres or any other centres. This is particularly relevant to iMH where Policy CEN3 makes car park charging a pre-condition of any future growth at Brierley Hill strategic Centre.

The current policy justification relates to managing travel demand but it also states the potential impact on economic regeneration needs to be considered. With respect to this later point, as outlined in further detail in our response to Question 68, a recent shopper survey undertaken at iMH demonstrates the significant impact introducing car park charging could potentially have upon visitor numbers and trips to iMH and the knock on effects this would have upon retailers, jobs, wealth creation and regeneration of the wider area. The reduction in visitors and the time they spend at the centre is particularly concerning based on the need to maintain or increase visitor numbers and also extend dwell time.

Given this, intu considers it is not appropriate to introduce car parking charges at iMH and this should be recognised through revised policy wording. The most appropriate approach is for policy to instead encourage the use of alterative sustainable transport methods and encourage investment in transport infrastructure.

There are no controls on parking at retail parks (and the majority of superstores) within Dudley or the Black Country, and no proposals to introduce them as far as we are aware. Thus, and as evidenced by the recent shopper survey, should car park charging be introduced at the centre this will encourage more people to shop at out of centre retail parks and superstores, within, and outside the Borough - travelling further by car to locations without good public transport, thereby increasing unsustainable travel patterns. Furthermore, only 7.4% of respondents in the shopper survey said that if car park charging were introduced they would be more likely to use public transport to visit the centre.