WOLVERHAMPTON CITY CENTRE AREA ACTION PLAN 2015-2026 THE INSPECTOR S MATTERS, ISSUES AND QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION City of Wolverhampton Council Hearing Statements Matter 1: Land use allocations
Matter 1: Land use allocations Issue Are the allocations realistic and soundly based Questions Site 3e a) On what basis did the Council consider the appropriate uses to be those stated in Table CA3A rather than placing an emphasis on a residential-led development? 1.1 The identified appropriate uses for Site 3e stated in Table CA3A are realistic and soundly based, being informed by a robust and credible evidence base. 1.2 Site 3e falls within the Interchange & Commercial Gateway Character Area (CA3). The transformation of the Interchange is a 120m long-term strategic project that is in the process of being delivered, involving the commitment of a number of development partners. The scheme is identified in the Black Country Local Enterprise Partnership s (LEP) Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) as one of the Transport Priority Investments ([CC10.10] p.7). The first phase in 2012 saw the delivery of a new bus station, with ground floor retail units and first floor offices, and the renovation and reoccupation of the Queen Building. 1.3 The second phase is the delivery of i10 (see, for example [CC10.3] pp.2-3), which comprises ground floor retail and leisure units, with 3,382sqm of offices above. This scheme is nearing completion, will be the first Grade A office provision in the city centre, has attracted significant occupier interest and will kick start the office market in the Interchange Character Area and city centre, involving a 10.6m strategic intervention by the Council, see for example http://www.wolverhampton.gov.uk/article/8128/showpiece-i10-buildingopens-its-doors 1.4 Extensive work has taken place to secure the next stage of transformation at the Interchange, involving 39.4m investment for the Metro extension, new Railway Station and extension to the multi-storey car park. This is being achieved through collaboration between the Interchange development partners (Neptune, Centro, Network Rail, West Coast Trains (Virgin), the Canal & Rivers Trust and City of Wolverhampton Council), the Black Country LEP and the Department of Transport. The c 13.5m LEP funding is reliant on securing development outputs consistent with the Interchange masterplan. 1.5 The Commercial Sites Assessment Study undertaken by Bruton Knowles (BK) [CC5.3] sets out what development the market could realistically deliver over the plan period. This informed the AAP s spatial strategy (AAP 1
paras 2.3.1-2) and the AAP s approach to the Character Areas (AAP paras 2.5.1-2). 1.6 BK also undertook Soft Market Testing work in the city centre (see, for example [CC10.3] p.7) and the feedback from the private sector during this exercise was that the Interchange offers the most attractive location for the new Grade-A office sector to become established in the city centre, maximising the positive attributes of a prominent location, which will benefit from excellent linkages through the delivery of a modern transport hub comprising rail, bus and metro and car parking. 1.7 Therefore, the vision and policy in the AAP for the Interchange & Commercial Gateway Character Area (CA3) reflects and builds on the extensive work of the Interchange project and AAP evidence base, including emphasising the priority for office-led mixed-use development. This approach will complement the priorities for facilitating retail-led mixed use development in the Shopping Core (Policy CA1), leisure-led mixed use development in Westside (Policy CA2), together with residential provision throughout the AAP area (Policy CC7), in particular in the Canalside Quarter (Policy CA4). 1.8 The Interchange Character Area is identified as providing the potential for around 25,000sqm of office floorspace, which will make an important contribution to the potential identified delivery of 70,000sqm of office floorspace in the city centre, as outlined in AAP Policy CC2(a). AAP Policy CC2 provides the mechanism for a minimum reservoir of offices to be provided, as suggested in the CS Inspectors Report (para 41) and utilised in the adopted Brierley Hill AAP (Policy 48). As the quantum of office floorspace delivered over the plan period is likely to be lower than the maximum figure set out in the CS (Council s answer to question B) 1) of the Inspector s Initial Questions), it is therefore important that the opportunities for office provision in the city centre are maximised, by enabling office-led mixed use development to become established and develop further, building on the momentum already being created by the Interchange scheme. 1.9 Site 3e is identified in Appendix 3 of the BK study as having the potential to deliver 13,000sqm Grade A office floorspace. This would be make the single largest contribution to office provision in the character area, be consistent with the vision and priorities identified for the Interchange and the AAP s spatial strategy, and would provide significant economic benefits to the city centre, potentially generating 1,000 jobs. It should be noted that the AAP floorspace figures are not prescriptive and give an indication to the market of the potential that exists at each development opportunity site. The approach of the AAP is to strike a balance between providing the flexibility to capture future investment and the certainty of having the framework of a spatial strategy in order to maximise the benefits of regeneration for Wolverhampton. 1.10 As set out in para 1.4 above, the Interchange will continue to be an area of significant change over the course of the plan period. Para 4.6.3 of the BK study identifies site 3e as a longer term opportunity, but with potential 2
to come forward in the medium term. There is at least a reasonable likelihood of a modern Grade A office market becoming well established in the city centre, for example, to maximise opportunities created by the ongoing growth of the Birmingham office market, and the potential to provide both back office functions and the headquarters of companies (see, for example, the current Marston s office redevelopment in the Chapel Ash & West Park Character Area). 1.11 The characteristics of site 3e lend itself to commercial uses, particularly with the future changes that will occur to the surrounding area and access arrangements, which will enhance the prominence of the site. The future main vehicular access to the Interchange railway station, Metro terminus and car park will be directly off the Ring Road along Corn Hill which forms the southern and eastern boundaries of site 3e. The site is currently in active economic use as a car park, therefore the policy steer provided by the AAP will not sterilise the site. 1.12 The Interchange development partner Neptune have been following the progress of the AAP, and have written to the Council providing an up-todate commentary on the Interchange scheme and setting out their concerns if site 3e were not to be allocated for office-led mixed-use development (please see Appendix A of this Matters Paper). As the private sector partner of the Interchange, who are seeking to maximise the commercial success of the scheme, it is significant that Neptune have emphasised the importance of delivering office development at site 3e. 1.13 The Canalside Quarter (CA4), which adjoins the Interchange Character Area, is identified as the focus for residential-led mixed use development. The Canalside Quarter has the largest number of development opportunity sites in a character area and will make the largest contribution to housing provision in the AAP area (670 dwellings - AAP Fig. 7). This character area lends itself to residential-led schemes, particularly to maximise the potential of the canal environment. If significant residential provision was diverted to other nearby locations, such as Interchange, then it would make it more difficult to deliver the vision and priorities for the Canalside Quarter and the AAP s spatial strategy. 1.14 Although delivering enhanced residential provision in the city centre is a priority, the AAP is not reliant on site 3e being identified for residential-led development to help meet the City s housing requirement. As indicated in the SHLAA [CC6.1] and answers to the Inspector s Initial Questions (part A) and Further Questions, there is sufficient housing capacity in the City to meet the 5 year housing supply and the CS housing target. 1.15 Site 3e has benefitted in the past from residential planning permissions and an allocation that residential use would be acceptable, however, a residential scheme has never come forward on the site. In recognition of this and that the Horseley Fields residential scheme adjoins the site at Albion Street to the east, Table CA3A identifies residential as an appropriate ancillary use. Other appropriate ancillary uses are also identified (retail and leisure), in order to provide maximum flexibility to assist the delivery of office-led mixed use development on this site. For 3
clarity and consistency, a minor modification is proposed so that the Development Capacity entry for site 3e in AAP Table CA3A reflects the Appropriate Uses entry: The Development Capacity entry for site 3e in Table CA3A to read: Around 15,500 sq metres of office and ancillary leisure, retail and residential development. 1.16 AAP Table CA3A does not impose any phasing restrictions to site 3e, and given its size, the site could therefore come forward in a phased manner, potentially with ancillary uses (such as residential) being delivered in a first phase, as long as the site as a whole delivers office-led mixed use development. 1.17 Therefore, site 3e is of strategic importance to the delivery of Grade A office-led mixed use development in order to meet the vision and priorities of the Interchange, serve the city centre and deliver the AAP s spatial strategy to provide balanced investment, jobs and regeneration in the city centre. Word count: 1,503 4
Site 11a b) On what basis did the Council consider the appropriate uses to be those stated in Table CA11A? 2.1 The appropriate uses stated in AAP Table CA11A are to assist with delivering the vision set out for the All Saints Character Area (CA11) (AAP p. 126). At 6.25ha, site 11a is the single largest development opportunity site identified in the AAP area. Therefore, the priority is to ensure the delivery of comprehensive regeneration, particularly as the site is strategically important occupying a prominent location and containing the listed Royal Hospital buildings which have been vacant for over 18 years, the retention of which is a priority. This will be achieved by providing a balance between maximising flexibility to facilitate regeneration and giving the certainty of a steer to the market of the types of uses that could realistically come forward at site 11a, consistent with the overall spatial approach to Character Areas (AAP paras 2.5.1-2). 2.2 The identified appropriate uses are realistic and soundly based, being informed by a robust and credible evidence base. Whilst the Bruton Knowles (BK) Commercial Sites Assessment Study (December 2014) [CC5.3] was written prior to Tesco s announcement that it no longer intended to proceed with building-out a foodstore, Appendix 3 of the BK study (which refers to the Royal Hospital development area as site 12a) identifies a number of development outputs that the market could deliver at the site, which informed AAP Table CA11A. 2.3 The approach taken to site 11a is to identify a range of acceptable alternative primary uses that could take the lead role in delivering comprehensive mixed use regeneration, together with a range of supporting subsidiary/ complementary uses. The Holliss Vincent (HV) addendum letter [CC5.6] (p.4, penultimate para) supports the appropriate uses identified in Table CA11A. 2.4 In terms of the identified primary uses and subsidiary/ complementary uses, these are justified in turn below. Housing 2.5 The All Saints Character Area is a predominantly residential area, particularly to the south. AAP para 4.12.2 outlines how All Saints has been subject to significant regeneration through housing renewal in recent years. The BK study (para 4.14.1) notes the delivery of the Royal Gardens housing scheme. AAP Fig. 7 highlights that there are 57 existing housing commitments in All Saints. The area falls within RC3 of the CS, which emphasises the importance of enhancing the residential communities to the south of the city centre. 2.6 As set out in the Council s response to question F) 3) and 7) of the Inspector s Initial Questions, residential use would be acceptable at site 11a, and the SHLAA [CC6.1] identifies the potential to provide a minimum 5
of 100 dwellings. AAP para 4.12.4 emphasises the need to provide a mix of housing types and tenures. Education 2.7 Education provides another realistic opportunity to deliver the vision and priorities identified for the All Saints Character Area. The city centre has become the focus for considerable investment from the education sector in recent years, particularly by the University of Wolverhampton, through the delivery of a new Science Centre and Business School (see, for example [CC10.3] p.4). In addition, the University of Wolverhampton is also investing at Springfield Brewery in the Canalside Quarter (AAP Policy CA4, site 4c), in collaboration with the Construction Industry Training Board, to create a construction and skills campus and business park. Planning permission (ref 15/00290/FUL) has been granted for a West Midlands Construction University Technical College (UTC) and work has commenced on site: http://www.expressandstar.com/news/localnews/2015/09/02/college-construction-starts-at-springfield-brewery/. The second phase will include relocating the University s School of Architecture and the Built Environment to the site. The importance of education to the city centre is reflected in AAP Policy CC5. 2.8 Additional education interest in the city centre has also emerged, with Wolverhampton College seeking to relocate from its Paget Road site (outside the AAP area) and increase the College s presence in the city centre. As part of this the potential for site 11a to accommodate a college campus is being actively explored (see, for example http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2015/10/19/wolverhamptoncollege-eyes-up-old-hospital-for-campus/). 2.9 It has been recently announced (see http://www.wolvcoll.ac.uk/news/new-campus-plans-are-one-step-closer/) that the Black Country LEP is funding a feasibility study to be carried out by the company Inspired Spaces, that will assess the potential for the Royal Hospital site to include a college campus. The study is due to be completed by March 2016. 2.10 As there is serious education interest in the site and there would be considerable planning merits in an education-led scheme coming forward, (particularly with the potential to meet the priority to regenerate site 11a and contribute to the retention of the listed buildings), it would be realistic and soundly based to identify education as an appropriate primary use for site 11a. Foodstore 2.11 The reasons why a foodstore is an appropriate primary use are set out in the answer to question c) below, in addition to the Council s response to question F) 5) of the Inspector s Initial Questions. Subsidiary/ complementary uses 6
2.12 Table CA11A also sets out a range of subsidiary/ complementary uses that could support the primary uses identified to assist with the delivery of comprehensive mixed-use regeneration at site 11a. Retail, office, food and drink, community uses and a petrol filling station could help serve primary uses, and these formed part of the implemented foodstore-led permission (ref 11/00365/FUL), which proposed a mix of uses in the main Royal Hospital building, a café in the former Lodge and offices in the retained former Nurses Home. Leisure and Car Showroom uses are also identified as appropriate, particularly as such uses have the ability to provide a scale and nature of development befitting this large prominent site. c) Although it is appreciated that the foodstore has an extant planning permission, why is it specifically listed as an appropriate use in Table CA11A? 2.13 The foodstore is specifically listed as an appropriate use in Table CA11A because it reflects the consistent approach in the AAP for all the Character Area Development Opportunities tables to identify what uses could reasonably be delivered, consistent with the AAP s strategy, in the prevailing circumstances. This includes reflecting any relevant planning permissions which could come forward. 2.14 A foodstore-led scheme would contribute to meeting the vision for the All Saints Character Area, including the priority for site 11a to provide comprehensive mixed use regeneration and the retention of the Royal Hospital listed buildings, as demonstrated by the Tesco foodstore permission (ref 11/00365/FUL). A foodstore would serve the residential area, particularly to the south-east of the city centre. The site is highly accessible with The Royal metro stop nearby, and a foodstore would have the potential to provide a northern anchor to the Bilston Corridor in terms of convenience provision. Following the closure of the Sainsbury s Store at St George s Parade (AAP site 9a), the only substantive convenience provision in this part of the AAP area is the Aldi store at Howard Street/ Birmingham New Road. 2.15 Not only is there extant planning permission for a foodstore at the Royal Hospital, but the permission has been lawfully implemented (this was confirmed by the Council on 9 th December 2014). As included in NLP s response to the Inspector s Initial Question F) 4), the Royal Hospital Sales Particulars state: The planning consent for the retail led regeneration scheme has been implemented and could be completed at any time in the future (p. 7). As there is currently no alternative scheme for the Royal Hospital that has planning permission, has been lawfully implemented or is being delivered, it is still possible for the foodstore scheme to be built-out. 2.16 The purpose of the Council requesting the HV Addendum Letter [CC5.6] was to seek advice in the light of Tesco s announcement it would not be proceeding to build-out the foodstore. The HV recommendations (p. 4, penultimate para) and overall conclusions (pp.4-5) support the AAP referring to a foodstore as an appropriate use. 7
2.17 The NPPF (para 23, sixth bullet point) states that identified retail needs should be met in full. The identified need for convenience retail is set out AAP Policy CC1 (second bullet point) and the opportunities identified in CC1(b) are capable of providing sufficient floorspace to meet this need. Site 11a forms one of these opportunities. 2.18 Please also see the Council s responses to part F) of the Inspector s Initial Questions. d) Does the presence of the foodstore allocation conflict with the priority of regenerating the shopping core? 2.19 No. The priority for the All Saints Character Area set out in the vision for AAP Policy CA11 is to ensure that development will complement both the city centre as a whole and the surrounding local area. Therefore, any proposals that would not complement the city centre as a whole (including the shopping core) will be resisted. 2.20 A foodstore would complement the predominantly comparison goods retail-led regeneration of the Shopping Core, much in the same way as the new Sainsbury s store at St Mark s in the Chapel Ash & West Park Character Area, including through providing the potential for linked trips, reflected in the priority for enhancing linkages from Cleveland Road across the ring road towards the Shopping Core (as indicated in AAP Fig. 34). 2.21 The potential impact of a foodstore at the Royal Hospital was subject to extensive evidence work and sensitivity testing by HV, as part of the determination of three foodstore applications in 2011. This included modelling the potential impacts of the Tesco foodstore at the Royal Hospital. The city centre net trade diversion in solus terms was identified as 2.1% ([CC5.7] Stage 2 Report Appendix 1 Table 6.1 p.6) and in cumulative terms (together with the Sainsbury s foodstore being built-out) was identified as 5.9% ([CC5.7] Stage 2 Report Appendix 1 Table 6.2 p.7). It was concluded that this level of impact was not significantly adverse. Since the granting of the foodstore permissions, the building-out of the Sainsbury s store has been of a smaller floorspace (through the inclusion of a gym application ref 13/01185/FUL), and the Tesco foodstore floorspace was also reduced in size through a non-material amendment in September 2012. Therefore, if the Tesco permission were to be built-out the level of trade diversion from the city centre is likely to be lower than originally identified. 2.22 The 2014 HV Retail Update Study [CC5.5] involved detailed quantitative and qualitative analysis, including a health check of the city centre, and did not identify a conflict between the implemented foodstore permission for the Royal Hospital site and the priority to regenerate the shopping core. Indeed, para 4.46 concludes there is every indication that the city centre can prosper in the future, including through the regeneration of the Royal Hospital. The policy approach of identifying a foodstore as one of the appropriate primary uses at site 11a is endorsed in the HV Addendum Letter ([CC5.6] third bullet point on p.4). 8
2.23 Therefore, at present, a foodstore would not conflict with the priority of regenerating the shopping core because it would not cause any significantly adverse impacts. 2.24 The AAP includes two important robust policy mechanisms in order to prioritise the regeneration of the Shopping Core and provide protection from significantly adverse impacts in the future. 2.25 First, protection is provided by prioritising the Shopping Core, particularly the Area for Enhancement and Refurbishment through AAP Policies CC1 and CA1. AAP para 3.1.7, third bullet point cites that when planning applications are subject to impact testing, particular emphasis will be placed on assessing the impact on the planned investment identified for the Shopping Core, especially the Area for Enhancement and Refurbishment (this is clarified through the Council s answer to question H) 4) of the Inspector s Initial Questions). 2.26 Second, the final sentence of AAP Policy CC1 states that if any alternative forms of retail development come forward on sites, they would be subject to the relevant retail planning tests. The alternative forms of retail development are taken to mean any proposal that differs from that which is permitted, implemented or indicated in the relevant policy in Part C of the AAP. Therefore, if an alternative foodstore application came forward in the future at site 11a, although the current implemented foodstore consent and reference in AAP Policy CA11 to a foodstore as a primary use would be given due weight in the determination of any planning application, the NPPF paras 24 and 26 sequential and impact tests would still need to be satisfied, including providing evidence that the proposal would not conflict with the priority to regenerate of the Shopping Core by causing significantly adverse impacts (AAP para 3.1.7). Word count: 2,026 9