Dudley Council planners have rejected a contentious proposal to convert a vacant office building in Brierley Hill into an 18-bedroom house in multiple occupation (HMO). The site, located between High Street and Albion Street, involved the conversion of three Victorian-era buildings with additions including office space, an amenity block, and a communal room.
Council officers concluded that the proposed design would cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area, outweighing the scheme’s potential benefits in providing additional housing. A report noted: “While residential development is important for boosting housing supply, the proposal does not respect the distinctive character of the existing structures.”
This is not the first time a similar application has been refused; a nearly identical plan was turned down in August 2025. Despite some design changes, the council’s Historic Environment Team remained opposed. The report highlighted concerns about the northern building’s distinctive arched windows and historic brickwork. To accommodate three floors, internal alterations would disrupt the original window design, including blocking up windows internally to address amenity concerns—measures described as visually jarring and architecturally inconsistent.
READ MORE: Tomoki Iwata Poised for Key Role as Birmingham City Targets Promotion
READ MORE: Santander Offers Valuable Cashback and Savings Perks Amid Cost of Living Crisis
Local campaigners, including ward councillors Adam Davies and Wayne Little, have welcomed the decision. They gathered a 283-signature petition citing worries over poor-quality housing, increased crime risks, and loss of privacy for nearby residents.
Supporters of the application argued the design had been refined after pre-application feedback, aiming to complement the local character while revitalizing a disused site. They stressed the importance of housing development and the site’s regeneration to benefit the local community.
Despite these arguments, Dudley Council planners ultimately concluded that the scheme’s adverse impact on the conservation area could not be justified.