Controversial Huddersfield Open Market project put back
Over 1,000 people have signed a letter opposing the current plans for a revamp of Huddersfield market
A decision on the controversial plan for Huddersfield Open Market has been deferred due to major concerns over consultation.
Yesterday (January 29), the town hall was packed with traders and visitors speaking against Kirklees Council’s vision for the market. The local authority has been awarded £16.5m from the government’s Levelling Up Fund (LUF) and is planning to extensively renovate the Grade II* Listed building. Terms and conditions attached to the cash mean that the project must be completed by March 31, 2028.
Under the plans, the revamped market would offer traditional stalls, with a combination of fixed stalls and over 70 that are demountable. There would be hot food vendors, a bar, and a dedicated seating area. Outside a new ‘Market Yard’ would provide space for around 50 demountable stalls, with additional capacity for more on busy days, creating an area for outdoor trading and events.
The plans also feature the creation of a mezzanine, glazed screens to replace the existing security shutters, and would see the demolition of previous, more modern additions that have been made to the building over the years. The council had envisaged that a temporary market, on land adjacent to the existing market in Brook Street, would accommodate traders during the construction period. A second application for the temporary site has also been deferred.
During the planning process, over 1000 people had signed a letter opposing the council’s plans in a campaign co-ordinated by Same Skies think tank. Signatories also called for the council to pursue a co-design process with traders, market goers and other interested parties.
At the meeting, the strength of feeling from traders and visitors was clear to see. One speaker, Alex Metrick, described the council’s consultation process as “deeply flawed”, with this view shared by others. He said: “The market is a huge lifeline for hundreds of people if not more, both stallholders and the public, and these changes in their current form, once the number of stalls plummets, will drastically reduce this.”
He added: “These plans as they stand are going to cause damage to people’s lives, both those of the traders and the public, and to the town itself once this has more or less killed what is one of the UK’s best markets. All we ask is that you reject this application in its current form and come back to us – the people out there on the battlefield – and work with us to come up with something that will suit everybody.”
Jeff Needham, who runs Huddersfield Auto Jumble said the plan would result in the loss of almost half of all stalls, though this figure was disputed by a council officer. He added: “Put simply, these plans will kill the events and other markets as they exist today. The building does not need radical redesign. It needs basic care, a repaired roof, better toilets, paint and proper maintenance.”
Speaking in favour of the plans was the council’s Head of Service for Culture and Tourism, Jamie Nalson. Mr Nalson said he wished to correct “misinformation” that had been circulating about the plans. He said the aim is to make the market more comfortable for traders and shoppers and create a “more flexible space”, and that when 1,000 residents were consulted, 70 per cent had been in support of the plan.
He continued: “We cannot stand still and do nothing. No longer do we want water pouring through on rainy days or complaints about toilets. We have now the opportunity to improve the shoppers’ experience and create a special place that more of our residents and visitors will wish to visit. Without shoppers there will be no market, and therefore the traders will no longer be able to do business.”
When it was down to the panel to discuss, members were in agreement that while some improvements are needed, traders and the public should have a greater say in shaping the plans. They unanimously voted to defer the application. Councillor Donna Bellamy (Con, Holme Valley North) had suggested refusing the plan altogether and going back to the drawing board but this didn’t get to a vote.
Councillor Paola Davies (Lib Dems, Almondbury ) said: “I know it does need some attention, it does need some work to be done to it but I think this is too much all at once. We’re in danger of being blinded by having such funds – £16.5m – to spend all at once that we’ve gone ‘ wow, we need to redevelop it, rebuild it, redo it’.”
The plans were deferred for several reasons including so that “comprehensive, appropriate consultation” could be carried out, where the council will work directly with the traders to refine the plans. The deferral will also allow further discussion around the temporary market arrangements and for additional documents and information to be provided.