Plans to create hundreds of jobs - and knock down a Black Country eyesore in the process - are expected to get the green light.
The £82 million proposals for apartments, a hotel, restaurants, bars, a cinema and offices where Cavendish House presently stands have been recommended for approval by Dudley Council.
Avenbury ( Dudley ) says the proposals will create up to 500 jobs in the borough.
The plans would see 400 new homes created - but have drawn opposition from SAVE Britain Heritage.
Avenbury (Dudley) wants to clear land between Dudley Row, Duncan Edwards Way, Claughton Road North, St Joseph Street and Porters Field for the proposals.
It would also see 161,458 sq ft for shops, restaurants and cafes and bars created.
A gym and student accommodation also forms part of the plans.
The plans will go before councillors on April 9 and comes with the demolition of Cavendish House imminent.
Other shops, including the former B&Q building, will also be knocked down.
The application also calls for the demolition of all of the buildings within the triangle of and bounded by Trindle Road, Porters Field and St Joseph’s Street, including St Joseph's Court, the former Rickshaw restaurant, a taxi office, a disused Scout hut and the former Metro Bar pub.
A council document published ahead of the meeting said: "The uses proposed by the application are considered to be acceptable from a planning policy point of view and would provide a significant regeneration opportunity for Dudley town centre, as well as complement the proposed transport interchange and the Metro extension to Brierley Hill.
"The scheme in its self is unlikely to have any significant impact to neighbour amenity and disruption caused by demolition would only be short term."
Among those to have objected to the plans were the local Vauxhall dealer, Archdiocese of Birmingham and SAVE Britain Heritage, which said was likely to damage rather than improve the local character and distinctiveness of Dudley.
Vauxhall Dealership (Dudley Motors), which listed several issues including the loss of parking and arguing it should have been consulted prior to submission.