£100m 330-apartment waterfront scheme should be rejected, say planning officers

Controversial plans for 330 new waterfront homes in Liverpool have been recommended for refusal.

Liverpool City Council planning committee will consider proposals to develop almost 800 new homes within the area at its meeting next Tuesday.

Four schemes have been submitted for consideration, but the two biggest have been recommended for refusal, by planning officers, including a scheme by Liverpool developer Romal Capital for 330 units on Liverpool Waters.

The proposal is to build three blocks of between four and nine storeys which would offer apartments and ground floor commercial units.

Plans were unveiled last year for thr £100m development but they drew swift condemnation from neighbouring tenants.

Papers for next week’s committee show that 100 individual letters and emails objecting to the proposal have been received from local residents and their representatives.

Reasons include opposition to the infilling of part of West Waterloo Dock and fears of over-development.

Three councillors, Cllr Nick Small (Labour), Cllr Richard Kemp (Lib Dems), and Cllr Tom Crone (Greens), have objected on similar lines, as well as concerns about the impact on local wildlife.

But a variety of experts have also raised objections.

Historic England said it continues to have serious concerns and advised that Liverpool’s historic docks are a “finite resource, no longer expanding and growing as they once did”.

The planning application for 300 apartments and the partial infilling of West Waterloo Dock goes to the Council's Planning Committee with a recommendation from officers to refuse. This is positive news. 1/2 pic.twitter.com/SJlUdyyxzF

— Councillor Nick Small‏ 🇺🇦 (@CllrNickSmall) January 10, 2022

It said any loss of water space means a reduction to the scale of dockland.

Heritage groups vehemently objected to Everton FC’s £505m Bramley-Moore Dock plans, which were passed in February last year, because it involves the infilling of the entire dock to build its new ground.

The Victorian Society also objects to the Romal Capital scheme, first in principle to the partial infilling of West Waterloo Dock, and the poor design of buildings

Likewise, The Georgian Group said it objects strongly, due to the impact of the partial infilling of the dock, and the impact of the scale and height of the proposed development on the site, while the Save Britain’s Heritage objection is based on its claim that any infilling of the historic dock basin for the construction of three large buildings will be substantially harmful to the outstanding universal value of the site.

If the scheme went ahead the council would be in line to receive £947,504 of Section 106 payments, for improvements in the surrounding area.

But planning officers have recommended that the committee refuse the plans on the grounds of the partial infilling of the historic dock, its effect on plans for a ‘cultural square’ to provide key open space as part of Liverpool Waters proposals, and that there are too many one-bed apartments, which would fail to deliver a diverse housing mix.

Another substantial residential scheme has also been flagged for refusal.

Crosslane Co-Living SPV1, Wates Group, and Ascot Property, have applied to demolish existing buildings in New Bird Street, within the Baltic Triangle area of the city, and create 236 co-living apartments and ground floor commercial business space on the site of the former Bogans Carpet building.

Developers have pledged to include an on-site communal space, including co-working areas, a gym and external courtyard, landscaping as well as other external works.

But council officers say the application should be refused because the plans are for all single occupancy studios, 192 of which do not comply with the Nationally Described Space Standards, for accommodation.

Two schemes which do meet with planning officers’ approval are proposals for 66 new flats and 135 apartments, in the Kirkdale area on the fringe of the city centre.

The Eldonian Community Based Housing Association has applied to build three blocks of four storeys, creating 66 one- and two-bedroom flats aimed at a young market, on land off Love Lane, running parallel to the Northern Line rail link into the city.

Twenty eight objections have been received, ranging from the size and height of the proposed development, the loss of privacy for nearby bedrooms and gardens, and the prospect of over-development.

However, in making their recommendation for the scheme to the committee, planning officers say the proposal would “complement neighbouring development” and would provide “high quality live/work units intended to attract younger residents”.

They reject fears of loss of privacy, saying: “The proximity of the proposal to the rear of neighbouring properties would not result in unacceptable degree of overlooking and the degree to which the development could overshadow or have an overbearing effect has been mitigated to a degree which is considered acceptable.”

Another application to demolish existing buildings housing a restaurant and cafe and create a 16-storey residential block, comprising 135 apartments and a ground floor commercial unit, is back before the committee again.

The development, planned for Waterloo Road, in Kirkdale by applicant Waterloo Road Ltd, went before the committee in February last year and was approved. But due to delays in signing legal agreements, the scheme needs considering once more.

Council officers say there have been no material changes since the scheme was last considered and have recommended approval.