Council rejects plans for 261-apartment waterfront scheme
Proposals to develop a 261-apartments scheme on Liverpool’s waterfront have been refused by Liverpool City Council planning committee this morning (December 5).
The development was recommended for approval by the council’s planning officers.
Liverpool-based Carpenter Investments submitted the plans for a stepped building, rising from 11 to 13 storeys, with a five-storey podium fronting onto the main Wapping highway, including one floor of office and commercial spaces, on land between Kings Dock Street and Sparling Street, at the eastern edge of the Baltic Triangle.
The proposed site, described as “neglected”, comprises 2.6 hectares, including a former surface car parking area which had been unused for a number of years but has recently been used for building material storage.
The developer is seeking permission to create 261 apartments on the first to 12th floor levels of the 13-storey scheme, offering 104 one-bedroom units, 71 two-bedroom, 65 two-bedroom duplex units, 11 three-bedroom, and 10 three-bedroom duplex units.
The commercial space provides two units within the lower ground level to be used for mixed uses for flexible purposes, including bar/takeaway functions.
A 55 sq m office space is proposed on the first floor.
The basement area could provide 69 car parking spaces, including 14 accessible space and 10 EVC bays for electric cars. Also, 292 cycle parking spaces were planned within the lower ground level.
United Utilities raised an objection as the development is proposed close to a sludge main on the southern boundary, which the water and wastewater group says is a critical asset. It said it will not allow development over this pressurised sludge pipeline.
However, the applicant disputed there are any pipelines under the development site. Council officers said the two parties must determine the issue between them.
In recommending the application for approval, planning officers said: “It is considered that the proposal offers a high quality, mixed use scheme that would lead to the redevelopment of a long term vacant site, improving the appearance of the built environment and the future offer of the Baltic Triangle and as such would be a regeneration benefit to the local area.”
However, in today’s planning committee, the proposal was rejected, unanimously.
Reasons cited by councillors included a lack of affordable housing and issues over S106 payments.
