Contentious residential schemes overcome opposition to win unanimous approval

Liverpool City Council has approved planning permission for two residential schemes that had attracted objections relating to concerns over massing and the lack of affordable homes.

Today’s (January 30) planning committee unanimously approved both proposals.

McLaren Property is behind plans for a purpose-built, 242-bed student accommodation scheme on Myrtle Street, neighbouring the University of Liverpool campus.

The Mulberry Street site is currently used as a furniture shop and café/frozen yogurt shop to the ground floor. The upper floor is vacant. An adjacent building is a former Avis car hire garage with associated forecourt canopy.

This was built in the post-war period and is comparable in height to the former roller rink. It has been vacant and in a state of disrepair for a number of years.

McLaren’s plans are for 77 studios (32%), 32 cluster units providing 165 bedspaces (68%). Five per cent of bedrooms are accessible to M4(3) standard across the development in both studios and cluster bedrooms. The scheme has been designed by Manchester-based Cartwright Pickard.

The scheme attracted 56 objections, including concerns over the design, scale, massing and impact of proposed building, and the principle of student accommodation. Two local councillors, Cllr Nathalie Nicholas and Cllr Tom Logan also registered their opposition.

Almost a third of the purpose-built student accommodation scheme will be studios and the rest are arranged in four-, five- and six-bedroom clusters around common rooms. Alongside essential shared facilities like a laundry, residents may also have access to bookable guest rooms and a variety of inviting amenity spaces, such as a social lounge, study hub and cinema room.

McLaren said the scheme is designed to support the health and wellbeing of residents and to target BREEAM Excellent through a highly efficient building envelope and services. Its central site has good transport links and residents will also have the use of storage space for 81 bicycles.

In recommending approval for the development, planning officers said: “It is accepted that the proposed development will result in some harm to designated heritage assets.

“As this is considered to be less than substantial, however, the harm has been weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. In this instance and on balance, it is considered that the public benefits outweigh this harm and that the proposed development will enable the regeneration of a long term underused and partly unsightly site within the Canning Street Conservation Area and will have a positive impact on the area.”

McLaren Property’s regional managing director Tom Gilman said: “We’ve worked closely with Liverpool City Council to deliver a scheme that is sensitively designed and one which respects neighbouring heritage.

“We are excited to get started and regenerate this site and bring forward a vibrant student hub on the edge of Liverpool’s knowledge district.”

Carpenter Investments scheme (via planning docs)

The other scheme, which had also been recommended for approval by planning officers, was back before councillors after being rejected last month (December 2023).

Liverpool-based Carpenter Investments submitted 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 wants 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.

An amendment at last month’s committee by Cllr Steve Radford, seconded by Cllr Pat Moloney, that the application be refused based on the design and scale of the development; failure to comply with policy requirements in respect of affordable housing; and failure to comply with policy requirements in respect of planning obligations, was carried and the subsequent vote resulted in unanimous rejection.

Planning officers again recommended approval and the committee, this time, unanimously approved the proposal.