18 flats and two houses at Former La Mennais Community House, Liverpool

What was proposed

The application proposed replacing the existing two-storey accommodation with an apartment block containing 18 flats and two large detached houses.

“The Proposal The application proposes the redevelopment of the site for a residential use, replacing the existing two storey Brother accommodation with a three-storey residential apartment block to the north and the siting of two large detached properties within the open space to the south.”

“The remainder of the site will accommodate two large detached dwellinghouses, each with their own garage and private amenity space. The layout enables retention of the existing access point, internal roadway and stone boundary wall. The proposed houses are of 2.5 storeys, with basement and accommodate 5/6no. bedrooms…”

Officer report

The site and its history

The apartment block would occupy the existing building’s area, while the houses would be built in open space; the site has a tree preservation order.

“The apartment building will be located in the same part of the site as the existing residential block, towards the rear of the site. The building accommodates 18 apartments over 3 storeys. Use of the roofspace means that the property’s appearance is of 2.5 storeys. The building’s ridge height is in line with that of the adjacent St Francis Xavier’s college.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the scheme was considered acceptable in principle, well designed, and without unacceptable effects on residents, highways or biodiversity, subject to controls.

“It is concluded that the proposed development would provide an acceptable level of parking provision alongside adequate space and location for cycle and refuse storage. The proposed development would be facilitated within the existing highways network without placing undue pressure on the existing highways infrastructure. As such, the development is considered to accord with plan policies TP5, TP6 and TP8.”

“(i) the payment of £565.20 to mitigate the effects of recreational pressure arising from the scheme, payable prior to first occupation; (ii) the distribution of leaflets by the developer for new householders, setting out information about the Liverpool coastline to be provided to all first-time occupiers of new homes, to mitigate the effects of recreational pressure; (iii) payment of £323,127,80 for off site affordable housing contributions payable 50% prior to commencement…”

Officer report

What people said

Nine objections raised concerns including traffic, parking, privacy, loss of nature and green space, design, affordable housing, viability and drainage; four more objections followed.

“Loss of privacy due to increased height of apartment building causing overlooking ▪ Loss of nature due to removal of established tress and development on open space occupied by wildlife, squirrels etc. ▪ Highway safety issues due to Beaconsfield Road already being highly congested and backing up past the site entrance.”

“As such the proposal will dominate the view from the rear of 35 Beaconsfield Road ▪ The reduction in green space is too great and there is a net loss in biodiversity ▪ Resurfacing of nearby roads needed, concern about impact on this from construction traffic ▪ Parking around the junction with Quarry Street and Beaconsfield Road is already dangerous ▪ No social value to the development ▪ There is no affordable housing ▪ The supposed lack of viability is largely due to the sum…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s agent supported the proposal, a local resident objected, and the planning case officer answered questions about trees, heritage, materials and biodiversity.

Committee discussion

The committee was told that the recommendation remained approval after the case officer summarised the assessment and answered members’ questions.

“The Planning Case Officer summarised the application and answered questions relating to trees, heritage, materials and biodiversity net gain.”

“On the basis of the Case Officer assessment, the application was recommended for approval. _____”

Minutes

The decision

The application was approved subject to a legal agreement and conditions proposed by the Director of Planning and Building Control.

“That the Application be approved, subject to a Legal Agreement and Conditions as proposed by the Director of Planning and Building Control.”

Minutes