199-apartment mixed-use block at Land Bounded By Greenland Street, Liverpool

What was proposed

The application proposed a 5-to-13-storey mixed-use block with 199 apartments, two ground-floor commercial units, a basement and associated works.

“The application seeks full planning permission for a 5 to 13 storey block (plus a basement to the rear of the site between Greenland Street and New Bird Street). It is a residential-led development comprising 199 apartments and two ground floor commercial units on a prominent vacant brownfield site at Greenland Street and St. James Street. The scheme sits within the Baltic Triangle Area…”

“It proposes a perimeter block with active frontages, including 6 no. duplex townhouses with their own front doors facing Greenland Street, and 2 no. commercial units fronting onto St. James Street and Greenland Street. There are ground floor amenity spaces, a communal landscaped roof terrace and a gym and co-working space for residents. The development also includes sufficient internal cycle storage, and has no car parking.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to conditions and a legal agreement because regeneration, social and economic benefits outweighed identified policy shortfalls.

“The areas in which policy objectives are not fully met are summarised in this section. The “Housing Mix and Affordable Housing” section of this report, highlights that the proposal would not meet all requirements in respect of the housing mix, in terms of unit size as required by Policy H3 of the LLP.”

“The social benefits of providing accessible residential accommodation, with supporting internal and external amenities, including a residents’ co-working space and gym, together with commercial uses to activate the ground floor are recognised as significant in this location. The weight attributed to these potential economic and social benefits is significant.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s agent spoke in support, and the planning case officer summarised the application and recommended approval.

What members debated

A proposed refusal amendment cited height, housing mix and low daylight levels, but members voted against it.

“That the application be refused on the grounds of height, housing mix and low daylight levels.”

Minutes

How members voted

The refusal amendment received three votes in favour, seven against and no abstentions; the original approval motion was then carried.

“The Amendment was lost, with the same voting on the original Motion, it was carried and resolved accordingly.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The application was approved subject to the stated conditions, a legal agreement, viability reassessment and delegated authority if the agreement was not signed by 21 October 2026.

“(d) In the event that the Legal Agreement required under (b) is not signed by 21 st October 2026 then the Director of Planning and Building Control be given additional delegated authority for the discretion to refuse the application for the reason that: ‘The applicant has not entered into a legal agreement to pay a commuted sum in lieu of the provision/enhancement of street…”

Minutes