Contentious Liverpool open storage scheme heads to inquiry
Plans to use an 11-acre site in Garston for open storage were rejected by the city council after backlash from locals, prompting Peloton Real Estate to appeal.
Liverpool City Council’s planning team had recommended the Blackburne Street project for approval when it first came before the planning committee in April.
Members deferred a decision so a site visit could take place before returning to refuse the project at the next meeting.
Objectors to the scheme claimed that noise and air pollution caused by increased traffic movements would “cause harm to the living conditions of the occupiers of nearby residential properties and traffic movements would”.
The project was rejected despite warnings from officers that it would leave the council open to an appeal and potential costs.
Now, Peloton is seeking to overturn the decision. No date has been set for the inquiry.
Peloton was contacted for comment.
The 11.4-acre Blackburne Street site was bought by a joint venture between Peloton Real Estate and investor Moorfield Group for £4m in 2022, the first investment in what was billed as a possible £100m programme in the open storage market.
Savills is advising the development team. The site is allocated for employment uses in the Local Plan and is now cleared.
To follow the appeal process, search for reference number 3369126 on the Planning Inspectorate website.
The council had the opportunity to see this site redeveloped for housing, but didn’t support that either. The issue with the proposed use is that the area has unacceptable air quality. The Local Plan prevents development that will result in an unacceptable impact on air quality. The vehicle movements from the suggested storage use would exacerbate an existing problem. However, residential development of the site would have the same issue. The council was justified in refusing permission, so I can’t see why costs would be awarded. That doesn’t resolve the issue of what to do with the site if the Inspector dismisses the appeal, though. Given that Peloton paid close to £5m for the site, I can’t imagine they’re going to give up easily.
By Anonymous
Here’s a view that some may find uncomfortable: the level of benefits are now so high in this country that people can live comfortably without worrying about issues such as the economy. Many therefore oppose sound investment proposals because they see no direct line to their own life chances, which are ‘fixed’ by the benefits system. It’s what economists call a ‘moral hazard’ and we see it increasingly frequently.
Meanwhile, by the government’s own measure the number of ambitious people and businesses leaving the country is at a record level. Who will create the wealth to pay people’s benefits then? It’s utterly unsustainable and the country is heading for a financial reckoning. The bond markets have spotted it, but government has its head in the sand.
By Anonymous
To anonymous at 10.54
Simply not true
https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/An-OBR-guide-to-welfare-spending-Bud-17.pdf
https://www.tuc.org.uk/research-analysis/reports/benefit-levels-uk
By Miss Ann Thrope
I live very near here – can someone please advise what they are storing – is it waste? It is very sad that councils are stuck in the position that the developer has the money to appeal – so they know its coming back again – Peel used to do this all the time – should have been called ‘A Peel’. The roads around this area of Garston and Speke are rammed – they could not take any more HGVs
By Bob Dawson
To Anonymous at 10:54 – Are sharp elbows only for the middle class? I bet if somebody pitched up in your leafy suburb and wanted to turn the bottom of your garden into an open air self-storage facility you would have plenty to object about. The “uncomfortable view” is that there are some here who think that those of lower socio-economic means should put-up and shut-up to ensure your bond market investments keep generating a good return.
By Anonymous
Looking at the photo image the site looks like it was already industrial before it was cleared, also adjacent sites look like they are used for industry too. Yes there is housing nearby which looks well established but, as there was industry nearby historically, possibly Peloton could win the appeal.
By Anonymous
Little bit of sarcasm from one of the many anon posters on here
By George