Liverpool blasts Baltic block but backs Blacklight
The city council’s planning committee decided to approve Blacklight’s plans for a Devon Street PBSA, but concerns over affordable homes stalled Ascot Luxury Living’s residential scheme, the other big project on the agenda, which is nearing a decade in the making.
Devon Street
Blacklight Capital Partners’ application to revive a stalled 164-room PBSA project and bring the number of flats on offer up to 202 was approved unanimously yesterday [Tuesday 3 June].
The developer’s plans concern an L-shaped site off the junction of Devon Street and Falkland Street, which wraps around an existing BP petrol station.
Currently, the site hosts YPG’s unfinished, façade-less eight to 10-storey PBSA block with only its structural shell erected.
The developer now has consent to complete the façade, finish the PBSA units, and provide 1,000 sq ft of ground floor commercial space.
The scheme offers a wide range of amenities for residents. Credit: Project Studio
Residents would benefit from access to a 645 sq ft roof terrace on the eighth floor, a gym, a lounge, a games room, a cinema room, a private dining room, and a reception area.
The Devon Street project first won planning permission in 2016, but construction stopped in 2021. Now, Blacklight’s success will enable the firm to rectify that.
To view the application, use the planning reference number 24F/3271 on Liverpool City Council’s planning portal.
Ascot’s scheme would be built on the former Bogan’s Carpet warehouse site after its demolition. Credit: via planning documents
New Bird Street
Ascot Luxury Living’s plans to demolish an old carpet warehouse and erect a nine to 10-storey block of 194 apartments have been deferred, with councillors concerned about the lack of affordable housing.
The Falconer Chester Hall-designed block would replace the one-storey Bogan’s Carpets warehouse buildings and offer six public-facing commercial units ranging between 1,200 sq ft to 3,800 sq ft on its ground floor.
Featuring a 4,520 sq ft roof terrace on the first floor, the block would provide 96 one-bed and 96 two-bed flats, and two two-bed, four-person apartments.
The plans do not offer on-site car parking but instead would provide 194 cycle spaces.
Speaking at the meeting, Liberal Democrat Cllr Richard Kemp said the efforts to designate 20% of the flats as affordable were “totally unconvincing” and put forward a successful motion to defer the application.
He added that the amendment would require a “full report from the city planning officer on all the issues about viability and the failure to take up the 20% affordable housing originally identified as a requirement for the city”.
Terry Riley, chief executive of Ascot Group, said: “This is very disappointing news, and we’ll obviously reflect on the decision and consider our options.
“We have worked closely and extensively with Liverpool City Council’s planning team over the past 30 months, despite many challenges and changes in the planning process along the way, in order to ensure that this fully compliant scheme was ready for planning approval.
“We are extremely surprised that all the hard work and effort of the council’s planning officers, including their own recommendation to approve, seemed to carry no weight with today’s committee.”
He added: “Naturally, we’ll maintain an open and constructive approach, but this will add further time and costs to Ascot Group, and this decision sends negative signals to other developers and investors at a time when Liverpool City Council are trying to attract inward investment.”
Those interested in the application can view it using the planning reference number 16F/2922 on Liverpool City Council’s planning portal.
Love the headline. Say it three times fast.
By Anonymous
A shameful political decision from councillors woefully under-qualified to assess complex planning issues. Zero thought from them as to the tricky economics of developing in Liverpool, nor for the hundreds of local tradespeople who would be gainfully employed building a scheme such as this. A city of lions, led by donkeys.
By Anonymous
Ascot don’t build anyway but if they believe in their scheme they should appeal as Angela Raynor wants homes built quickly
Liverpool Planning Committe is as backward and short-sighted as ever, can’t imagine what they’ll do with the TJ Morris skyscrapers.
By Anonymous
When existing student accommodation in Liverpool is being turned into homeless shelters allegedly because of lack of demand, isn’t it totally inappropriate to allow the building of more?
Or does the city council aim to have a large city centre population of homeless people?
By John
Disagree with both ‘Anonymous’ comments – LCC planners have been far more proactive recently than they have been for a long time. The need for more homes built quickly shouldn’t be to the detriment of the required social housing provision. It’s slack not to have submitted the required info or allocation for this as requirements are well documented. (And LCC have already intimated support for the Davos’ tall buildings proposition so let’s reserve judgement!)
By Local
The lions left Liverpool a long time ago. It’s full of dodo birds now.
By Anonymous
This decision and the motion filed by Richard Kemp seems utterly ridiculous…..what message does this send out to any potential investors?
Liverpool City Council have been on a charm offensive of late, setting up Invest Liverpool, going to places like MIPIM, screaming from the building tops that we are open for business, spending untold amounts on these trips and marketing, then we get this!
How does the city ever move forward and encourage investment?
To be big, you have have to aim big, attract big, and deliver big………the only thing that seems to happen is we talk a big game.
The council needs to be as one and they need to have faith in each other to get to where we should be as a city, yet we seem to fall further behind places like Manchester which has become a metropolis, yet we are a parochial village in their shadow.
Someone needs to take charge and get the council and councilors working as one to be constructive and not destructive.
Unless they work as one, then in my eyes public money is being wasted on things like trips to MIPIM, Invest Liverpool etc……. so these things should be banned till the city works as one!
By TaxPayer
This just comes across as posturing by the councillors, for the benefit of the people who vote them in. Would be very surprising if it doesn’t fly through in a few weeks.
The bigger issue for me is land owners not building their schemes out. Judging by the planning reference, this project has been in the system for nine years. How many times has a version of this been to committee?
By Mike
This is what we are up against in Liverpool anti investment Labour council.
By Anonymous
Shock horror. Developer tries to wriggle out of affordable housing. Welll done to the council for holding them to account.
By Anonymous
@anonymous it was the Lib Dem councillors on the committee that successfully pushed for a deferral not Labour
By Watcherzero
Surprised that the application got so far without fulfilling a clear Council policy on 20% affordability, regardless of whether you think the policy is sensible or not.
By Anonymous
We struggle to get developers into Liverpool anyway so insisting on 20% affordability will just put them off even more…….well done Liverpool.
By Anonymous
Things are moving again now the inspectors have moved on soon be back to normal
By Anonymous
Some mad takes here – we need affordable housing and developers need to follow the rules
By Anonymous