Liverpool refuses Sandhills hotel

Plans filed in 2019 for a 174-bedroom hotel close to Everton’s proposed Bramley-Moore Dock stadium have been rejected by the city council.

The proposal was put forward by advisor Landor Planning Consultants on behalf of applicant FSF Estates for a narrow triangular site at 51 Sandhills Lane, 800m from the Everton site.

Set in a largely industrial area, one noted as such as in Liverpool’s 2002 unitary development plan, the 0.4-scre Kirkdale site currently houses hardstanding and a vacant three-storey building of around 24,000 sq ft. Bordered on its western side by the railway, Goggins’ transport yard sits to the east.

What had been proposed was a hotel of eight storeys at its tallest point, visible from the nearby Sandhills station platforms, which would include 114 standard rooms, 42 family rooms and 18 large standard rooms.

Two reasons were given for refusal: the loss of industrial/business space, and that the height, scale and massing would be out of character for the area.

Landor’s planning statement argued that the principle of development is acceptable “on the basis that the proposed hotel development would regenerate an under-utilised site and is compatible with the wider regeneration initiatives for the northern dock area”. Everton’s stadium was approved in February.

A feasibility study from Knightsbridge Property Group added that “the scheme provides a strong presence and will act as a visual key on this prominent site”.

The professional team also included CC Geotechnical and transport consultant Vectos.

Your Comments

Read our comments policy

No to all high rise buildings down by the Dock Area

By John Lunt

As ever Liverpool Planning Dept is obsessed with height, even when it`s only 8 storeys, there must be some kind of cult within the council who believe there will be impending world disaster if they allow a building over 2 floors.
Sandhills is not that far away from the Tobacco Warehouse scheme, and the proposed Everton Stadium, both involve massing and will be much higher than this hotel proposal.

By Anonymous


By Anonymous

LCC simply know that the city doesn’t need any more hotels. Much like apartment builds now hitting the buffers , investment has now reached its limit for the foreseeable future.

By Realist

Not sure what world “Realist” is living in ,but Everton are about to build a new stadium increasing the capacity by 14000, in addition Liverpool will be extending their capacity by at least 8000, and amongst these extra fans will be many who want overnight stays in hotels. If you dont`t understand how the market works it will not be the council that decides it is saturated but market forces and demand, oh and by the way the council will soon be building a new hotel next to the cruise liner terminal .

By Anonymous

LCC should look to the wider aspect, surely a hotel on waste land would be an improvement and in some way go to the redevelopment of the area along with the Bramley moor stadium

By T. Davies

Thank goodness the Council has seen sense at last! World Heritage accolade is vital to tourism and we may still lose it with EFC development.
NO to high rise buildings. We need to keep character to protect future tourism nobody wants to look at characterless modern buildings which will soon need to be pulled down!

By annonymous

Clearly no need for it and no requirement to further pollute Liverpool’s once attractive waterfront with this nonsense.

By Red Robbin

Liverpool is the birthplace of the skyscraper. It’s part of our heritage to go taller and be bolder, but we need to respect our the character of our dockland areas as these will be the drivers of our future prosperity. Our skyscrapers need to be in the right place and in clusters. I don’t know about this eight storey building but the demand for hotels on the Waterfront will only grow.

By Red Squirrel

When you are as shortsighted and parochial as Red Robbin then “clearly” you would not see any need for most things outside of your own back yard. There were may structures that were deemed to be “not needed ” by the local powers that be eg Sailors Home, Overhead Railway , Bibby`s Building and all were pulled down . One might also argue that Tobacco and Sugar were ” not needed”, but they helped make the city and port wealthy. Sometimes Red Robbin you have to take risks and use your imagination, as this is what most of the entrepreneurs did decades ago in creating Liverpool`s waterfront.

By Anonymous

Wrong design in the wrong place and two wrongs do not make a right. We need affordable housing.

By Tufty

Its lucky that at least the council can see sense. Just no need.

By Anonymous

Great decision, only the the most shortsighted and parochial could possibly want an 8 storey carbuncle of a building here. It’s not often one can say this but well done LCC.

By Anonymous

Related Articles

Sign up to receive the Place Daily Briefing

Join more than 13,000 property professionals and receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox


Join more than 13,000 property professionals and sign up to receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox.

By subscribing, you are agreeing to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

"*" indicates required fields

Your Job Field*
Other regional Publications - select below