PLANNING | Liverpool rejects Crosslane and Romal applications

Liverpool City Council followed planning officer recommendations in refusing the 236-apartment, co-living project in the Baltic Triangle and the 330-home scheme at Liverpool Waters.

Only one large scheme was approved at the council’s planning committee meeting on 18 January – an application for 135 apartments off Waterloo Road. The project had been approved in February last year, but went before committee again after changing its housing mix, reducing the number of three-bed units from ten to five and the number of two-bed apartments from 65 to 63. The number of one-bed apartments increased from 38 to 45. Councillors voted unanimously to approve the changes.

The refused schemes

Romal Capital’s £100m Liverpool Waters project was rejected due to the harm the council believed it would cause to heritage assets, the impact it would cause Cultural Square, and because it had too many one-bedroom apartments.

The project was for 330 homes, consisting of 194 one-bedroom apartments, 124 two-bedroom units and 12 three-bedroom ones. It was designed by Ollier Smurthwaite Architects.

Romal Capital has already appealed and the matter will be decided by an independent inquiry.

New Bird Street, Crosslane, P.Google Earth 000

Crosslane wanted to turn the site into a co-living devleopment. Credit: Google Earth

Crosslane Co-Living Group’s redevelopment for the former Bogans Carpet site on New Bird Street in the Baltic Triangle was scaled back twice before, with the original plan calling for 370 co-living apartments across 11 storeys. It was then reduced to 326 before the current application, which petitioned for 236 units.

Wates was lined up as main contractor for the project, which had been designed by Sadler Brown Group.

Councillors rejected the application saying that the number of single occupancy units was too high and that 192 of the apartments did not comply with nationally described space standards.

Read more about the Liverpool co-living situation in The Subplot.

Your Comments

Read our comments policy

Who said that the Variety Halls were dead, Liverpool CC is keeping the tradition going and inventing new ways to be ridiculed and discourage investment. Is this their elected role to say no to almost everything?

By No investors welcome.

Romal. Come to Manchester. We are only down the road but a million miles away in our views to investment.
Liverpool are managing their own decline now.

By Miles Platting

Like a hunger striker refusing food Liverpool turns away the developers, even reliable ones. What is the heritage they want to preserve at Waterloo dock, and why are they worried about 1 bed flats, they are dancing to the tune of the anti-development groups down there, who want no development at all.
As regards the Crosslane development once again it`s 1 bed flats they don`t like but let the market decide, in the meantime where are the developers who are planning to build larger flats, nowhere !

By Anonymous

Why should it be anything to do with the council whether “there are too many one beds apartments” this planning officers and committees need their wings clipped

By Stuart wood

What are they going to put there instead-at the Liverpool waters scheme?

By Scouser

The reversal in outlook at the City Council is something to behold. After a late conversion to the merits of regeneration and investment at the millennium, the Lib Dem administration began a remarkable transformation of the city which the Labour Party under Anderson built upon. And now?

Now we seem to be a city that shuns investment and progress; that seeks to dictate to the market; and which lacks ambition and foresight. Where is the plan which articulates how the city will face up to and exploit the monumental changes in our economy and society brought about by technology, by shifting trading patterns, by demography and, yes, by Brexit? I suspect there are few that are even abreast of these issues and fewer still, if asked, could articulate a convincing narrative which shows that they are on top of the issue.

Meantime, here we are rejecting two credible, proven developers… Liverpool is beyond parody once again.

By Not welcome in Liverpool

This policy that all new residential developments in the City Centre must provide a greater number of 2 bedroom accommodation than 1 bedroom accommodation is going to be a real issue for years to come that will totally destroy investment in the city. The planning department won’t budge on the issue, because they won’t go against a newly adopted policy, and as others have pointed out, the market decides the accommodation mix so investors will simply go elsewhere.

On a related point, are we now saying Baltic Triangle is officially part of the City Centre – because this policy only applies to City Centre developments?

By Anonymous

Let’s stop all this development, it was bad enough when we were just a fishing village, sometimes there would be 2 even 3 fish stalls in Castle street. I mean how much more could we take then never mind now?

By Preserve the Past

@scouser absolutely nothing !!

By Anonymous

Liverpool council and planners are a total disgrace and should hang their arrogant heads in shame. They are dinosaurs with agendas to suit who ???
I am sick to death of hearing about heritage , our city is not a museum. The planners are totally disconnected from what the city needs – progress and investment . Honestly they should all be sacked and lets get some forward thinking professionals in from outside of the council.

By Paul M

What else could we expect fom these clowns? To bad they don’t read what people are saying about them. But would it make any differenice?

By Benny

One end of the M62 has arguably too much development and the other end too little. I’m sure there’s a happy medium to be found here somewhere.

By Anonymous

What on earth are they playing at, can’t blame World Heritage anymore. There’s 1 crane in Liverpool at the moment, 1! If that doesn’t tell you the dire state our city is in then I don’t know what will. Liverpool City Council need to do a day a week on work experience with Manchester City Council, go and see it’s supposed to be done.

By Michael B

My toilet is bigger than the Crosslane bedsits.

By Anonymous

So who’s to blame now UNESCO aren’t around?

By Anonymous

Liverpool: Closed for Business

By Anonymous

It is the correct decision. Some people dont care what gets built as long as it can be interpreted as progress.

By Bixteth boy

Trying to limit HMOs while refusing co-living and 1 bed apartment developments. Mad.

By Bob Smith

More than one crane in Liverpool ATM but yes does need to be improvement

By Anonymous

When I worked in Manchester two years ago the Council used to require new Apartment schemes to have a 66/33 split for a two bed/one bed ratio, this seems like Liverpool wanting to implement a similar strategy? I haven’t lived in either city centre for a few years but one beds were great if you had the wages or were in a relationship, two beds were ideal and often more affordable when split with a friend/colleague etc. Seems a shame as Romal have delivered some nice schemes.

By Sandgrounder

London based building enthusiasts lambast the council for requiring standards, saying it’s driving away business.

However if these standards had been applied a decade ago, not one of the shonky office to residential schemes would have been proposed let alone passed and the city would be 4 million square feet of office space better off.

With a healthy inflow of relocations, there would have been plenty of impetus for quality new build residential. Perhaps even one or two QUALITY conversions for those with money to spend.

By Jeff

These ‘investments’ suck cash out of the city in the form of rent. Build homes without scam management fees and ground rents and not egg boxes.

By Bill Dean

@Bixteth boy, soon your wishes will come true and there will be no development in Liverpool, and nothing for you to worry about. All those pieces of grass wasteland and scrub left to grow wild as nature intended, and derelict buildings in the Baltic will remain so. Job opportunities will decline and people with any skills and initiative will move out, as a result there will be less council tax for the council, services will suffer and the fabric of the city deteriorate, but no matter your work will be done, who needs managed decline from outside when Liverpool`s citizens inflict it on themselves.

By Anonymous

Liverpool City Council are obsessed with cycle paths . They would take more cars off the road if they restored the railway line that ran from Hunts Cross through Gateacre , Knotty Ash , West Derby up to Walton and Bootle thereby completing a circular route round Liverpool.

The Council refuses to consider it because the disused railway line is used as the Liverpool Loop Line for cyclists .

By Jax

Liverpool is being sacrificed to idesalitic political principles and suburban mind-sets, which ignore how urban economies actually work. Yes, plenty of cowboys in Liverpool, but the Romal proposal was a good one, and they have a record for delivery. The docks and the waterfront belong to us all – not just to a handful of residents frightened of change.

By Anonymous

Related Articles

Sign up to receive the Place Daily Briefing

Join more than 12,000 property professionals and receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Join more than 12,000 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

Name*
Would you also like to receive our free PlaceTech Weekly newsletter, covering innovation in property?*