Posted by: John Brace | 4th April 2018

Despite objections on highways and ecology grounds did Liverpool City Council’s Planning Committee approve a planning application for 48 dwellings in Wavertree?

Despite objections on highways and ecology grounds did Liverpool City Council’s Planning Committee approve a planning application for 48 dwellings in Wavertree?

                                         

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Planning Committee (Liverpool City Council) 3rd April 2018 Part 1 of 2

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Planning Committee (Liverpool City Council) 3rd April 2018 Part 2 of 2

Cllr Lawrence Brown objecting to a planning application on highways and ecological grounds 3rd May 2018 Planning Committee Liverpool City Council

Cllr Lawrence Brown objecting to a planning application on highways and ecological grounds 3rd May 2018 Planning Committee Liverpool City Council

Yesterday morning, I went to my first Planning Committee meeting of Liverpool City Council at Liverpool Town Hall (which you can watch in the video clips above).

Unfortunately I forgot to pick up the bag with the tripod in it when we got to the train station, so filmed only the first forty-five minutes without a tripod (which covered two planning applications).

At the start there was a minute of silence due to the recent death of Cllr John McIntosh.

The first planning application (17F/2788) was for 38 houses and 10 flats on Plot C, Wavertree Technology Park in Wavertree Ward.

An employee of the owner of the site addressed the Planning Committee. He said that in May 2017 the Planning Committee had agreed to a planning permission for 40 dwellings. The next speaker was the project’s arboriculturalist who also spoke in favour of the planning application.

Cllr Kemp asked him about the work that had been done without a formal environmental application being approved? He answered that he wasn’t directly involved in such a decision.

Councillor Lawrence Brown spoke about the removal of the trees in February 2018 that weren’t protected. He also felt that it was overdevelopment as the outline planning permission was for forty dwellings whereas this was for forty-eight. Cllr Brown referred to the Great Crested Newt and bats in what he said to the Planning Committee. Highways reasons were another reason why he thought it should be rejected.

Cllr Concepcion asked him whether he was aware of the revised landscaping plans to which he answered that he was but also referred to protected species and habitats.

One of the ward councillors for Wavertree Cllr Cummings spoke on behalf of the residents against it as he objected to a sole access to the development. He wanted a further access for vehicles to the Wavertree Technology Park (beyond the pedestrian access and cycle access planned).

Cllr Clare McIntyre (another of the ward councillors for Wavertree) spoke about the residents’ concerns on traffic and ecology.

Cllr Kemp asked a question of the ward councillors asking if it would be acceptable to them if there was an access to the Wavertree Technology Park. One councillor answered yes, whereas the other councillor gave a much longer answer that was essentially yes too.

The Chair asked the planning officer and highways officer to address the issues raised. The planning officer asked for a plan to be displayed on the screen (which wasn’t possible), so he handed round a paper plan instead. He pointed out that it was recommended by officers for approval.

The highways officer said that they agreed with the access from the residential area and said they expected the development to generate one vehicle every three minutes which they believed was a negligible effect on the highways network.

A question was asked about construction traffic coming through the residential area. In the answer a proposed condition for the Developer to submit a Construction Traffic Management Plan was referred to.

Cllr Kemp referred to the previous commercial or industrial designation of the land and whether that had been changed by the previous planning approval. He also asked a question about traffic. A long answer was given to Cllr Kemp’s second question.

Cllr Concepcion asked a question about the concerns that Cllr Brown had raised about the Great Crested Newt. The answer given was that a pond just off the application site was a habitat for Great Crested Newts.

The Chair Cllr Tricia O’Brien referred to ecological issues and asked for the recommendation for approval to be agreed. The planning application was agreed.

The meeting moved on to consider planning application 17O/3230, which was a hybrid planning application which included outline planning application for the construction of a new Cruise Liner Terminal. That application was also approved.

If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.


Categories