Conclusion

The Planning Manager considers that the proposal to undertake demolitions,
alterations, refurbishment to the former brewery in connection with its
conversion to 9 no. flats; to erect 2x3 storey blocks of 4 flats and 9 no. flats at
rear; retain No. 42 as single dwelling and layout 22 space car park at rear is
acceptable and generally accords with the relevant policies of the City of
Liverpool UDP outlined above, with the exception of some limited impact on
residential amenity of adjacent properties.

However, it is considered that the proposal would bring significant conservation
benefits to refurbishing the historic characteristics and features of the brewery
and No. 42 and would remove modern unsightly and incongruous industrial
buildings at the rear of the site. The Planning Manager considers that the
overall conservation benefits associated with the development are material
considerations which warrant planning permission being granted for the
redevelopment of this site.

Accordingly the Planning Manager recommends that:-

A) Subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Agreement to
(i) Prior to any development commencing, a phasing programme
should be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Planning
Manager which requires that the principle elements of the works of
repair and alteration to the Listed Buildings are undertaken or
substantially completed prior to the occupation of any flat within the
new build development.

B) Planning permission be granted subject to the stated conditions;
however

In the event that the Section 106 Agreement required under (A) is not signed by
7th August 2006 then the Planning Manager be given delegated authority to
refuse the application for the reason that:-

'The proposed development has not made provision for a phasing
programme that ensures that the principle elements of the works of repair
and alterations to the Listed Buildings are undertaken or substantially
completed prior to the occupation of any flat within the new build
development, as laid down in Policy HD4 in the Unitary Development
Plan, as a Section 106 Agreement has not been signed. As such, the
development does not secure the future of the Listed Buildings, contrary
to advice given in PPG15 and Policy HD4 in the Unitary Development
Plan.'

continued . . .