Date: 18 August 2016
To: Caroline Maher
Development Control Division
Liverpool City Council
Municipal Buildings
Dale Street, Liverpool L2 2DH

Dear Mrs Maher,

Thank you for your letter dated 28 July 2016 - Unique ID 3105868 - notifying me of the Amended Plans Received in relation to this planning application. The plans were discussed by the Gateacre Society's Executive Committee at its meeting on 8 August, and the unanimous view of the Committee was that I should write to you reiterating our previous objection.

In addition to the points previously made (email of 17 Nov 2015, copied here) about the lack of an up-to-date Design & Access Statement, the lack of information on the materials to be used, and the overshadowing effect of the new block on the Brown Cow's beer garden, we wish to make the following observations:

1. The amended plans appear to indicate that the top two storeys of part of the new block will be shifted away from St Stephen's Court - in comparison with the previously-proposed arrangement - and supported on a row of four pillars, so that they bridge the gap between the ground floor of the new block and the existing metal-roofed 'shed' which will remain in use as a covered car park. In the absence of 3D visuals it is difficult for us to imagine what this will look like, but 'incongruous' is the word that springs to mind.

2. The amended plans appear to indicate that the top two storeys of the new block will rely (at least to some extent) on the east wall of the 'shed' for support. Although we said in our previous comments that we had no objection to the retention of the shed, this referred to the short-term rather than the long-term. We understood that, in due course, the site of the shed was going to be landscaped, so as to provide an attractive environment for the residents of the whole Brewery Gardens development (including the old cottages in Lower Sandfield). The plans now submitted would appear to reduce the chances of the shed ever being removed.

3. The Decision Notice in respect of application 11F/1928 (refusing planning permission for a telecoms mast on the site of the 'shed') included the following statement: "The skyline in the locale, whilst varied, is typically restricted to 2 storeys with the exception of key historic buildings such as the Brewery Tower and the former school cupola. A structure, such at that proposed, would compete with these architectural features to the detriment of the character and appearance of the conservation area". We feel that the same is true of the proposed three-storey apartment block.

For the avoidance of doubt, the points (1 and 3-7) made in our previous email still apply. If you feel that I have misinterpreted the amended plans, or overlooked any documents that may have been submitted in relation to this application, please let me know as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Mike Chitty (Environment Secretary)
THE GATEACRE SOCIETY