The former Clegg's Felt Factory
(originally Gateacre Brewery)
Gateacre Brow, Liverpool

October 2016

Local Residents

7 representations have been received from local residents as a result of the public consultation process, which are summarised as follows:

The proposed building will only be 20ft from St Stephens Court and due to its height, it will overshadow the garden, block sunlight and result in overlooking;

The proposed building will change the skyline of the area;

There are already too many empty flats in the area;

The design of the proposed building is modern and ugly and is not in keeping with the conservation area;

There are concerns regarding the safety of children who play in the rear garden of St Stephens Court due to the close proximity of the proposed building;

The proposed building will have an adverse impact on nearby listed buildings;

The existing traffic levels in Gateacre Village are dangerous and this proposed development will add to this situation;

The length of the construction process is a concern as it will lead to noise and disturbance which the residents have to endure;

Insufficient parking provision within the site;

Devaluation of property prices;

There are too many flats cramped onto this small site;

Lower Sandfield Road is already heavily parked and therefore cannot take any overspill from the proposed development;

Mews style properties would be more suitable on the site;

Local Residents Groups

The comments of the Gateacre Society can be summarised as follows:

They are pleased with the work that has been carried out so far to the listed buildings;

No objection to the retention of the portal framed shed at the present time;

Object to the proposed block and in particular its height as it will affect the setting of the listed building and overshadow the neighbouring properties;

Objected to the previous scheme in 2006;

Occupiers of St Stephens Court were unaware of the height of the proposed block and were 'aghast' when they realised its height in relation to the existing wall;

Lack of information in relation to the proposed materials;

Insufficient parking provision as previously commented in 2006;

Consider that the site would be more suited to a mews style development. There is already an oversupply of flats in the area, which was raised as an issue in 2006.

Continued . . .

Previous page        Next page        Home page          Contact us

Page created 24 November 2016 by MRC