Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed10 October 20253366669

51 Arundel Avenue, LIVERPOOL, L17 3BY

to reinstate fire damaged building and carry out alterations to include new roof structure, front and rear gables, insertion of new windows and doors, dormer at rear and change of use from dwelling (Use Class C3) to 1 no. three bed and 1 no. five bed dwelling house in multiple occupation (Use Class C4); with associated installation of bike store to rear

Authority
Liverpool City Council
Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Other minor developments
Inspector
Gravett R

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • the effect of the proposed development on the residential character of the area, with particular regards to the balance and mix of housing
  • whether acceptable living conditions could be provided for future occupiers of the proposed development, regarding light, outlook, privacy, noise and odour
  • the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of existing residents in the surrounding area, with particular regards to noise and disturbance
  • whether the proposed development would preserve the setting of the Grade II listed building, known as 'rear entrance gateway, steps and attached boundary walls at Toxteth Park Cemetery' and the effect on the significance of the Toxteth Park Cemetery, a Grade II listed Registered Park and Garden, through development within its setting
  • the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, including whether it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Toxteth Park and Avenues Conservation Area
  • whether the proposed development makes appropriate provision for cycle parking

What decided it

The proposal would cause significant harm to the residential character of the area by increasing HMO concentration and losing a family dwelling, combined with unacceptable living conditions for future occupiers and significant harm to existing residents' amenity, which outweighed the moderate benefits of housing supply and heritage preservation.

The moderate benefits of housing supply, reinstatement of a fire-damaged building, and preservation of heritage assets were outweighed by the substantial weight given to conflicts with development plan policies on housing mix, residential character and amenity standards, and the substantial conflict with the Framework's requirement for appropriate housing mix and high amenity standards.

Framework references: 11, 209

Plan policies cited: Policy H7, Policy H8, Policy H10, Policy H11, Policy R1, Policy TP5, Policy UD1, Policy UD2, Policy UD7, Policy HD1

The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.