Row over Liverpool property developer's reduced council contribution

The developer plans to build 257 apartments on Kings Parade at Queens Dock

A row has broken out over payments developers make to Liverpool City Council to improve communities.

Plans for a waterfront apartment complex were approved but the developer was required to pay only a fraction of the expected financial contributions to the local authority.

A member of the council's planning committee said he felt "Christmas has come early for developers" in the city.

The developer said the scheme "at the moment is borderline viable".

Despite objections from some members, the planning committee approved the plans by Glenbrook Property and Barings Real Estate to build 257 apartments on Kings Parade at Queens Dock.

Figures in the planning report said a developer in this situation should expect to contribute £767,000 in Section 106 payments.

These are legal agreements where developers contribute money to mitigate the impact of the development on the local area, such as creating more public space, road improvements, cycling infrastructure or replacing trees.

The developer had suggested that the payments be reduced to nil.

An independent assessor disagreed but suggested a reduced contribution of £149,000 would be "justifiable".

'Off the hook'

Stuart McCrone, projects director at Glenbrook, told a council meeting on Wednesday: "This scheme at the moment is borderline viable."

He said the company was facing a "drastic increase" in construction costs and that it was only because it owned the site that the project would go ahead.

Liberal Democrat councillor Pat Maloney said: "I think Christmas has come early for these developers.

"This is a prestige development on the waterfront and I don't think the city should effectively subsidise this development."

Mr Maloney proposed a vote that it could be only approved if the full contributions were paid.

Furious Labour members of the committee accused him of "bringing politics into the planning process" and said the assessor's recommendations should be accepted.

Two ward councillors also argued the full contribution should be paid, including Sarah Doyle who is also the cabinet member for development and housing.

She tweeted: "If a developer doesn't feel that they can pay full s106 then perhaps their development isn't viable. Our communities are my priority and s106 is fundamental in improving them."

Leader of the city's Liberal Democrat opposition group, Richard Kemp, said the council needed to be more robust when it comes to calculating, enforcing and collecting these payments.

"We just let developers off the hook and let money drift away from us," he said.

It is understood the council is updating its Section 106 policy as part of its Local Plan which will be published next year.