Councillors have been told they should allow a development in Lichfield to go ahead rather than waiting for perfection.

An artist's impression of the new Beacon Street development
An artist’s impression of the new Beacon Street development

A report to a meeting of Lichfield District Council’s planning committee has recommended that the Friel Homes development on Beacon Street should be rejected.

It cited that overdevelopment and concerns about the impact on the conservation area should prevent the scheme going ahead.

But Lichfield Civic Society has said delays on redeveloping the land around the former Angel Croft Hotel cannot be allowed to continue.

“It may not be perfect, but the development offers multiple benefits to this area.

“After ten years of delay and decay, it’s time to improve this area now, not strive for perfection.

“It has the society’s support.”

Lichfield Civic Society spokesperson

The planning report, although not binding, will help councillors make a final decision on the development which is proposed to include new homes and a boutique hotel.

Cllr Doug Pullen, leader of Lichfield District Council has said he is sure the plans will provoke “a good debate” when the committee meet tomorrow (26th January).

Join the Conversation


Our volunteers moderated 1713 comments in the last 30 days. Say thanks with a coffee.

  1. I’m afraid the Civic Society lost their City cred when they opposed an arts centre designed by a world class architect and later supported the wholly inappropriate New Minister House on the most sensitive site by Minster Pool opposite the cathedral.

    It will be difficult for the planning committee members to support an application that seems contrary to Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and strongly opposed by Historic England. What members have to consider is the precedent any application sets – it is never just about the application in front of them, not an easy task.

    Obviously, the applicant doesn’t want any “affordable” housing on their site (they should provide six apartments) and prefers the funding it is obliged to provide to go somewhere else and I note that none of the supporters mentions affordable housing – not even the Dean.

  2. Affordable housing. Norman you are having a laugh at us surely? Out of interest how much affordable housing will there be in the monstrous retirement development on the old job centre site? You’re hiding behind meaningless legislation and you know it. Also out of interest which decade was New Minster House built? How long do you want to hold on to grudges for? Would you prefer Angel Croft site to sit derelict and wasted? Is this your best strategy? What ever happened to judging projects on their merit or a case by case basis and using common sense and encouraging innovation? So out of touch.

  3. I love how in the face of overwhelming public support big Steve has decided that the best political move is for him to condescendingly tell the plebs what’s actually best for them. How about you listen to what people actually want? So out of touch it begs belief. Sums up 21st century politics.

Leave a comment
Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy before posting.

Your email address will not be published.