A 100% 'affordable' housing development in Wirral has been slammed after it was claimed rent prices will see tenants pay up to £700 a month.

Plans were approved last week that will see a three-storey extra care development built at the Girtrell Court site in Saughall Massie, containing 78 one and two-bed apartments.

They were pushed through by the council's planning committee despite more than 200 people voicing objection to the plans, with concerns including the Woodpecker Close building's design, litter fears and a lack of local infrastructure including GPs and schools.

Leading the objections was ward councillor Chris Blakeley, who attended the meeting at Wallasey Town Hall where he accused the council of "rushing headlong into rail-roading the application through the planning process".

Explaining his objections to the plans, he said: "The officer in the report makes a case for affordable special housing for rents of around about £120 a week.

"But there would be a further £50 a week in service charges – a total of £170 a week.

"So I ask affordable to who?"

Committee member Cllr Kathy Hodson added: "I'm just a bit concerned, as we all in our own lives have different concepts of what's affordable.

"As a general rule of thumb, what's affordable to an average person? It might be to me but not to somebody else.

"Do we deem £680-£700 as affordable?"

Addressing the concerns, chair Cllr Steve Foulkes explained: "The government sets the benchmark for what is affordable housing.

"I have asked the officers twice before this committee if it meets the government's criteria for affordable housing.

"People often get confused for what is affordable housing and what is social housing with market rent. This meets the affordable benchmark.

"We don't set those rules, they are set by government.

"I think that answers the question."

According to a government paper released last year, there is no "all-encompassing statutory definition of affordable housing in England", but in 2010, it was announced that in terms of rents, they should be up to 80% of market levels within the local area.

Apartments at Girtrell Court will have 100% affordable rent, with the homes let to people aged 55 and over.

It will mean older people can live in a home of their own with 24-hour care and support services on site.

A total of 60 of the rooms will be one-bed, with 18 two-bed.

The mostly red-brick development with 59 car parking spaces will also see a cafe as well as a hair and beauty salon, all of which will be open to the public.

According to the planning document, the reasons for people opposing the new Girtrell Court plans submitted by Alpha Living include:

• The footprint would be "too large, overbearing and out of character", as well as breaching neighbours' privacy.

• It's a poor design.

• Fears over greater levels of traffic parking difficulties, litter and general congestion, as well as disruption and disturbance during construction.

• There's a lack of infrastructure in the area, including GP surgeries and no primary schools or playgrounds.

• Existing mature trees on site would be affected, with nesting birds disrupted.

But the document said concerns over the development’s size would be eased by way of facades in the east, north and west of the site having features that will help to "reduce the impression of height, bulkiness and mass”.

It added: "Furthermore, the separation of the building from boundaries and intervening landscaping treatment would serve to visually isolate it such that there would not be a step up in height in immediate juxtaposition to the nearest dwellings."

In terms of traffic, the document said the highways engineer had concluded the increase in traffic between the previous and future use of the site "would not have a material adverse impact on the local network".

It also added that there would not be any "unacceptable impacts" on the trees or local nature.

At the meeting, Cllr Blakeley also said the site had been sold by the council to Alpha Living for £250,000 less than its market value, and that the local authority was giving the developer a further £439,000 towards the project – complaints he was told were “not planning matters".

Recommending the proposals for approval, the planning report said: "The development would possess an appropriate level of design quality and visual interest, and would be of a layout, scale and mass that would respect the existing residential context and neighbours.

"The proposed development would bring social and economic benefits and, whilst objections have been received which have been carefully considered and taken into consideration, there are no material considerations which would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the scheme."

The news comes almost two years after the old Girtrell Court site – which provided respite care for families – closed, despite a huge campaign to save it.

The services were moved to a privately-operated facility in Birkenhead, with plans approved to demolish the Saughall Massie development last year.