Liverpool seeks feedback on local plan refresh
The city’s planning contingent spent the weekend poring over the 211-page early draft of the city council’s updated local plan, which sets out an ambition for 30,000 homes over the next 15 years.
Liverpool’s local plan maps out where those homes and 7.4m sq ft of employment space will be built in the city up to 2041.
Liverpool City Council has launched a consultation on the draft plan, which is in its very early stages, as well running a call for sites in parallel.
Headlines
At present, the council claims it has enough land allocations to deliver 10,000 of the 30,000 homes it wants to see built during the plan period.
The draft also states that there are “existing commitments” for 18,000 homes, including projects with planning permission and others in the pre-planning stage such as Festival Gardens.
The draft is underpinned by a fresh Strategic Housing Market Needs Assessment, which states that Liverpool needs to do more deliver and retain family housing.
This is reflected in the draft plan, which outlines an ambition for 20% of all homes delivered to be three-bedroom properties, rising to 30% in the city centre and fringe.
There are concerns that this will put a strain on project viability.
The need for more specialist accommodation for older people and people living with dementia is also set out in the draft.
Between now and 2041, the number of people with dementia will increase by 36% and the number of people with mobility problems will increase by 31%, according to the draft.
Industry reaction
Nick Lee, founder of NJL Consulting said he had concerns about the lack of housing allocations in the draft.
“There is a long way to go on the plan preparation, but I have concerns that there is an imbalance at the moment with over-reliance on large-scale windfall sites, which in viability terms will not deliver affordable homes, nor family homes, without significant public funding support.
“Liverpool City Council need to marry up planning policy with significant pressures for affordable housing, family housing and critically getting it all delivered. Viability in urban areas will be a major challenge as the council are currently looking to allocate around only a one-third of their housing requirement on allocated sites within the draft plan.
Green belt release could be one way to ensure a larger supply of land for housing, Lee added.
“The council may need to seek some pragmatic solutions with an element of greenfield or green belt land release in parallel to their significant brownfield regeneration ambitions, as well as not over-burdening the planning process with over-ambitious s106 requirements.”
Ian Ford, director at Pegasus Group, said described the timing of the consultation had raised eyebrows.
“The release of the initial draft comes at an interesting time when not all the evidence base has been published.
“The local plan coming ahead of the much-delayed Liverpool City Region Spatial Development Strategy could be a lost opportunity.
“The SDS should be leading the way for local plans to follow in order to deliver the strategic objectives of the city-region as a whole, another local plan coming before the SDS will clearly fail to achieve this.”
He added: “As expected, the plan has ambitious policies around housing tenure mix and design quality which may face challenges from local investors and developers who are already facing viability issues.
“Early engagement from all stakeholders will be crucial to ensure the local plan remains both aspirational and achievable.”
Ambition and Liverpool city council should not be seen in the same sentence. The planning department and certain councillors are a disgrace and holding the city back.
By Carl
Between now and 2024, is that 2034? Haven’t time to read the full document but that stuck out in your article. Cheers
By Abots
Thanks, Abots. It was supposed to be 2041. That has been fixed. Apologies for the error.
By Julia Hatmaker
Idealistic at best, naive at worst.
When will LCC realise that the market dictates the agenda.
When they accept this, perhaps more homes will be built and their aversion to taller buildings will be cured.
Even small rise buildings are still having floors cut off, they need to wake up and stop becoming the agent of slow progress in the City.
By Liverpolitis
Liverpool you have enough Housing Associations to deliver affordable housing, so why don’t you get off the backs of the private builders,especially within the inner city, and let them build high-density, high-rise, there is ample room in the inner neighbourhoods, and outer-suburbs for good family housing, and for the elderley and vulnerable.
Link all this in with more Merseyrail stations and re-opening of lines through Gateacre, Halewood, West Derby, Walton and Aintree.
By Anonymous
A draft plan which has clearly been written by urban designers, with no knowledge or experience of delivery. The Government’s agenda is to greatly increase housing supply on brownfield land – this Local Plan, in a Labour stronghold, makes that impossible.
By Anonymous
Another week and yet another plan and yet another vision from LCC. The local plan might have all sorts of ideas in it some good and some not so good but all of them will end up hitting the LCC’s own roadblock namely the planning committee and no matter if the planning officers recommend approval of a project, the planning committee will historically say no to it and that is why our fine city is going no where at best and backwards at worst. The city is certainly and very sadly not moving forwards at all despite all the hopes and dreams that those that love and really care about and for our city have. Because of the decisions made by LCC we do risk just becoming an ‘end of the line’ backwater in the north west of England. It sounds harsh but it is true.
By Brendan R
Once again, commenters are blaming LCC councillors and the Planning Department for the lack of the skyscrapers. If the market was there to support the extra costs of going tall, or demand outstripped available development sites, the skyscrapers would be being built.
LCC can reasonably be blamed for all kinds of things, but if there was any money to be made, it would be worth developers coming up something, working round anyone dragging their heels, and going to appeal if necessary. As it is, the actual experts in tall buildings aren’t interested.
By Rotringer
@Rotringer – there was literally an article the other day by a tall building expert in Liverpool talking about numerous skyscrapers coming forward in the city, and what the council can do to help.
By Anonymous
@ Rotringer, think back to the 50 storey Brunswick Tower from Simpson Architects, a way was found to refuse it, ok we’ve had the West Tower since and Infinity which stalled, but the general trend from the Council was to discourage height and once the market hears that well why bother. Just look now at some of the tallish ones that have been in planning for years but have still not gotten on site eg Packaged Living which is 25 and 19 storeys, then look at some a little less tall such as Carpenters Kings Dock Rd project, they have been badly messed about by Planning just because they wanted to build 15/16 floors high.
Meanwhile UNESCO played a major part in scarring off the builders, even the Everton Stadium was lowered by 3 metres. So really for me Liverpool was a viable, economic, option, but certain forces intervened to deter the market and now we are left with this mess.
By Anonymous
I sincerely hope there are a number of bungalows for the elderly
By Anonymous
The affordable housing requirements are absolutely mental.
By AB
20% or even 30% 3-bed homes, ambition is one thing, pie in the sky is another.
The Council wants thousands of homes built but then restricts the height of buildings that would go some way in supplying those homes.
They also say there are thousands of units with planning permission, but who with, lots of rogue developers sitting on land, also are they including Peel and Liverpool Waters with outline planning permission only.
By Anonymous
Meanwhile Manchester just gets on and builds.
By Anonymous
Anyone seen the planning agenda for the Council Committee on 30 Sept? It just gets worse and shows the depths we are sinking to in terms of development activity. Just 4 items on the agenda, 2 of them about tree preservation, another about waste-food treatment, and finally one about a development of 19 houses.
By Anonymous
No! to sky scrapers.. they are ugly and destructive.. unless they can design something that isn’t as hideous as what’s going up in Manchester.. we need Liverpool to be a vibrant city.. of culture and communication with NOT another holding pen for migratory populations.. and that most definitely includes student blocks
By Get wise..
@ Getwise, you need to get wise, as Liverpool will never be a vibrant and successful city again by ignoring market forces. If high-rise was so awful why do they still build them in the busiest, economically buoyant, and greatest cities in the world.
By Anonymous
Liverpool has now fallen behind well behind other port cities like Newcastle and Bristol when it comes to development never mind the Northern powerhouse. It simply cannot be left to develop into a sleepy little tourist town that people visit only for a drink, but that’s where we’re heading ..and quickly.
By Anonymous
Can someone please tell me how many ‘affordable’ homes (not shared ownership which are leasehold or R.TB./H.T.B.) Have been built over the last 20years in Liverpool? Until the government and councils challenge the developers who cry when they can’t meet their 20% profits from housing ‘drip fed’ on a slow basis to keep prices high, and councils not challenging them for fear of losing S103/C.I.L. payments,the town and country planning act needs to be reset to pre 1961 status the land compensation act needs to be changed too,L.V.C. needs to be used more efficiently,this article is just pie in the sky🤬🤬
By Jokers