Liverpool sends local plan to government
Enabling the delivery of 33,750 homes and 5.8m sq ft of employment floorspace by 2043, the latest strategic development framework from the city council is on its way for independent review by the Planning Inspectorate.
Liverpool City Council voted to approve its draft local plan for independent government inspection yesterday. Local authorities are required to have an up-to-date local plan as per central government rules.
“At a time when about two-thirds of councils don’t have a current or valid local plan, the fact that we’ve got one and we’re now renewing it – I think says everything about the professionalism about the way we’re delivering planning in this city,” said Leader Cllr Liam Robinson.
The plan includes the allocation of 145 sites for development, including 57 plots for purely residential building and 32 reserved for employment projects. The remainder are for mixed-use development, with two reserved for travellers.
Robinson praised the brownfield-first approach of the local plan.
“It has been completely clear that our green spaces in this city are protected for keeps,” he said to the city council yesterday.
Employment land is separated into three categories: 3.2m sq ft is for industrial, 2.1m sq ft for offices, and 542,500 sq ft for R&D floorspace. Allocations for these types of development include Littlewoods, Central Gillmoss Industrial Estate, Pall Mall, and Paddington South.
Pumpfield and Limekilns has the largest housing allocation of sites in the local plan, with 2,806 homes projected for it. Other large-scale housing allocations include Land at Festival Gardens (1,550 across two sites), King Dock Street (903 homes), and Regency House (609 homes).
You can review the site allocations starting on page 37 of the draft local plan.
In addition to site allocations, the local plan includes further restrictions on the location and concentration of HMOs. Further HMO rules are due to come forward in a revised and extended Article 4 motion in the next few months.
Under the local, plan, new takeaways and off licences outside of the city centre would also be unable to be open after 11pm.
Addressing his fellow councillors, Cllr Nick Small pointed out that the plan supports a 15% growth in the city’s population, which is set to reach more than 572,000 residents by 2043.
Regarding housing, 20% of the 33,750 homes are due to be designated affordable, with half of those set for social rent.
The local plan simply outlines where the city council would like development to occur – it does not mandate any actual building itself. That will be up to the private sector, but Small was optimistic that the city council was well-placed to help encourage development.
“Viability does remain an issue, as it does everywhere outside London and the South East, but we believe with interventions we’re doing with the wider city development agenda – things like the MDC in the North Docks, Imagine Liverpool, and working strategically with the city region and Homes England to optimise grant funding – that we can improve viability and market confidence over the next 15 years to deliver these targets,” he said.
To meet the city council’s 33,750-home target by 2043, there would need to be at least 1,875 homes built a year.
While the local plan won support from the Liberal Democrats, the party’s local leader Cllr Carl Cashman said he had hoped to see an inclusion for council-owned housing and a policy for dealing with empty properties.
“Don’t mistake our support for satisfaction,” Cashman said. “I don’t believe ethe plan is ambitious enough for Liverpool.”
Labour Party councillors noted that both of those ideas were outside the scope of a local plan, however they were supportive of council-owned housing and bringing empty properties back into use.


Stuffed full of viability-killing measures dreamt up by ideologues and puritanical planners with zero understanding of economics or markets.
File under ‘craneless skyline’.
By Anonymous
Good luck getting any of the 2,806 homes built in the “Pumfields area”. Once this plan is adopted the policies will make developers run a mile. Making these developments viable is tough enough as it is, then add the Gateway process. This looks like it’s been drafted by someone with zero knowledge of the private sector and how the development world works.
By Anonymous