Liverpool’s local plan nears final sign-off
An overarching strategy setting out how the city will deliver 35,000 homes over the next 15 years is close to being agreed by the city council.
Following a six-week public consultation in the summer, an independent planning inspector has concluded that the plan is compliant and meets the future development needs of Liverpool.
On Friday, Liverpool City Council’s cabinet will recommend the local plan to go before full council on 26 January for final sign-off.
The local plan will then replace the 2002 Unitary Development Plan on all planning matters.
The plan identifies 100 policies to manage the forecast population growth of 47,000 people over the 15 years to 2033, while protecting the city’s heritage and controlling developments in the city centre.
It will also ratify a new process to control the number of conversions of properties into homes in multiple occupation, a particular problem affecting residential market dynamics.
Key sites earmarked for housing include 15 acres near Aintree Hospital, which are slated for 500 homes, and the eight-acre former fruit and vegetable market on Prescot Road that could be redeveloped into 150 homes.
In addition, more than 350 acres have been allocated for employment uses. Among the sites tipped to boost jobs in the city are 64 acres north of Dock Road in Garston, as well as combined 30 acres at the former Northern Airfield close to Liverpool John Lennon Airport.
The council will aim to use the local plan to support its recently published City Plan, which is focused on delivering post-pandemic recovery.
The local plan will also enforce various area-based masterplans including Paddington Village, Liverpool Waters, Baltic Triangle, and Ten Streets, among others.
“The local plan gives us a strong foundation on which to deliver our vision of improved communities, dealing with climate change, and giving everyone an equal footing in life,” said Mayor of Liverpool, Joanne Anderson.
“It is a fundamental part of our work to improve the quality and type of new developments, to rebalance the relationship between cars, pedestrians and bikes on our road network, meet our net zero carbon commitment and embed social value in every decision we make.”
Cllr Sarah Doyle, cabinet member for development and housing, said: “The local plan is the biggest change in the council’s planning policy for 20 years and also directly acknowledges the importance of measuring social value in what we do and, crucially, who we work with.”
I hope in this local plan, it gets rid of the height restriction imposing on the waterfront. We want skyscrapers and offices built. The amount of size reduction in the recent schemes has been underwhelming to say the least. Let’s get those skyscrapers built.
By David
It will be interesting to see the masterplans. 35,000 homes over 15 years is quite a target. To meet this I imagine they will need to allow tall buildings in Liverpool Waters, Pumpfields, and Ten Streets. Now the millstone of UNESCO is gone hopefully some ambitious tall buildings will be proposed and built! The house price growth and rental yields in Liverpool certainly should make it a very good bet now – particularly with the clean up of the city council. It is also heartening to hear that business and commercial activity is part of the plan – this is key to the city’s future.
By Chris
If they envisage 35,000 new homes and assuming about 20 family homes per acre that is about 1,750 acres just for the homes never mind the roads and other infrastructure required. So does LCC have that amount of land available and if not they are going to have to think about high rise buildings if they like it or not.
If my figures are not right please correct me someone. Thank you
By Lovepool
This council won’t build skyscrapers.
By George
More skyscrapers please, we are a city on a waterfront so these would look beautiful .
By Anonymous
Liverpool Waters could easily emulate cities like Vancouver with tall slim high quality spacious apartment buildings with floor to ceiling windows to take in the amazing views, with commercial on the ground floor and plenty of open tree lined public space and providing 10k homes plus jobs
By BuildItNow
Let`s get the downtown re-populated with the use of tall buildings , then use mid-rise plus well designed town housing in streets to re-populate the acres of inner city land. One strategy I would like to see to preserve many of the fine traditional terraced streets already present is to do away with the back alleys which produce so much litter and vermin which make these attractive houses less desirable and lower their value,
By Anonymous
Are tall buildings financially viable in Liverpool at the moment?
By Viability
@viability – There are several going through the pre-app process at the moment. Lots of developers chomping at the bit to deliver tall buildings!
Most of the issues aren’t necessarily height related. The Council want to see comprehensive masterplans for areas, rather than stand-alone tall towers, which is understandable. The problem is getting multiple landowners and leaseholders to agree. Then there are further issues with parking provision. The LPA still insist on at least 1 space per apartment in the city centre – where do you put all these cars for a 50 storey tower on a small plot of land. People tend to assume height is the hurdle – it’s the less controversial issues that hamper delivery.
By Anonymous
Liverpool is a confident global city that looks out rather than to London or Leeds for inspiration as always , we know whats best for Liverpool a place of many firsts .
By Global G7
@Viability- yes high rise is viable, the more apartments you can get on a plot of land the greater the yield, of course Liverpool City Council have been putting developers off with their height restriction nonsense, or listening to small minded locals who object to every development but know nothing about city planning and dynamics.
By Anonymous
Interesting points on planning constraints. Hopefully the council can work through these issues with developers.
Liverpool needs to rid itself of this emotional idea that it’s somehow different. Every city “looks out” and compares itself to other places both locally and internationally. None of this has any impact on demand, return on investment, financial viability, finance, development risk or planning policy.
By Viability
While others have prospered we seem to have sat in the sidelines.Tall buildings? Just one would be nice. An underwhelming lack of development for years now.
By Anonymous
As regards provision for parking, many social landlords and private developers in London have,for years, not bothered with parking or kept it to a minimum, also local authorities will often not give street parking permits in order to discourage car use/ownership.
Instead, public transport is encouraged, or car share schemes, however if you don`t have a tube network things are less convenient, that`s why central government should encourage all our major provincial cities to have tram systems.
By Anonymous
Maybe creating more European style spacious apartment buildings complete with green spaces and areas for people to play and relax. Also commercial space on the ground floors and better transport links. Families need space to live in and grow so if LCC can’t build enough houses make the apartments as liveable as possible.
By Anonymous