{ "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "Article", "url": "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/live-development-viability-preflight", "slug": "live-development-viability-preflight", "title": "Live Development Viability Preflight", "categories": [ "PropTech", "Data & Analytics", "Professional Services", "B2B SaaS", "Property & Built Environment" ], "regions": [ "United Kingdom" ], "category_urls": [ "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/category/proptech", "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/category/data-and-analytics", "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/category/professional-services", "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/category/b2b-saas", "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/category/property-and-built-environment" ], "region_urls": [ "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/region/united-kingdom" ], "problem_statement": "Developers often screen land with incomplete assumptions for affordable housing, S106, infrastructure, accessibility, sustainability, abnormal costs, phasing and finance. The planning-policy burden is then refined after bid or design decisions, when a small movement in value, cost, yield or programme can erase residual land value and force redesign or withdrawal.\n\nLiverpool's whole-plan viability assessment is deliberately high-level. It says every site is unique, the residual result is sensitive to even small assumption changes and not all sites or eventualities can be modelled. It also finds multiple residential and commercial typologies marginal or unviable, including many apartment and speculative office cases.", "audience": "- SME developers and land buyers without a full in-house viability team.\n- Registered providers and Build to Rent teams comparing tenure and grant scenarios.\n- Planning consultants that need consistent policy-cost assumptions before instruction of a valuer.\n- Lenders and investment committees screening pipeline risk.\n- Councils triaging whether a submitted viability case is complete and intelligible.", "evidence_summary": "Local evidence:\n- Liverpool's assessment covers 14,770 indicative homes on 97 sites and uses generic typologies because it cannot model every site and eventuality.\n- It states that residual outcomes are sensitive to even the smallest changes in assumptions.\n- Low-value residential scenarios can be unviable even before policy requirements; market-sale apartments and speculative offices are also frequently constrained or unviable.\n\nProfessional and policy evidence:\n- Government guidance requires transparent, evidence-based inputs and explanation of any departure from plan assumptions.\n- RICS sets mandatory conduct and reporting requirements for planning viability professionals.\n\nCommercial implication:\n- A paid preflight can prevent weak bids and reduce professional data-gathering time, but final conclusions require a qualified practitioner.", "demand_signal": "- The local assessment documents sensitivity, marginal outcomes and scheme types needing site-specific work.\n- Every land bid and major design change can trigger another scenario, producing high-frequency use.\n- Government transparency requirements create a clear evidence-pack output.\n- Mature appraisal software and professional viability practices validate significant existing spend.", "competition_signal": "ARGUS EstateMaster, Aprao, ProVal, Forbury, Caldes and Excel serve appraisal users, while chartered surveyors deliver formal planning viability work. This is a competitive category.\n\nA credible entrant needs a narrow edge: automatic local-policy cost capture, comparison with the council's plan assumptions, rapid downside scenarios and an evidence gap list that hands off cleanly to an RICS professional.", "suggested_solution": "A site-screening workspace that starts with location and proposed scheme, loads relevant Local Plan policies and benchmark assumptions, and calculates residual value, cash flow and sensitivities. It highlights which inputs are unsupported, where the scheme departs from plan evidence and which professional reports are required.\n\nA qualified reviewer can lock an approved assumption set and export a transparent executive summary or a workpaper pack for a formal assessment.", "monetisation_angle": "Pricing classification:\nProxy based — medium confidence.\n\nIndicative pricing:\nIllustrative commercial model:\n- Self-serve site preflight: £250-£750 per appraisal.\n- Professional user: £399-£1,499 per user per month by feature depth.\n- Developer or consultancy team: £25,000-£80,000 per year.\n- Qualified review: £2,000-£10,000 per appraisal depending on scope.\n- Lender portfolio screening licence: £50,000-£150,000 per year.\n\nEvidence basis:\nAgile AI Planning Validator (£15,000–£60,000 per licence) is the closest verified adjacent anchor used here. Its buyer, duration and scope are not assumed to be identical; implementation is separated where the opportunity requires integration, assurance or managed delivery.\n\nCommercial test:\nAsk one planning authority, developer or planning consultancy with a live case pipeline to fund a paid test of Live Development Viability Preflight lasting 8–12 weeks, using an opening price of £250-£750 per appraisal and covering 20 live applications, sites, conditions or evidence packs from one planning workflow. Paid scope: A site-screening workspace that starts with location and proposed scheme, loads relevant Local Plan policies and benchmark assumptions, and calculates residual value, cash flow and sensitivities. Charge by authority, professional team, development site or assessed case and compare the fee with planning-officer and consultant time, avoidable invalid submissions and repeated evidence assembly. Measure validation time, missing-document rate, rework, officer overrides, applicant resubmissions and decision lead time. Continue only if handling or rework falls by at least 25%, at least 90% of required evidence is correctly identified and no material planning issue is suppressed. Stop or reprice if experienced officers find material false assurance, the workflow does not beat current practice or the buyer will not renew.", "underserved_score": 84, "score_rationale": "Evidence 25/25 + severity 18/20 + buyer urgency 16/20 + market gap 10/15 + timing 8/10 + delivery feasibility 7/10 = 84/100. Confidence is 88/100 because need and professional standards are explicit and the calculation problem is well understood; category competition and regulatory positioning reduce upside certainty.", "score_scale": { "min": 0, "max": 100 }, "sources": [ { "name": "Liverpool Whole Plan Viability Assessment - July 2026", "url": "https://liverpool.gov.uk/media/slhnlujg/whole-plan-viability-assesment.pdf", "publisher": "liverpool.gov.uk", "source_type": null, "date": null, "note": null }, { "name": "Planning Practice Guidance - Viability", "url": "https://www.gov.uk/guidance/viability", "publisher": "gov.uk", "source_type": null, "date": null, "note": null }, { "name": "RICS - Financial viability in planning conduct and reporting", "url": "https://www.rics.org/profession-standards/rics-standards-and-guidance/sector-standards/land-standards/financial-viability-in-planning-conduct-and-reporting", "publisher": "rics.org", "source_type": null, "date": null, "note": null }, { "name": "Liverpool Local Plan 2026-2043", "url": "https://liverpool.gov.uk/media/rdgp1ab4/1-local-plan.pdf", "publisher": "liverpool.gov.uk", "source_type": null, "date": null, "note": null }, { "name": "Liverpool Strategic Housing Market Needs Assessment", "url": "https://liverpool.gov.uk/media/0i5fxb3m/strategic-housing-market-needs-assessment.pdf", "publisher": "liverpool.gov.uk", "source_type": null, "date": null, "note": null }, { "name": "Liverpool Infrastructure Delivery Plan - July 2026", "url": "https://liverpool.gov.uk/media/2wjb0pif/issue_liverpool-idp-report_july-2026_a11y-checked.pdf", "publisher": "liverpool.gov.uk", "source_type": null, "date": null, "note": null }, { "name": "Liverpool City Council - Local Plan viability and planning evidence", "url": "https://liverpool.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/plan-making-in-liverpool/evidence-monitoring-and-information/evidence-and-information/", "publisher": "liverpool.gov.uk", "source_type": null, "date": null, "note": "The council page provides the authority's monitoring reports alongside national, regional and local planning evidence." }, { "name": "UK Government - National Planning Policy Framework", "url": "https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67aafe8f3b41f783cca46251/NPPF_December_2024.pdf", "publisher": "assets.publishing.service.gov.uk", "source_type": null, "date": null, "note": null } ], "related_opportunities": [ { "title": "Critical Infrastructure Backup Power Assurance Platform", "slug": "critical-infrastructure-backup-power-assurance-platform", "url": "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/critical-infrastructure-backup-power-assurance-platform", "api_url": "https://undersrvd.com/api/public/opportunities/critical-infrastructure-backup-power-assurance-platform.json", "underserved_score": 92, "categories": [ "Infrastructure", "Energy & Utilities", "B2B SaaS", "Safety & Security", "Rail" ], "regions": [ "United Kingdom", "Greater Manchester", "North West England" ] }, { "title": "Regional Social Economy Intelligence Platform", "slug": "regional-social-economy-intelligence-platform", "url": "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/regional-social-economy-intelligence-platform", "api_url": "https://undersrvd.com/api/public/opportunities/regional-social-economy-intelligence-platform.json", "underserved_score": 92, "categories": [ "GovTech", "Data & Analytics", "Economic Development" ], "regions": [ "United Kingdom" ] }, { "title": "Independent Cyber Assurance for Ofgem-Licensed Energy Operators", "slug": "independent-cyber-assurance-for-ofgem-licensed-energy-operators", "url": "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/independent-cyber-assurance-for-ofgem-licensed-energy-operators", "api_url": "https://undersrvd.com/api/public/opportunities/independent-cyber-assurance-for-ofgem-licensed-energy-operators.json", "underserved_score": 91, "categories": [ "Professional Services", "Compliance", "Safety & Security" ], "regions": [ "United Kingdom" ] }, { "title": "Critical Infrastructure Dependency and Blast-Radius Mapper", "slug": "critical-infrastructure-dependency-blast-radius-mapper", "url": "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/critical-infrastructure-dependency-blast-radius-mapper", "api_url": "https://undersrvd.com/api/public/opportunities/critical-infrastructure-dependency-blast-radius-mapper.json", "underserved_score": 91, "categories": [ "Infrastructure", "Data & Analytics", "GovTech", "Safety & Security", "Energy & Utilities" ], "regions": [ "United Kingdom", "Greater Manchester", "North West England" ] }, { "title": "Drainage-Ready Planning and Development Copilot", "slug": "drainage-ready-planning-development-copilot", "url": "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/drainage-ready-planning-development-copilot", "api_url": "https://undersrvd.com/api/public/opportunities/drainage-ready-planning-development-copilot.json", "underserved_score": 91, "categories": [ "ClimateTech", "PropTech", "GovTech", "Data & Analytics", "Property & Built Environment" ], "regions": [ "United Kingdom" ] }, { "title": "Texas Data-Centre Audit Submission and Evidence Workspace", "slug": "texas-data-centre-audit-submission-and-evidence-workspace", "url": "https://undersrvd.com/opportunities/texas-data-centre-audit-submission-and-evidence-workspace", "api_url": "https://undersrvd.com/api/public/opportunities/texas-data-centre-audit-submission-and-evidence-workspace.json", "underserved_score": 91, "categories": [ "Compliance", "Energy & Utilities", "B2B SaaS", "Data & Analytics" ], "regions": [ "Texas", "United States" ] } ], "license": "https://undersrvd.com/data-license" }