In June 2022 the Government consulted on proposals to abolish hope and development value when assessing compensation for land compulsorily purchased for certain kinds of schemes. Nine months after it closed, a response has yet to be published, but many CPO professionals made the point at the time that the proposals would be unfair and that there was no evidence that the risk of paying hope value compensation was deterring promoters from bringing forward CPOs.
On 13 March 2023, however, the Government tabled amendments to the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill, which is currently at Committee Stage in the House of Lords. One such amendment would allow “a minister confirming a compulsory purchase order to direct, in certain cases involving affordable housing, health or education, that compensation should be assessed on the basis that no new planning permission would be granted for the land”.
It is known from last June’s consultation document that the Government view is that hope value can lead to “perverse outcomes” that “artificially inflate” compensation because the valuation assumes permission will be granted, even in cases where the likelihood of permission being granted may be relatively low.
What though about the practical impacts of this change?
Should the need for housing (and in particular affordable housing) trump the “equivalence” compensation principle? Will the risk of CPO on this basis spook the development sector such that the measures are in any event counter-productive?
This episode is a recording of friend of the podcast Simon Ricketts’ Planning Law Unplanned Clubhouse discussion on this subject that took place on 23 March 2022 during which Simon put these questions to Raj Gupta, Jonathan Stott, Greg Dickson, Rebecca Clutten, Venus Galarza and David Baker.