Compulsory Purchase Orders: 2017 Update November 2017 Contents
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
womblebonddickinson.com Compulsory purchase orders: 2017 update November 2017 Contents Foreword 1 Introduction 2 Statistics 4 Housing CPOs 2015-2016 10 Planning CPOs 2015-2016 18 Appendices 28 • Appendix A. Compulsory purchase orders 2015 – 2016 29 • Appendix B. Section 226(1)(a) and (1A) Town and Country Planning Act 1990 30 • Appendix C. Section 215 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 30 • Appendix D. Section 17 Housing Act 1985 30 • Appendix E. Department for Communities and Local Government Guidance on Compulsory Purchase process and the Crichel Down Rules for the disposal of surplus land acquired by, or under threat of, compulsion (October 2015) 31 • Appendix F. National Planning Policy Framework 31 • Appendix G. Ministerial Statement 10 May 2013 32 • Appendix H. Human Rights and Equality 33 - Section 149 – The Equality Act - Public Sector Equality Duty 33 - European Convention on Human Rights 34 - Circular 2006/04 Compulsory Purchase and the Crichel Down Rules (now withdrawn) 34 - Guidance on Compulsory Purchase process and the Crichel Down Rules for the disposal of surplus land acquired by, or under threat of, compulsion (October 2015) 34 • Appendix I. Compulsory Purchase of Land (Written Representations) Regulations 2004 35 • Appendix J. Planning CPOs submitted 2015 and 2016 by Acquiring Authority 36 • Appendix K. Totals of Planning and Housing CPOs submitted 2003-2016 by Local Authorities listed by region 37 Foreword Compulsory purchase can be incredibly helpful to investment and community building, when used appropriately by local authorities, helping them bring forward much-needed housing and package parcels of land in ways that support regeneration. Despite its benefits, this report confirms that CPO remains an under-used process – particularly when compared to the frequency of applications during the pre-recession period. With the country facing a housing crisis, proposals for Garden Towns/Villages and more development on complex urban sites will likely gather pace and local authorities therefore need to be supported in the understanding of the tools at their disposal. Increased use of CPOs will not act as a silver bullet to addressing these challenges, and there are other means of supporting the development of new housing and regeneration – better resourcing of planning departments; improved and more transparent engagement between the public and private sector; and innovative thinking around infrastructure funding, for example. However, even if we are to accept these relatively low levels of use as the “new normal”, it is clear that increasing its use could still go a long way to unlocking more sites and more housing. This report finds that CPO remains a complicated and expensive process. Reforms proposed in the previous Parliament would help simplify this process, but are yet to come into force, and we would urge Government to bring these forward and consider how to go further in their reform. Empowering and encouraging local authorities to be more proactive with the use of CPOs will likely go a long way. Legislative change will no doubt prove difficult within the current parliamentary constraints, and Government will look to the industry to come forward with ideas, and evidence, to help support its agenda. The BPF therefore welcomes the findings and recommendations of this excellent report as it adds to a helpful body of evidence, and looks forward to working with Womble Bond Dickinson, Government and all our members to bring forward much-needed reform and regeneration. Melanie Leech, Chief Executive, British Property Federation womblebonddickinson.com Compulsory purchase order: 2017 update 1 Introduction This is the fourth in our In large part, this report echoes many of below) that the average is 98 days, series of reports looking the key messages of previous reports: identical to the 2013 figure. at the usage and success • CPOs are a vital tool for regeneration • In short, it takes on average two months for an unopposed Housing rates of compulsory purchase • Success rates for both Planning and CPO to be determined once it is orders (CPOs), principally Housing CPOs remain high submitted to the Secretary of State those made under the Town • There are a range of reasons, from for confirmation and three months and Country Planning Act 1990 technical to evidential, why some for an unopposed Planning CPO. s226 (1)(a) (ie Planning CPOs) CPOs were not confirmed • For both opposed Housing and and those made under • A significant number of local authorities Planning CPOs it appears to be taking make use of compulsory purchase longer to determine these. Most the Housing Act 1985 s17 powers but generally do so sparingly. significantly, opposed Housing CPOs (ie Housing CPOs). would appear to be taking three times However, this report additionally makes as long to determine as they did in In our previous reports we have the following findings. 2013, notwithstanding that it may be assessed Housing and Planning CPOs assumed that most were determined both quantitatively and qualitatively. As regards the statistical assessment: by way of written representations. Our first report in 2010 contained a • In 2015, 57 Planning CPOs and 54 • We have collated all Planning and statistical analysis of the outcomes of Housing CPOs were submitted Housing CPOs submitted between CPOs, analysing how many were respectively. In 2016, 40 Planning CPOs 2003 – 2016 by region. As previously confirmed (with or without modifications), and 39 Housing CPOs were submitted. reported, the North West of England how many were not confirmed and how These figures are toward the lower end and London regions predominate in many were treated as withdrawn. The of the range of CPOs submitted terms of totals of CPOs submitted. report also reviewed Secretary of State annually in the years 2003-16 covered • Within the regional figures, however, decisions and case law. by our previous research. Moreover, the there is a wide range of usage. range of 40-60 CPOs per year for both The data supports our previous Our second report in 2012 contained a Planning and Housing CPOs reflects the conclusions that: purely statistical update of the figures “new normal”. through to the end of 2011. - Many authorities have used their • Both Planning CPOs and Housing compulsory purchase powers but Our third report in 2015 was a more CPOs continue to demonstrate high do so sparingly levels of success. extensive review containing both a - A relatively small number of statistical update and a detailed review • The figures indicate that: authorities account for a significant of Secretary of State decisions through - for Planning CPOs at least 87% in proportion of CPOs made. to the end of 2014. The report also 2015 and 82% in 2016 succeeded. included details of levels of This may be even higher when We have reviewed the reasons why implementation of confirmed orders considering withdrawn CPOs the Secretary of State has not based on information collated from due to aquisition by agreement confirmed Housing and Planning Acquiring Authorities. CPOs in 2015-2016. - for Housing CPOs the equivalent This fourth report in our series continues figures are at least 79% in 2015 • The reasons for non-confirmation of the statistical assessment through to the and 88% in 2016. Housing CPOs include: end of 2016 and looks at Secretary of Whether the property is vacant or State “not confirmed” decisions in • This level of success is consistent with - in limited use – assessment of extent 2015-2016; ie it seeks to identify why previous years and demonstrates an of actual use of the property some CPOs were not confirmed. established, long-term trend. • In terms of the time taken to - Individual circumstances of determine CPOs, there is continuity the owner for unopposed orders. For example, - Degree of harm caused by the unopposed Housing CPOs were CPO and insufficient to warrant determined on average in 70 days confirmation as compared with an average 63 days - Engagement of PSED1 and in 2013, the last year for which ECHR2 – including a failure to comparative figures are available. accommodate disabilities Similarly the figures for unopposed Planning CPOs would suggest - Failure to show CPO was 1. Public Sector Equality Duty being used as a “last resort”, 2. European Court of Human Rights (subject to the adjustments noted 2 Compulsory purchase order: 2017 update womblebonddickinson.com - Compliance with an undertaking remember that not only must join the same queue awaiting an whilst not fulfilled by the owner but negotiations be undertaken proactively; Inspector. We would recommend that sufficient work had been undertaken they must also be seen to have been this aspect of the system be reviewed undertaken. In opposed cases, the to check whether our observations are • The reasons for non-confirmation Secretary of State will expect “chapter well-founded and, if so, how time- of Planning CPOs include: and verse” of efforts to acquire and savings can be achieved. At the time - Conflict with Ministerial Statement negotiate. In finely balanced cases of this report’s publication, the provisions “the benefit of the doubt” may well be of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 Failure to assess - given to an owner. This is, perhaps, a to introduce timetables for the alternative schemes lesson which has been taken from the determination of CPOs, as well as the - No longer any need for examination of Nationally Significant ability for inspectors to confirm CPOs, confirmed order Infrastructure Projects and the approach