In the context of a certificate of appropriate alternative development, planning need does not need to be expressed as a specific figure.
The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) has considered this issue in Secretary of State for Transport v Quintain City Park Gate Birmingham Ltd and others [2025] UKUT 7 (LC).
The case concerned the entitlement to compensation of the former owners of four neighbouring plots of land at Eastside in central Birmingham. Each plot was acquired by the SST in 2018 for construction of the Curzon Street terminus for the HS2 railway.
To support their claims for compensation each owner sought and obtained a CAAD from Birmingham City Council under section 17 of the Land Compensation Act 1961 to determine what planning permissions could have been expected to have been obtained for each site had it not been compulsorily acquired. CAADs were granted for all four sites including an allowance for purpose-built student accommodation as an appropriate alternative form of development.
The SST appealed against the CAADs arguing that the need for student accommodation in central Birmingham was fully satisfied by the existing supply of PBSA and other accommodation. The site owners disputed this. The parties sought a determination of the level of planning need for PBSA at the respective valuation dates in 2018.
The July 2018 Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment acknowledged that a significant amount of housing demand originated from the city’s large student population. The number of full-time students in the city was assessed at 66,217 with a minimum demand for PBSA of 36,892 bed spaces. Available supply of PBSA was 21,811 bedspaces leaving a shortfall of around 15,000.
During 2018 and 2019 the council granted several planning permissions for PBSA – including the CAAD applications – and was clearly satisfied that there was a demonstrable need for PBSA.
The tribunal was satisfied that it was not necessary to express planning need as a specific figure. It was likely in 2018 that it would have been assumed that the future growth of student numbers in the city would be at a higher rate than historically.
The starting point was expert evidence on behalf of the site owners, which concluded from a comparison of the demand pool with the agreed supply in 2016/17 that there was a shortfall of around 20,000 bedspaces for the city as a whole (9,000 for the city centre).
While part of that need would be met by HMOs there was an obvious and substantial need for additional PBSA at the valuation dates. This was consistent with the SHLAA assessment.
Louise Clark is a property law consultant
