![[2025] UKUT 00007 (LC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_lnJS4Uj.png){kind=logo}
Planning need
Planning need
The first limb of the preliminary issue invites the Tribunal to determine “the level of planning need for PBSA” at each of the valuation dates. “Planning need” is not a term of art and no national policy statement explains how it should be assessed when the need in question is for PBSA. Mr Feeney proposed that planning need for PBSA was simply “the difference between supply and demand”. Mr Taylor was confident that each of the experts understood what planning need was and used it in the same sense, but as we heard their evidence it seemed to us that the absence of a clear definition was responsible for some of the differences between them. We therefore asked the parties to agree a definition of planning need which we could apply in our assessment of the evidence.
After completion of the evidence but before making their closing submissions the parties agreed a helpful statement in which they explained that the focus of the preliminary issue is the first bullet point in policy TP33, the City Council’s development plan policy on PBSA, which requires consideration of whether there is “a demonstrated need for the development” (we will come to the Policy in greater detail shortly). The following propositions were also agreed.
In broad terms, planning need is calculated by comparing demand for and supply of student bedspaces across a geographic area.
The appropriate conclusion of the issue of planning need is numerical.
Planning need relates to the level of need for new PBSA to be met by the proposed development of PBSA on Sites 1-4 (each at its own valuation date).
The reasonable local planning authority applying Policy TP33 would reach a judgment on planning need for PBSA taking into account an estimate of future growth of student demand for PBSA.
Planning need falls to be assessed in the context of the relevant planning policies and guidance as at the valuation dates.
The differences between the three expert witnesses are explained by their disagreement over the following fairly discrete topics, namely:
The relevant geographical area across which any need for PBSA should be assessed.
The relevance of other rented accommodation available to students in determining whether a need for PBSA had been demonstrated (with “HMOs”, houses in multiple occupation, being used as a convenient shorthand for all such accommodation).
The period of time over which any need for PBSA should be assessed, and the length of time over which the potential growth in the number of students requiring accommodation should be considered.
To a lesser extent, the rate of growth which should be applied to the number of students requiring accommodation.
Whether a reasonable planning authority would use publicly available data on student numbers and accommodation choices or would have regard to a more detailed version of the same data available only under commercial licence.
Despite their best efforts to clarify what they mean by planning need, it can be seen that the parties’ agreed explanation begs important questions, in particular about the area within which, and the period over which, the relevant need must be established, but also about whether the relevant supply and demand for student bedspaces are for spaces within PBSA or extend to other types of accommodation, including HMOs. With the benefit of hindsight, it might have been preferable for us to have been asked to consider whether the relevant policy as a whole was satisfied, rather than to address only one of its components, but we will do our best within the limits of the evidence to provide a useful answer to the preliminary issue.