Show CPO Blog Posts | Show All Posts
In part 1 of this series of posts on the decision by an inspector not to confirm Barking and Dagenham’s Vicarage Field CPO, we looked at the primary reason for refusal – that the Inspector could not be satisfied that the scheme was viable and therefore would be delivered.
Written by
Raj GuptaOn 4 Oct, planning Inspector Katie McDonald issued her delegated decision not to confirm the London Borough of Barking CPO.
Written by
Raj GuptaIn this final post on an Inspector’s decision not to confirm Barking and Dagenham’s Vicarage Field CPO, I look at how the Inspector treated alternative proposals for redevelopment made by two of the objectors.
Written by
Raj GuptaWhile we wait for the Commons Select Committee to consider the CPO aspects of the LURB and for DLUHC’s assessment of the response to the consultation on land value capture, we thought we would fill the gap with a back-to-basics entry on CPO promotion.
Written by
Emma McDonald & Paul ArnettAs reported in the last entry of this blog, DLUHC is consulting on proposals to “allow acquiring authorities to request a direction from the Secretary of State that, for a specific scheme, payments in respect of hope value may be capped at existing use value or an amount above existing use value where it can be shown that the public interest in doing so would be justified.”
Written by
Raj Gupta & Juliet MunnThanks for all the positive feedback on the first episode of our blog. Having already summarised the CPO provisions in the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill (or “LURB” as all the cool kids are calling it).
Written by
Raj GuptaThis site uses cookies to keep our site secure and provide our users with the best possible experience. For more information, click here.