Section 106 Agreement 5 Years

With respect to developer contributions, the Community Infrastructure Tax (CIL) did not replace the Section 106 agreements, which strengthened the s 106 tests. S106 agreements on developer contributions should focus on correcting the specific weakening required for a new development. CIL was designed to address the broader effects of development. There should be no circumstances in which a developer pays CIL and S106 for the same infrastructure for the same development. Planning obligations can be renegotiated at any time if the local planning authority and the proponent agree, but informal negotiations often stall and lead nowhere. S106A provides for a more formal schedule that requires a decision in 8 weeks. Each year`s agreements can be amended and will be successful if they either no longer serve a useful purpose or if the revised proposed conditions serve the original purpose as effectively as the original act. If the planning requirement is more than 5 years, the application may be the subject of a routine call for planning inspection. Recent agreements can only be challenged through the judicial review process, which is a realistic option only in the most valuable cases. In practice, the review “no longer constitutes a reasonable planning objective” is liberal, making these applications very unreliable. The legislation is on this link: Richards J. added that Section 106A contains a specific and specific legal review and does not provide the full range of planning considerations involved, for example, in a formal decision regarding the granting or denial of the building permit. Sections 106A and 106B of the 1990 Act provide for a procedure for amending or fulfilling planning obligations incurred after October 25, 1991 without the approval of the local planning authority.

However, an application for modification or discharge may be submitted to the competent authority after the expiry of the “relevant period” as defined (see s106A (3)).