S73 Application And S106 Agreement
It is possible to replace an existing S106 agreement or a unilateral undertaking with a land development application without meeting the conditions previously imposed by filing a development application in accordance with the S73 TCPA. This route does not change or impose any additional CIL obligations. An S73 application establishes a new planning authorization that requires a new S106 or UU agreement. Any existing agreement disappears, as explained above. See: Section 106 contributions (also known as planning obligations or unilateral obligations) are required by law to mitigate the impact of your development on a local community and infrastructure. These are sought by local planning authorities (LPAs) during the building permit process and are guaranteed by a legal agreement S106 of the Town -Country Planning Act 1990. In Norfolk Home Ltd v. North Norfolk District Council – Another  EWHC 2265 QB, the High Court considered whether a Section 73 building permit was related to a previous Section 106 agreement. The High Court considered whether, on the basis of a framework permit for dwellings subject to the s106 agreement, Section 73 of the authorities was linked to the agreement for substantially identical development. Christopher Lockhart-Mummery QC analyzes the verdict. One year after the development building permit was granted, Norfolk Homes requested that the original authorization be amended by an application pursuant to Section 73 of the 1990 TCPA to amend two of the conditions imposed by the original authorization. The APA decided to grant the authorization without reference to the original s106 agreement.
The applicant submitted that the development carried out was not bound by the agreement. The Commission requested (1) that the agreement be construed as relating to a subsequent s73 authorization and, alternatively (2), that such a provision be implied. She relied on the decision of the Lambeth LBC Supreme Court/Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government  1 WLR 4317 in support of her arguments. However, it also considers, albeit obitant, the inclusion of clauses mandating the section 106 agreement for future authorisations s.73. The insertion of these types of clauses has continued to gain popularity, especially among developers, as the intention is to avoid the time and effort required to design acts of variation. As a result, LJ Holgate decided that Norfolk was allowed to develop homes under the 2015 authorization and that it was not related to the original s106. The planning obligation s106 has been removed from the local land tax register and the developer can build up to 85 market housing units without having to provide affordable housing or a financial contribution. The Commission objected to Norfolk Home`s request on two points: the High Court recently decided, in Norfolk Homes Ltd/North Norfolk DC  EWHC 2265, that a Section 106 agreement under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 does not apply to subsequent planning authorizations granted pursuant to Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.