Planning obligations or "Section 106 Agreements" are legally binding agreements negotiated between developers and the Council, as Local Planning Authority, usually in the context of considering planning applications.
They may comprise a "planning agreement" drafted and agreed with the Council or a "unilateral obligation" offered by the developer prior to the grant of planning permission, which will make the proposed development acceptable under relevant published local, regional or national planning policies.
They might be used to prescribe the nature of the development:
The most recent Government advice is published in the Planning Obligations Circular 05/2005. Obligations entered into run with the land and may be enforced against both the original covenanter and their successors unless otherwise stated. They can be positive, requiring something to be done or negative, restricting the use of the land in a specified way.
The Council's requirements were derived from the Tandridge District Local Plan 2001 which has been superseded for these purposes by the new Core Strategy from October 2008. The needs of various statutory consultees will continue to be negotiated on a site by site basis. However, the Council will bring forward further detailed policy on improving infrastructure and services in its Local Development Framework and Supplementary Planning Documents in due course.
A Planning Obligations Code of Practice has been agreed by the Planning and Environment Committee and brings together current policies and practices and provides a working document for use in Development Control and the determination of planning applications received. Prospective developers are strongly urged to familiarise themselves with this Code and contact the planning department at an early stage to discuss their proposals. In particular the advice note explaining the requirements for affordable housing provision on new housing sites should be viewed at Affordable Housing
Although there is a charge for pre-application discussions, it is hoped that developers will proceed with greater confidence in the outcome of their schemes rather than face a refusal of permission and the delays and uncertainties of re-applying or appealing.
