We are presently working on the Draft Charging Schedule and will soon be going out to consultation. In accordance with the 2012 Guidance, we will also be publishing a draft Reg 123 List. The approach that we take to the 123 List has been muddied somewhat by the introduction of the following paragraph in the 2012 Guidance: 88. Where the regulation 123 list includes a generic item (such as education or transport), section 106 contributions should not normally be sought on any specific projects in that category. Such site-specific contributions should only be sought where this can be justified with reference to the underpinning evidence on infrastructure planning made publicly available at examination. If we were to include "transport improvements" in the Reg 123 list with an exception being "Excluding site-specific requirements needed to make a specific development acceptable" would this be appropriate? My reading of para 88 would suggest it isn't acceptable as site specific requirements do not form part of the underpinning evidence on infrastructure planning (unless perhaps a strategic site). In which case, I believewe would need to be very specific in terms of the "transport improvements" on the Reg 123 List which would allow for s106 to be used on site specific development that isn't picked up by the list. A bit of a ramble but in essence my questions is, in light of para 88 of the Guidance do we need to be very specific in terms of identifying projects for the purposes of the Reg 123 List or can we take a generic approach as has been taken by a lot of Authorities who got through before the Guidance was published?
