think you'd need to be careful doing this as you can't 'double charge' developers for the same item of infrastructure. You can be clever about the wording of the Regulation 123 list to ensure that you have maximum flexibility for use of Section 106. For example a) you can include 'education' in your Reg 123 list which would mean any funding for schools would come through CIL, none through S106 b) you can include 'education except school X' in your Reg 123 list which would mean funding for all schools would come through CIL, except for school X which could be funded through S106 (this would be good for a strategic site for example) c) or you can include 'school X' in your Reg 123 list which would mean funding for school X only would come from CIL, and funding for all other schools would be through S106. In Derbyshire we are pursuing the last option - where we know a new school is needed or improvements to an existing school are needed, we are looking for these to be identified in the Reg 123 list. We will seek all other improvements as and when they are required through S106. This gives us the ability to account for 'planned' growth through CIL, and also to react to 'unplanned' growth and ad hoc planning applications. What I don't think you can (or should) do is try and fund improvements through both CIL and Section 106 - this would be unfairly charging developers twice. So you can't have School X on your Reg 123 list and then later ask for a Section 106 for it.
