Issue - meetings

3/13/0528/SV - Deed of variation to S106 obligation dated 15 April 2005 under planning reference 3/04/0657/OP - to insert an additional clause, following Clause 2.4, stating that successors in title does not include leaseholders at 95-97 London Road,

Meeting: 19/06/2013 - Development Management Committee (Item 71)

71 3/13/0528/SV – Deed of variation to S106 obligation dated 15 April 2005 under planning reference 3/04/0657/OP - to insert an additional clause, following Clause 2.4, stating that successors in title does not include leaseholders at 95–97 London Road, Bishop's Stortford, CM23 3DU for Cala Homes Limited pdf icon PDF 28 KB

Variation of a Section 106 Legal Obligation.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of application 3/13/0528/SV, subject to the expiry of a 21 day period subsequent to the date of notification of the application by the applicant, and as provided in an appropriate certificate to the Council and subject to no new and substantive matters of objecting being raised as a result, the legal agreement be varied to add the following clause:

 

·                          Except for restrictive covenants capable of affecting an individual dwelling unit, the reference to ‘successors in title’ in the agreement does not include leaseholders.

 

The Director advised that this application followed on from an application approved in 2004 that had permitted the development on this site, subject to a number of Section 106 legal obligations.  The current application sought to amend the agreement by the addition of a further clause which would state that the ‘successors in title’ to the agreement did not include leaseholders. 

 

Members were advised that this would ensure that individual purchasers of the flats would not become liable for any commuted sums that had not been paid and would not have to be signatories to any deed of variation.

 

The Director summarised the reasons why this situation had arisen.  He referred to the legal advice from the Hertfordshire County Council’s solicitor, as well as the advice from the East Herts Council’s solicitor, which had subsequently led to this application being submitted.

 

Councillor G Jones commented that, if any future developer in possession of this site went into administration, would there be any risk that the outstanding Section 106 monies would not be secured.  Councillor Jones made the point that, as some of the units were now occupied, the full Section 106 obligations should have been paid by now.

 

The Director advised that the risk of not securing the full Section 106 obligations was no greater now than it had been when the original application was determined in 2004.

 

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, the Committee supported the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

 

RESOLVED – that, in respect of application 3/13/0528/SV, subject to the expiry of a 21 day period subsequent to the date of notification of the application by the applicant, and as provided in an appropriate certificate to the Council and subject to no new and substantive matters of objection being raised as a result, the Section 106 legal agreement be varied to add the following clause:

 

Except for restrictive covenants capable of affecting an individual dwelling unit, the reference to ‘successors in title’ in the agreement does not include leaseholders.