S106 §1:100 · NPPF

NPPF and section 106 viability

Reviewed by Chartered Planner (MRTPI) and Chartered Surveyor (MRICS) · 2026-06-21
Direct answer · 54 words
The NPPF published 17 Aug 2026 replaced the Dec 2024 Framework and rewrote it into lettered plan-making and decision-making policies, so the numbered paragraph 58 on viability no longer exists. Viability is now resolved primarily at plan-making, with decision-stage tests confined to Policy DM5. The reg 122 necessity test and the per-head structure are unchanged.

What the Aug 2026 rewrite did

The NPPF published 17 Aug 2026 is the first comprehensive rewrite of the framework [NPPF (Aug 2026)]. It splits policies into plan-making and decision-making and drops the numbered paragraphs, so any citation to paragraph 58 now points to a framework no longer in force. Viability moves upstream: plans are expected to set viable contribution policies, and a scheme complying with an up-to-date plan is assumed capable of delivering them.

Policy DM5: when a decision-stage viability case is admissible

At the decision stage, Policy DM5 assumes a proposal that accords with up-to-date contribution policies is viable. A site-specific viability assessment is confined to defined circumstances: a development type or site materially different from what the plan viability evidence tested, demonstrable costs the plan evidence did not take into account, or a significant change in economic circumstances such as a recession. Ordinary movements in build cost, GDV or interest rates cannot be used to set aside the plan assumptions. The burden stays on the applicant.

BLV and threshold-test profit

Benchmark land value continues to follow RICS Financial Viability in Planning guidance [RICS Financial Viability in Planning] and the PPG Viability methodology. Threshold-test profit (typically 15% to 20% on GDV) was not changed by the rewrite; the position remains negotiated with the LPA viability consultant.

Policy-compliant tariff versus open-book review

The open-book review mechanism remains the preferred response where a viability case reduces the contribution at consent. Camden and RBKC are notable for using late-trigger reviews (50% sales, practical completion) to recover contribution upside.

What the Dec 2024 Framework did (now superseded)

The Dec 2024 refresh retained the earlier paragraph 58 position that policy-compliant tariffs are presumed deliverable unless viability is demonstrably an issue, with the burden on the applicant[NPPF (Dec 2024, superseded)]. That principle carries into Policy DM5, but the paragraph number and the Dec 2024 Framework itself were superseded on 17 Aug 2026.

S106 §1:50 · related

Related

LURA 2023Devolution Act 2026ViabilityAHChangelogSources