Councillors are demanding answers over why they are being asked to write off a £1.9million contribution from the developer who built a loss-making multi-storey car park in the centre of Altrincham.

The Regent Road Car Park has been redeveloped alongside 34 homes, 26 of which are for social rent, but the scheme has made a total loss of £2.9m.

Applicant Citybranch Healthcare was granted planning permission for the project in 2019 conditional on the payment of £1.9m – known as a Section 106 agreement – but Trafford’s planning and development management committee was told ‘the money does not exist’.

The company has already paid £250,000 in contributions towards the public realm in Altrincham town centre.

A report to the committee said: “Since the granting of planning permission there has been extreme economic turbulence and cost inflation in part caused by the Covid pandemic and other UK and global factors that have had a significant influence on the build programme.”

It said the applicant now wants the clause in the agreement committing the company to pay up be ‘deleted’.

Recommending approval of the write-off, head of planning and development for Trafford Rebecca Coley said: “The money is not there – it’s not going to be magicked up.”

She said the council’s viability officer had looked at the receipts and financial records of the developments and said there had been some ‘mismanagement’.

Cllr Nathan Evans, who is also the Conservative opposition leader on the council, asked why there was no mention in the officers’ report of the Trafford Continuum report which is on the council’s website.

The continuum report says that evidence has not yet been provided by the applicant to show that ‘costs and values’ in the scheme are correct.

“It seems at total odds with the officers’ report,” he said. “I’ve been contacted by numerous residents and businesses in Altrincham over the fact they’ve had no car park for four years.

“I don’t believe we’ve got the capacity to write off £1.9m and I don’t think we’ve got the capacity to scrutinise it.

“There is a lot to take in. My proposition is that this should be deferred for some serious consideration.”

Cllr Meena Minnis agreed. She said: “We can’t make a decision on this. They don’t want to fulfil all their Section 106 agreement obligations.

“I don’t think it’s fair for Trafford residents who pay council tax to be mitigating something that’s gone wrong for the developer. This hasn’t been gone into in the report. I was quite disturbed by this.

“I understand that there is no money left. But if they are a big enough company they will have other projects that have made money. You can’t just do away with your obligations.

“I don’t think it’s acceptable that we’ve lost large amounts of public money. I think it’s wrong.”

Cllr Michael Taylor added: “I don’t think we should be voting on this. There seems to be a catalogue of errors. There needs to be an investigation.”

However, Ms Coley said there was ‘no realistic prospect’ of getting the money. “There is nothing else to tell you,” she said. “We have done the work and taken legal advice. 

“[One of the] purposes of the development was to deliver affordable housing in Altrincham.”

The application from Citybranch also asked for a variation of planning consent to include ‘minor changes’ to some external materials to the buildings.

Acting chair of the committee Cllr Laurence Walsh rounded off the discussion by saying: “We need to defer this. I’m not sure if we can get our viability officer here, but we need to assess the situation in this case.”