Attempts by a housing developer to wriggle out of its obligations to provide affordable housing are coming under increasing fire with town councillors and the local MP criticising the move.

Harrington Homes asked Teignbridge District Council to waive its Section 106 responsibilities for the Teignbrook site on Higher Exeter Road in Teignmouth in October because it claimed the costs would make the site financially unviable.

The Section 106 obligations include a condition for 25% of the housing on the site to be allocated as ‘affordable’ and a requirement to financially contribute to the local community through education, sport, transport and biodiversity funds.

However, local MP Martin Wrigley has slammed Harrington Homes for trying to get out of its responsibilities. And a group of councillors has submitted a motion urging Teignmouth Town Council to call on Teignbridge planning officers to keep all the Section 106 obligations that were agreed when planning permission was granted.

‘I am a great supporter of responsible business, said Martin. ‘Sadly, Harrington Homes are anything but. Their attempt to wriggle out of their responsibility to provide affordable homes on this site is incompetent and purely greed,’ he commented. ‘I urge Teignbridge Council to not let them do it. I will be seeing what I will be doing in Parliament to stop greedy developers doing this sort of thing. It is not acceptable, not responsible, and they shouldn’t be allowed to do it,’ he added.

In the developer’s application to remove the Section 106 obligations, Stantec UK Ltd, an engineering consultant acting on behalf of Harrington Homes, said costs had continued to rise ‘due to the unforeseen realities of delivery on site and associated technical challenges’. It pointed out that an independent financial viability assessment had concluded that the scheme in its current state would be ‘terminally unviable and undeliverable’ and would be stalled in December 2025 unless the Section 106 obligations were removed.

‘Section 106 agreements are the primary tool for holding developers accountable for their promises and ensuring that new developments are sustainable and beneficial to the existing community,’ noted Teignmouth Town Councillor Penny Lloyd.

Harrington Homes had hoped that Teignbridge would make a decision by the beginning of December. However, Teignbridge said its planners are awaiting a report from a council-appointed viability consultant ‘who will consider the financial viability of the site and its (Harrington’s) ability deliver the original obligations’, a Teignbridge spokesperson said. Teignbridge also confirmed that it had received a claim for compensation from Harrington relating to the temporary stop notice issued last year after concerns were raised about waste being dumped in a nearby meadow.

Some councillors are concerned that the decision on the Section 106 obligations will be made by officers rather than elected officials. ‘The fact that Teignbridge councillors have no ability to debate or vote on the specifics of these agreements erodes public trust in the planning system,’ pointed out councillor David Cox.

By early January more 116 comments objecting to the request to remove all the Section 106 obligations for Teignbrook had been logged on the Teignbridge District Council Planning website along with two objections from Teignbridge’s biodiversity officer and housing enabling officer.

Outline permission for the 255 home site was originally granted in 2014 with final sign off in 2022.