A BUILDER is seeking a huge reduction in the amount he has to pay the local community after creating a new development of 18 homes - saying the sums worked out by Thurrock Council's consultants were wrong!

Tom Ingleton bought the site in East Tilbury from the applicants who were originally granted permission but now building has been completed, he is arguing he is being asked to pay a larger sum of section 106 money than the site merits.

A section 106 agreement (S106) is an agreement between a developer and a local planning authority about measures that the developer must take to reduce their impact on the community.

Planning permission was granted in 2016 for the building of 18 homes on the site of former tennis courts and a swimming pool close to the junction of Coronation Avenue and Princess Margaret Road. It was granted to 'Stolkin, Mawhood and Clements' which is believed to be a consortium of property developer Mark Solkin, directors of other companies he is associated with and Thurrock businessman and landowner Ray Mawhood, who owns large parts of the former BATA site in East Tilbury now known as Thames Industrial Park.

Though there is nothing in the final draft approval notice to the builder that details the size of the S106 agreement, previous paperwork suggests the site should have a 36 per cent affordable housing quota - which equates to six houses - or a commensurate cash sum be paid to the council.

The planning approval did also specify a financial contribution of £70,154.50 towards secondary school provision in the 'East Planning Area' and dedication of land within the site for the provision of a bus stop.

It would appear that the lump sum is the chosen option of Mr Ingleton's company, Ingleton Property Ltd, but he has made a submission to the council via a new planning application, challenging the figures.

In the new application, which can be viewed in full on the council's planning portal here it is suggested that a contribution of £523,650 is unreasonable and he wants to pay £105,140. Residents can express their views on the application via the portal.

The valuations put on the site and the housing appear to have been worked out for the council by consultants Aecom, who have just been associated with the significantly botched A13 widening and Stanford rail station projects.

The issue of developers reneging on planning agreements and commitment to the communities is becoming a regular feature of Thurrock planning issues and is of mounting concern.

Among those keeping a close watch on the situation, and the East Tilbury development in his ward, is independent non-aligned councillor Fraser Massey.

He says: "S106 outcomes are agreed well before a project is completed, any developer should expect to meet these agreements and deliver on the points which should mean improvements and funding for the towns or villages directly affected by any building of new homes or businesses.

"I would urge residents to make comment on the planning application. This was a well-respected local space with grass and trees and going back many years even had tennis courts. It is now houses and the communities directly in and around East Tilbury should get what was agreed."

Meanwhile residents in the village have expressed concern about the state of the Lawns development.

While most of the houses now appear to be occupied, the site infrastructure is far from finished and has at best been described as 'untidy' and worst 'dangerous' by residents who have commented on social media.