Call for focused awareness and urgency on £11.5m of unspent developer funds

An independent councillor is calling for greater focus and urgency from Warrington Borough Council over more than £11.5 million in unspent developer funds, warning that delays risk vital infrastructure funding being lost.

Cllr Stuart Mann, who represents Burtonwood and Winwick, and successfully campaigned for £6m funding for Parkside highway imporvements, has been raising the issue through scrutiny and has now escalated concerns to Full Council, submitting a formal question ahead of the meeting at Parr Hall on 20th April.
The Council’s latest Infrastructure Funding Statement (IFS) for 2024/25 confirms a closing Section 106 (S106) balance of £11,579,202.74 — funding that has been received but not yet spent.
S106 contributions are legally binding payments made by developers to fund infrastructure required as a result of new development. While restricted in use, they are intended to deliver timely improvements for communities impacted by growth.

To date, £21.49m has been received, including £8.36m for education, £4.61m for transport, and £1.19m for built leisure. Despite this, no S106 funding was spent on built leisure during 2024/25.
The report also confirms that £350,000 had to be returned to another authority because it was not spent in line with the agreement.
Cllr Mann said:“The key issue here is that this £11.5 million is sitting unspent. At a time when residents are paying significantly more in council tax and services are under pressure, that simply cannot be acceptable.
This funding is there to deliver real infrastructure, and it needs to be used — and used on time.”

Cllr Mann pointed to a previous example where delays led to funding being lost altogether.
He said:“We’ve already seen what happens when this goes wrong. Section 106 money from the Vulcan development in St Helens, which was intended to fund improvements along Alder Root Lane in my ward an area that constantly suffers from traffic issues and flooding was not spent within the required timescale.
That money was ultimately clawed back by St Helens and used elsewhere.”
He added that an apology had been issued following the incident, but warned lessons must now be applied.
“I have received an apology for that funding not being spent in time, and I welcome that acknowledgement. But the reality is the money is gone and we must ensure that lessons are learned so this does not happen again.”
Newly confirmed details show that £6 million in S106 funding has now been secured for infrastructure linked to the Parkside development funding Cllr Mann says was only achieved after sustained campaigning.
He said:“I campaigned tirelessly for this £6 million, and at one stage there was a very real risk it wouldn’t happen. Had that been the case, key junction improvements in and around Winwick simply would not have been delivered. So while I welcome this funding, it underlines why we must now make sure it is actually delivered.”
Cllr Mann has also called for firm assurances that the Parkside funding will be delivered as planned.
He added:“I’ve asked for clear assurances at Full Council that this money will be protected and that the works will be delivered within the agreed timescales.
Residents need to see these improvements happen not just promised on paper.”
The issue is particularly significant in areas such as Burtonwood and Winwick, where communities are experiencing the cumulative impact of major developments, including sites at Omega, Golborne Road, Parkside, and the wider Peel Hall scheme.
Concerns have also been raised following confirmation that a planned primary healthcare facility at Omega close to The Landings, Eagles Green & Holly Grange, will not now be delivered.
Under the S106 agreement, the developer fulfilled its obligation to offer the facility to the NHS, but the Integrated Care Board confirmed in September 2025 that it would not proceed, releasing the developer from the requirement.
Cllr Mann said:“This is exactly why getting S106 right matters. Thousands of new homes have been built, yet the healthcare infrastructure that was meant to support that growth has not materialised.
Residents will quite rightly see this as a failure to keep infrastructure in step with development.”
The IFS notes that £1.8m has been allocated to specific projects, with a further £9.77m reserved. The Council maintains that balances reflect the timing of delivery.
However, Cllr Mann believes the scale of the unspent balance requires greater focus.
He said: “Holding balances may be normal, but at this level, with these pressures, it requires focused awareness and urgency.
My role is to make sure residents have the full picture — and that the Council delivers on what has been promised.”
The issue will now be raised formally at Full Council on 20th April, where further clarity is expected on how these funds will be safeguarded and spent.

A Warrington Borough Council spokesperson said: “Our Planning Policy Team closely monitor all obligations on a quarterly basis, meeting with responsible service managers to ensure that each contribution is being spent in accordance with the detailed measures set out in the respective Section 106 agreements and within the required timeframes. If there are contributions at risk of not being spent, then these are escalated to senior managers for resolution, in advance of the date when re-payment is required.”
“The £350,000 that had to be returned to St Helens Council was originally given to fund off site highway works linked to a housing development at Vulcan Village to assist with the mitigation of cross-boundary highway impacts in Warrington. The aim was to use this money alongside contributions from the Parkside developments to deliver larger, combined improvements. However, delays in the planning process meant that St Helens Council asked for the money back, in line with the agreement, so they could instead use it for upgrades at Earlestown Station. Since then, more than £6 million has been secured from the Parkside developments to deliver improvements at four congested junctions in Winwick.”