Subscribe to trusted local news
In a time of both misinformation and too much information, quality journalism is more crucial than ever. By subscribing, you can help us get the story right.
- Subscription costs less than £1 a week with an annual plan.
Already a subscriber? Log in here.
28
Oct 2020
Harrogate council acted lawfully in Green Hammerton case, High Court told
Harrogate Borough Council officers acted lawfully when they chose to pick Green Hammerton over Flaxby for its local plan, London's High Court was told today.
Paul Brown QC, representing the authority at the judicial review, outlined the council’s defence to claimants Flaxby Park Ltd on the second day of the hearing.
Flaxby claimed yesterday the council made insufficient comparisons between the two sites, that further assessments were not brought back before councillors and questioned the viability of the site.
But Mr Brown told the court there was no legal reason for officers to return a further assessment of the two sites to councillors.
He said officers had already been delegated powers, which covered assessments and modifications to the plan, and they were not “legally required” to check further with councillors after carrying out the work.
Read more:
Mr Brown said:
'Entirely lawful'
Mr Brown said the council’s decision not to assess a “broad location” for Flaxby before the local plan was submitted for examination was “an entirely lawful one to take”.
The council ultimately carried out the further assessment after the planning inspector said the move would be “sensible” and not that it was legally required, Mr Brown added.
He said the assessment was then given to the inspector and the inspector’s final report, which included the additional work, was considered by councillors before the local plan was adopted.
The court also heard that there was “no unequal treatment” between Flaxby and Green Hammerton and that the two were considered by officers throughout the process.
Flaxby limitations
Mr Brown said the “like for like” comparison was completed and limitations of the Flaxby site had been made clear since July 2017.
Addressing the clam that the planning inspector’s conclusion on viability was “perverse”, Mr Brown said the judgement was a “matter for the inspector”.
The court also heard that the council looked at the viability of both sites and each developer was spoken to and "treated on a like for like basis".
Christopher Katkowski QC, representing Flaxby Park Ltd, will respond to the council’s defence tomorrow.
The hearing is expected to conclude tomorrow.
0