£11.2m Harrogate Station Gateway halted after legal challengeNorth Yorkshire Council has revoked its decision to proceed with the £11.2 million Harrogate Station Gateway scheme in the face of a legal challenge.
Hornbeam Park Developments instructed lawyers to launch a judicial review against the council’s decision this week.
The council responded today with a statement that has plunged the controversial scheme into fresh doubt.
Karl Battersby, the council’s corporate director of environment, said:
“We have received a legal challenge to the executive’s decision to progress the Transforming Cities Fund scheme in Harrogate.
“Having taken external advice on the grounds of the challenge and having fully considered the matter, we have rescinded the decision to proceed with the scheme at this stage in order to avoid further costs and time delays.
“A further report will be considered by the executive soon, which will set out next steps and timescales for the project in line with legal advice. We will be taking further advice before deciding how best to proceed.”
The scheme is one of three worth £42 million being funded by the government’s Transforming Cities Fund to improve station gateways to town centres in Harrogate, Selby and Skipton.
An impression of how James Street would look.
It would see James Street partly pedestrianised and a 300-metre section of Station Parade reduced to single lane to make way for new cycle routes.
The legal challenge focuses on the council’s alleged failure to disclose key carbon and climate impact information during consultation.
A climate change appraisal said drivers would be forced to take longer alternative routes as a result of the road changes and overall “user emissions are anticipated to increase as a result of the scheme, as the emissions from changing traffic flows are predicted to outweigh the avoided emissions from modal-shift”.
The appraisal also predicts the scheme would result in an increase of 1,356 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions over its lifetime.
All Conservatives and most Liberal Democrats approved the decision to proceed in May — however, the Liberal Democrats subsequently withdrew their support.
Read more:
Judicial review launched against £11.2m Harrogate Station GatewayA judicial review has today been launched against the £11.2 million Harrogate Station Gateway scheme.
Planning lawyers have been instructed by Hornbeam Park Developments to challenge North Yorkshire Council‘s decision-making on several grounds.
They include the council’s alleged failure to disclose documents relating to climate change, and a failure to properly consult upon the scheme as a result.
The judicial review threatens to de-rail the controversial scheme, which would see James Street partly pedestrianised and a 300-metre section of Station Parade reduced to single lane traffic to make way for new cycling routes.
A spokesperson for Hornbeam Park Developments said:
“Residents deserve to be fully informed on a major scheme with significant environmental and economic impact on our town.
“This judicial review challenges the decision-making process and lack of crucial information provided to the public as part of previous consultations.
“The impact of this disastrous scheme will be felt across the district, but specifically on the businesses on James Street, and residents nearby. These groups should be confident the correct processes and information was provided to help inform the public. Our investigations show this is not the case, so we are challenging this”.
Read more:
Councillors approved plans to proceed with the gateway in May.
Most Liberal Democrat and all Conservative councillors on North Yorkshire Council’s Harrogate and Knaresborough area constituency committee supported the scheme although the Liberal Democrats later withdrew support.
How James Street would look.
A statement sent today on behalf of Hornbeam Park Developments said the scheme “has proved unpopular with the majority of residents and local businesses due to potential impact on the local economy and on town centre congestion due to increased waiting times throughout the day”.
It adds:
“Redirected traffic from the town centre gyratory could also make residential streets nearby less pedestrian friendly, fuelling concerns across the town centre.”
Key climate data not released
Today’s legal challenge claims a council-commissioned climate change appraisal, which concludes the scheme is predicted to result in an increase in 1,356 tonnes of CO2e over its lifetime, was not made available during public consultation or taken into account by the council when it decided to go ahead.
Instead, consultation materials indicated the initiative would be beneficial in terms of climate change.
The judicial review also claims a plan showing proposals for traffic regulation orders on highways such as James Street was incorrect and should have triggered a public inquiry.
The spokesperson continued:
“The decision to omit the damning independent analysis into the predicted carbon emissions of this scheme will contribute during public consultation is shocking.
“In this climate emergency, information around environmentally damaging schemes should be front-and-centre to help people appraise the scheme.
“Instead, we have a document which states that the reduction of Station Parade to one lane and the part-time pedestrianisation of James Street will reduce general traffic capacity and force drivers onto longer alternative routes – predicted to result in an increase in 1,356 tonnes of CO2e over the project’s lifetime.
“Everyone in the town wants to see improvements to the area, but it needs to have a democratic mandate that we can all get behind, and be fully thought through.”
North Yorkshire Council has been approached for comment.
Harrogate businessmen give council notice of Station Gateway legal actionTwo Harrogate businessmen have given North Yorkshire Council notice that they intend to press ahead with a judicial review of the Harrogate Station Gateway scheme.
Chris Bentley, of Hornbeam Park Developments, and Dr Terry Bramall CBE have lodged the claim against the scheme.
The pair have concerns over the legality of the council’s consultation process over the gateway.
In a letter from solicitors Walton&Co sent to North Yorkshire Council and West Yorkshire Combined Authority, which are overseeing the project, they argue that the procedure for the gateway scheme was unlawful on six grounds.
It includes claims that the council failed to hold an inquiry on planned traffic regulation orders, that it carried out unlawful publicity of the orders, and that it acted “irrationally” when approving them before receiving funds for the project.
The letter also claims the council’s consultation was “unlawful” and that it failed to “take into account material considerations”, such as access to premises, when deciding to proceed with the gateway scheme.
Mr Bentley told the Stray Ferret previously that he felt the council had come up with “utopian ideas” and that the plan should be shelved.
He said:
“They just keep throwing the dice until they get the right answer. I think it should be shelved.
“There is so much other stuff that the town needs.”
Read more:
Mr Bentley and Mr Bramall declined to comment further on the matter.
The Stray Ferret asked North Yorkshire Council whether it would be defending its position against the claims made.
In response, Karl Battersby, corporate director of environment at the council, said:
“We will be responding to the pre-action protocol letter, and we will look to defend our position should legal action be taken.”
The gateway project includes proposals such as the pedestrianisation of part of James Street and the reduction of a section of Station Parade to single lane traffic to encourage walking and cycling.
The scheme is still to receive final approval but won the backing of senior councillors in Northallerton at a meeting last month.
The predicted cost of the scheme is now £11.2m — a sum that has risen considerably from the £7.9m initially suggested by council.
Ripon councillors consider judicial review on 1,300-home Clotherholme plan
Ripon City Council is to take legal advice on the merits of seeking a judicial review of Harrogate Borough Council’s handling of the 1,300-home Clotherholme planning application.
The Homes England development on Ministry of Defence land at Claro Barracks, Deverell Barracks and Laver Banks was granted outline approval on February 23 on the casting vote of planning committee chair and Conservative councillor Rebecca Burnett.
This came after votes were tied at six for and six against supporting a recommendation to defer the plans to officers for approval subject to conditions.
At the planning meeting no reference was made by officers to a traffic assessment commissioned by Ripon City Council in 2020, because of fears that additional vehicle movements generated by the barracks scheme would cause permanent gridlock across Ripon.
A subsequent report from the consultant, who carried out the assessment, contained recommendations on a range of mitigation measures that could be taken at key junctions and traffic hotspots to reduce pressure on Ripon’s roads.
In the light of the report, the city council called on Homes England to reduce the number of houses in the development to an initial 800, with the option to seek approval for a further 500 once the traffic impact of the first phase of the scheme had been assessed.
At Monday night’s full Ripon City Council meeting, Independent council leader Andrew Williams said:
“It is clear that our traffic survey and the correspondence that we had with Harrogate Borough Council planners was totally ignored.
“They have ridden roughshod over the wishes of people living in the city, leaving them with a potential problem to deal with for years to come.”
Ripon Liberal Democrat county and city councillor Barbara Brodigan told the meeting:
“I attended the planning committee to speak on behalf of the Ripon Spa Residents Action Group about the concerns we have about traffic, but it appeared to me that this was a done deal.
“The city council’s own traffic assessment wasn’t even raised by officers.”
City councillors unanimously supported a proposal put by Cllr Williams and seconded by Cllr Brodigan, to take initial legal advice on the merits of seeking a judicial review of Harrogate Borough Council’s handling of the planning application.
At the February 23 planning meeting, David Rowlinson, speaking on behalf of Homes England, said:
“We’re not new to this site, we’ve been working on it for five years. We’ve looked at this very thoroughly and worked with North Yorkshire County Council’s highways department to get their on-the-ground views.
“We feel we’ve robustly assessed the impacts and come up with the best solution possible for Ripon.
“North Yorkshire County Council has confirmed there is no defensible reason to refuse the application on highways and transport grounds.”
Read more:
Harrogate property developer considers Station Gateway legal actionA Harrogate property developer is considering legal action over the town’s £10.9 million Station Gateway project.
Chris Bentley, who owns Hornbeam Park Developments, has concerns about the legality of North Yorkshire County Council’s consultation process.
In a letter from his lawyers, Mr Bentley threatened to take the local authority to a judicial review.
The letter, which was sent to the county council, Harrogate Borough Council and West Yorkshire Combined Authority, which all support the scheme, said that the second consultation “failed to include sufficient reasons for and information upon particular proposals to allow those consulted to give intelligent consideration and an intelligent response”.
In response, the council said that it did not accept that the second consultation was unlawful.
It argued that the council proposed to undertake further consultation on the Harrogate scheme.
In response, it said:
“A further consultation can address your client’s concerns, but also provide a pragmatic resolution and avoid the costs of formal litigation.”
Read more:
Mr Bentley told the Stray Ferret that he felt the council had come up with “utopian ideas” and that the plan should be shelved.
He said:
“They just keep throwing the dice until they get the right answer. I think it should be shelved.
“There is so much other stuff that the town needs.”
He added that he would still pursue a judicial review because he felt the council’s decision making process is “flawed”.
Last month, the Stray Ferret asked the county council if there had been a legal challenge against the scheme.
Karl Battersby, Corporate director of business and environmental services at the council, said there had been “no formal legal challenge in response to issues raised regarding the consultation last autumn”.
The gateway scheme is set to undergo a third round of consultation this year.
In a report, county council officers said the consultation will be held alongside the publication of traffic orders required for the scheme.
It said:
“A further consultation will commence in July alongside the publication of the draft Traffic Regulation Orders required to implement the changed highway layout. Construction is targeted for an early 2023 start.”
The gateway project includes proposals such as the pedestrianisation of part of James Street and the reduction of a section of Station Parade to single lane traffic to encourage walking and cycling.
Harrogate council refuses to reveal High Court legal costsHarrogate Borough Council has refused to reveal its legal costs for the recent three-day judicial review in London’s High Court.
The Stray Ferret sent the council a request under the Freedom of Information Act asking how much it had spent on legal fees for the case against property developer Flaxby Park.
But the council said the information was exempt from disclosure because its lawyers’ legal fees should remain private.
The council reply said:
“The counsel fees relate to the individual’s private life because counsel is a self-employed individual.
“Counsel would have the reasonable expectation that their personal data, their final salary for work done, is not disclosed into the public domain.
“There is a general expectation of privacy when submitting invoices for payment concerned with payment of salaries.”
Paul Brown QC, joint head of chambers at law firm Landmark Chambers, represented the council at October’s hearing.
Mr Brown is a local government specialist who has represented several councils at the High Court and Court of Appeal.
Read more:
During October’s judicial review, the judge, Mr Justice Holgate, rejected a request by the council to be spared costs. He also ruled the council should pay 15 per cent of Flaxby’s costs.
A spokesperson for Flaxby previously told the Stray Ferret 15% would amount to a “significant five-figure sum”.
But the council said Flaxby had not yet submitted a claim for costs.
Flaxby claimed the council’s decision to choose Green Hammerton and Cattal rather than Flaxby as the site of a new 3,000-home settlement was based on a flawed process.
Mr Holgate ruled in the council’s favour by saying the decision did not have to be made again.
But the judge ordered the council to vote again on its Local Plan to correct a legal flaw.
The Stray Ferret has requested an internal review of the council’s decision. This should be completed in 40 working days.
Flaxby fails to stop Green Hammerton development at High CourtA High Court judge has ruled that Harrogate Borough Council’s decision to choose Green Hammerton over Flaxby for up to 3,000 homes in the district does not have to be made again.
The developer, Flaxby Park Ltd, argued at a Judicial Review last month that the council’s decision to choose Green Hammerton for 3,000 homes was based on a flawed process.
Representing Flaxby, Christopher Katkowski QC raised three objections about the way the council came to make their decision.
He said:
- Environmental and sustainability assessments were not brought back before councillors to help them make a decision.
- The council failed to include an additional 630 hectares of land in the assessment of Flaxby as a broad location.
- The Green Hammerton proposals were not financially viable.
In a judgement published today, Mr Justice Holgate ruled in favour of HBC on the second and third points. However, he said that an environmental and sustainability report regarding the proposals would have to go back before the full council.
He said because this report wasn’t produced at the time, it “rendered unlawful” the new settlement policies at the adoption stage of the Local Plan. It means the council will have to vote again to rectify the “legal error” to address the issue of the sustainability report.
The judgement could potentially put to bed what has been one of the most bitter planning disputes to hit Harrogate in decades.
In his conclusion, Mr Justice Holgate said:
“In my judgment there was no error in the local plan process up to and including the conclusion of the examination process.”
Harrogate Borough Council welcomed the judgement and said an updated sustainability report will be brought to full council “as soon as possible”.
A council spokesman said:
“The judge is clear there were no flaws in the development of the local plan, the process was fair and equal, and that sufficient evidence had been put forward in relation to the new settlement.
“He has ruled that the plan does not need to be quashed in part, or full, saying that would be ‘wholly unjustifiable’.
“The court’s view is there was a single procedural issue because specific attention was not drawn to an updated sustainability appraisal when adoption of the local plan was discussed by councillors, even though the document was in the public domain at the time.
“The judge stated that although Flaxby Park Limited has been successful, in-part, to Ground 1 they had mounted a ‘time-consuming and costly attack on the local plan process’ and had ‘failed in achieving what was plainly the main object or thrust of the challenge.”
Read more:
Flaxby Park Ltd released a statement to the Stray Ferret this afternoon also claiming victory.
Chris Musgrave, chief executive at Flaxby Park Ltd, said:
“Flaxby Park Limited (FPL) are delighted that we have been successful in winning our Judicial Review challenge.
“HBC did not take into account vital information such as the sustainability appraisal and the detail of the consultation process. As a result, the councillors did not have all of the relevant information which would allow them to form a sound judgement on the merits of the community settlement issue.
“Council officers have a duty to provide council members with the fullest information and this has not been the case. As a result, the decision making of elected officials in the context of Flaxby Park has been flawed.
“The judgement by Mr Justice Holgate has confirmed that HBC acted unlawfully by adopting the Local Plan and we note that an order has been made by the Judge for HBC to pay their own legal costs as well as a proportion of the costs incurred by FPL. This speaks volumes as to the validity of our successful legal challenge.”
Harrogate council acted lawfully in Green Hammerton case, High Court toldHarrogate 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:
“It is patently not a matter which members would have been competent to carry out themselves.
“In a world where officers had delegated authority to agree modifications, it would be perverse to check with members before deciding that no modification [to the local plan] was required.”
‘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.
High Court battle begins into plan for thousands of homes at Green HammertonA crunch judicial review looms for Harrogate Borough Council this week as Flaxby Park Ltd calls into questions the authority’s local plan.
This morning at the High Court in London, a review will be opened into the decision to choose Green Hammerton ahead of Flaxby for a 3,000 home settlement in the local plan.
After months of bitter debate, a judge will decide whether the decision was lawful or not.
The developer maintains that the council’s decision was based on “flawed information of a scant, conflicting and contradictory nature”.
Read more:
It also caused backlash in Green Hammerton with residents embarking on a long campaign against the proposal.
Green Hammerton campaigners deliver 600 objections to Harrogate Borough Council back in February 2018.
Further tensions were raised when Flaxby urged the council to delay a decision on its application for 2,750 homes at the site.
However, the council said the planning committee and the review were two separate procedural process and refused the application.
What is a judicial review?
Flaxby was granted the review earlier this month and will now embark upon a three-day hearing at the High Court.
The purpose of the hearing is to look at the process that the council took to arrive at the decision to pick Green Hammerton over Flaxby.
The review looks at whether or not the decision made was lawful and followed the right procedure.
It is not a re-run of the merits of the decision.
If it is found to be unlawful, it could mean the decision has to be made again.
Judicial review looms after 2,750-home Flaxby development refusedCouncillors took an hour this afternoon to refuse an application for up to 2,750 homes on the former Flaxby golf course, near Knaresborough.
Harrogate Borough Council’s planning committee rejected the plans because they contravene its Local Plan, which chose Green Hammerton and Cattal as the location for a new settlement instead of Flaxby.
The Flaxby proposals also include a retirement village and two primary schools, as well as retail and office space.
The developer, Flaxby Park Ltd, is challenging HBC’s decision at a judicial review, which will take place at the High Court in London this month.
Cllr Robert Windass questioned why the planning committee had been asked to decide on Flaxby now, just weeks before the judicial review. He said the council should postpone any decision until after the judicial review takes place.
But his request was rebuffed by HBC’s chief planner, John Worthington, who said the planning committee and the judicial review were “two very separate processes”.
Cllr Christine Willoughby, who spoke representing Knaresborough Town Council, said the development would have a negative impact on the market town.
She said:
“The town council objects to this application as there would be a serious detrimental impact to health services, educational and recreational services of Knaresborough. Any economic benefit [to Knaresborough] would be small.”
Alex Smith, a member of the public, urged councillors to defer the Flaxby decision until the Green Hammerton development plan document was more fully developed.
He said the Flaxby development was “more sustainable” than Green Hammerton, which he said would require significant infrastructure investment. He said:
“We have a disused golf course and an existing dual carriageway here, now and ready to go. Why discard that site now?”
Eight councillors voted to refuse the plans. Two abstained.
Read more:
The judicial review will take place on October 27, 28, and 29 at the High Court in London.
Flaxby Park Ltd has claimed the council’s decision to choose Green Hammerton was based on “flawed information of a scant, conflicting and contradictory nature”.
A judge will decide whether the decision was lawful and followed the correct procedure.
If found to be unlawful, the decision on where to place the new settlement may have to be made again.
Meanwhile, HBC is pressing ahead with plans for Green Hammerton and last week rubber-stamped a public consultation that is expected to take place later this year.