PLANS to earmark land near York for a massive new settlement in Harrogate’s draft Local Plan are legally flawed, it was claimed last night.

Harrogate Borough Council is this evening due to debate officers’ recommendations for the 3,000 home development to be based in the Hammerton area under the plan, despite huge local protests.

Residents from Green Hammerton and Kirk Hammerton have argued that the new settlement should instead be based on a former golf course alongside the A59 and A1 at Flaxby.

And now Flaxby Park Ltd, which is behind proposals to build on the Flaxby site, has instructed solicitors to write to the council to claim its draft plan is legally flawed.

Development director Matt Johnson claimed the council’s district development committee was promoting a scheme that had “no proven sustainability, deliverability or viability credentials”.

He claimed there was clear evidence the location had not been properly or objectively considered. “Therefore the whole Local Plan process is at risk of legal challenge.”

He said solicitors had written to say legal flaws included an “undeclared and inappropriate bias towards the new broad location”, which would result in significant gain to the county council.

“There is a serious level of concern regarding the whole process of the Draft Local Plan and this was clearly evident at the recent District Development Committee, where officers failed to even present the new settlement plan, despite displaying and acknowledging every other hamlet, village, and town allocation in the borough. This is extremely concerning given the new settlement is the largest development ever to happen to Harrogate.”

Cllr Rebecca Burnett, cabinet member for planning, said the authority was carefully considering the contents of the lawyers’ letter and would respond in detail in due course.

“However, we do not believe there are any legal flaws in the local plan process,” she said.

“Nor do we accept that a new development in the broad Green Hammerton area isn’t sustainable or deliverable.

“Alleging a site has been chosen because another council stands to gain is a nonsense.”