THE district council has wasted both its own money and Helioslough's by objecting to the railfreight depot on grounds dismissed by the first inspector, Helioslough's barrister has told the inquiry.
Arguing for the company's partial costs claim against the authority, Martin Kingston said that instead of listing 14 reasons for refusal, the council could have limited the area under dispute to the alternative sites assessment.
He said: “The council was determined to refuse the application irrespective of the evidence and the Secretary of State's decision letter.
“That would have led to a much shorter inquiry.
“But it ploughed on regardless.”
The costs application is a 14-page document setting out detailed arguments but no figures.
Helioslough's managing director Simon Hoare told the Review that if the inspector awarded costs against the council the figure would be settled by negotiation.
He said: "I can't estimate a figure at this stage but it's more than a fiver."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel