TrustNews Dec 22

River Park Leisure Centre site

An update from Rose Burns on behalf of Friends of River Park

 

Friends of River Park were dismayed at the refusal by Mrs Justice Thornton DBE of leave to apply for Judicial Review of the Council's decision to sell this site. It seemed to us extraordinary that she decided, effectively, that because the Council was making expansive concessions to remedy any or all unlawful actions from now on, our claim was academic. I should say that we haven't yet received the transcript of Judgment, so l am summarising what we understand was the thrust of the decision.

 

The learned Judge opined that it wouldn't make any difference to the Council's plans even had they acted unlawfully, so she declined to make any findings, for example, as to whether the site constituted open space, in legal terms, or whether the lack of public consultation because of defective advertising might vitiate the eventual decision. Because the Council has committed to following the correct procedure with regard to appropriating the site before the lease is finally signed, they should be permitted to continue with their proposals. She also held the view that it was not the role of the court to challenge, or police, public authorities' administration.

 

It seems to us that Judicial Review is there precisely for the purpose of challenging unlawful, overbearing behaviour by local authorities, particularly when they make decisions about publicly owned assets without consulting the public in advance of doing so. We naturally wish to appeal this decision because it gives licence to the Council to continue making unlawful decisions and then to correct them retrospectively if and when someone is brave, or rash, enough to challenge them. This is the 20th (or perhaps the 21st) legal challenge to the Council's decision-making since the Silver Hill debacle in 2015.

 

Our primary purpose is to prevent the loss of recreational green space and the precedent that its sale sets for the rest of the area which lies so close to the Winnall Moors Nature Reserve. This is a precious piece of recreational land, in the centre of our small, historic City, and it provides access to the countryside beyond through a network of public footpaths.

 

The site is bounded on three sides by the river ltchen's clear, chalk streams, and it is at a pivotal point in the formation of the flood plain which underlies the whole of the lower part of the City of Winchester. An Environment Agency report in 2013, commissioned by the Council, says that 'The land mostly lies in a zone (3A) where floods are highly probable, and it is upstream of the city and the Cathedral'. It also says that 'a new design that increased the existing building footprint or the impermeable area within the floodplain would not be appropriate in this location', also, 'replacing the existing leisure centre buildings with open space might have a beneficial effect on downstream flood risk'.

 

The Recreation Ground, of which the site forms a significant part, lies in the City Ward of St Bartholomew. When the political boundaries changed in 2016 to bring Winnall into the Ward, it meant that there was a shortfall of open space for public recreation. We say that this supports our view that the Council cannot allow this open space, where people can play, exercise and enjoy their leisure time, to be handed over for development.

 

It is with heavy hearts, therefore, that we have issued a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal. The Council clearly intends to pursue their opposition to our challenge, as does the University of Southampton.

 

We have asked the Court of Appeal to list our matter after the hearing of a parallel case on similar grounds in the Supreme Court, which is due to take place on 7th December 2022.