A CAMPAIGNER who has fought for five years against development on recreation land will today make a last-ditch plea to councillors.
Jim Haggett, of South View, Ushaw Moor, and other residents have fought - so far in vain - to prevent homes being built on land near Broom Lane.
He has made a second application for the site to be declared a village green - the first application was rejected - even though a company has already started building.
The builder is Durham Villages Regeneration Ltd, jointly owned Durham County Council and Keepmoat PLC.
Today, Durham County Council's licensing, registration and general purposes committee will be recommended to reject the Mr Hagget's application.
But Mr Haggett says he will urge the committee to defer a decision until a possible appeal over another case, which could have a bearing on his bid, has been heard.
Mr Haggett, 62, said: "There was a ruling in a case in Oxford that, if the owner of land puts a fence around a site before it is registered, there is nothing anybody can do.
"The Open Spaces Society has been given leave to petition the House of Lords on that ruling and there could be an appeal. I'm going to ask the council to wait before making a decision on Ushaw Moor until the Oxford issue is resolved."
Mr Haggett and other residents, backed by the Open Spaces Society and the City of Durham Trust, opposed the loss of recreation land for development, but the scheme for more than 140 homes won planning permission.
The inspector who chaired a public enquiry into Durham City's Local Plan concluded the development should not proceed as it was not needed.
A report to councillors by county council deputy chief executive Andrew North says the application is opposed by Durham Villages Regeneration Ltd.
He said that a barrister's opinion is that the decision in the Oxford case means that Mr Haggett's application "must fail''.
He said it could be "some considerable time" before the House of Lords hears the Oxford case and that "it would be unreasonable in the circumstances of this application to delay making a decision" .
He recommended that the application for a delay in building be rejected.
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 The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.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 hereComments are closed on this article