A CAMPAIGN to stop Winchester's controversial Silver Hill scheme has been revitalised after the High Court reversed its decision to block a legal challenge against civic chiefs.

Winchester City Council will now face a judicial review after allowing developer Henderson to propose dropping a bus station and affordable housing from the £165 million regeneration project.

The offensive was launched by city councillor Kim Gottlieb, who says the latest version of the long-touted scheme will ruin the city centre.

The Hampshire Chronicle can also reveal that a second legal challenge against the council is in the pipeline concerning an “improper planning application process”.

Cllr Gottlieb's call for a review was thrown out by the High Court in October but was reinstated in a dramatic U-turn on Tuesday.

Mr Justice Lindblom ruled that there was an “arguable” and "significant" case to be made that the council unlawfully allowed Henderson to propose the changes without putting the project back out to tender, allowing other developers to bid for it.

In August the council allowed Henderson to propose replacing a planned bus station with a large department store and on-street bus interchange.

It also cut the number of homes to be provided from 287 to 177, controversially removing all 100 affordable units which were originally proposed.

The court had previously ruled that the decade-old development agreement allowed for alterations - something the council maintains - but Cllr Gottlieb has now won the right to argue that the changes were “material” and should therefore have constituted a new scheme.

Hampshire Chronicle: Kim Gottlieb by Kings Walk, set for demolition

Cllr Kim Gottlieb

Cllr Gottlieb said: “To say we, the Winchester Deserves Better campaign, are pleased and relieved would be an understatement.

“I feel a little vindicated we've made better progress this time. This is just the next part of a long battle.”

He also told the Hampshire Chronicle that his lawyers have served a letter to the council warning them of a possible second legal challenge against what he called an “improper planning application process”.

A council spokesman said its decision to allow Henderson to propose the changes was “taken in the light of legal advice from external counsel.

“The city council is focused on preparing its case for the next hearing date to defend its decision,” he said.

“The legal arguments on this point do not affect the council's ability to determine the planning applications now before it, and therefore at this stage there are no plans to alter the date on which the council is scheduled to determine these.”

The planning committee will decide on the latest Silver Hill application at a special meeting on December 11.

If approved, the project will lie in wait ahead of the High Court's decision.

After that, the future of the development is unclear.

The judicial review hearing is expected to take place over two days in January 2015. The judge ruled that it should be scheduled as soon as possible to avoid undue delay to justice.

The city council has set aside £100,000 to defend the case.

City council leader Cllr Rob Humby this month accused Cllr Gottlieb of “undermining the democratic process” by challenging the scheme with alternative proposals.

In a written answer to a question at a full council meeting on November 6, he said: “Unlike Cllr Gottlieb I do not see it as my role to undermine the democratic process by promoting alternatives which have yet to be shown to be feasible.”

Cllr Gottlieb hit back at the criticism, saying Cllr Humby “has a very strange sense of democracy”.

The comments were made at his series of open 'conversation days', inviting the public to view CGI images of the scheme, discuss the development and share their views on potential alternatives.

He said the current proposals were “absurd, intellectually lazy and inept. The idea is trying to do something creative and beautiful and attractive. If it takes us six months, if it takes us five years, let's take the time to get it right. Time is not an issue as far as I'm concerned. The only thing that matters is getting it right.”