AN attempt to force Middlesbrough Council to reconsider plans to build five “high quality” office buildings close to Centre Square has been rejected.

The council is working with developer Ashall Projects to deliver the “grade A” office space, which the authority expects to deliver 1,500 to 2,000 jobs.

But on Tuesday, Conservative and independent councillors “called in” the development to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee amid claims that councillors had voted to approve the scheme without being told it had been declared not viable by independent commercial development experts.

The Conservative councillor for Coulby Newham, Jacob Young, said he had brought the project before the committee, not because he disagreed with it in principle, but because he said: “The decision making process was flawed.”

He said independent commercial development consultants, Bilfinger GVA, had told the council, in a report commissioned in 2016, that the amount of rent required to cover costs and make the project viable was “over and above current market levels”.

Cllr Young said the report went on to say there was a “shortfall in rent return achievable in the open market”, the cost of which would need to be covered by Middlesbrough Council and that he was concerned “officers had knowledge of the advice and didn’t pass it on to decision makers”.

He added that the independent report had concluded that the scheme was “un-viable”.

He said: “Whether or not you agree with the scheme taken, do you think decision makers were in receipt of the full facts?”

Sam Gilmore, an officer from the council’s regeneration department, said that subsequent reports gave different advice to the Bilfinger GVA report.

Cllr Nicky Walker said: “This is not a risk-free project. We have to look at the risk of doing something against the risk of not doing something.” She added that decision makers had been aware of the risks when they approved the plans.

Not a single councillor voted to send the decision back to cabinet.

In the second call-in, Nunthorpe’s independent councillor, Jon Rathmell, raised concerns over “process and governance failings” and “project viability”.

Again the unanimous decision was against sending the decision back.