Hamilton Mayor Andrew King said he won't challenge the Environment Court's decision.

A failed legal bid by Hamilton Mayor Andrew King against his own council's district plan cost city ratepayers $500,000.

A judgment by Environment Court Judge Melanie Harland released this week dismissed an appeal lodged by the A & A King Family Trust.

King, through the family trust, lodged two appeals against the new district plan, one of which was settled out of court.

CHRISTEL YARDLEY/FAIRFAX NZ Hamilton City Council chief executive Richard Briggs said staff had yet to make a recommendation on whether to pursue legal costs against King's family trust.

The second appeal asked for a change to planning provisions for a prominent site in Frankton to allow for a range of uses, including retail and office development.

The site, on the corner of Killarney Road and Greenwood Street, is zoned industrial, meaning retail and office uses are not provided for.

King's appeal was the final outstanding appeal against the district plan.

More than 40 appeals were originally filed against the plan, but later settled.

King said he respected the court's judgment and would not appeal the decision.

He was disappointed the city had incurred substantial legal costs but believed his appeal had merit.

"I would have preferred not to have gone down this route but that was the legal framework that we had to deal with."

A key plank of King's successful mayoral campaign was the need to cut council red tape.

King said he intended to deliver on his election promise.

"I just want to introduce some common sense back into the system and have it so staff are encouraged to make a call without getting into trouble," he said.

"I believe the development community, and those affected by the development community, want certainty around these things and at the moment I don't believe there is certainty there."

Property Council Waikato branch president Thomas Gibbons did not respond to media requests for comment.

King didn't know how much his legal challenge had cost him, saying he made a conscious decision not to add up the costs.

He said he would not have lodged the appeal as mayor.

The appeal cost ratepayers $500,000 which went toward economic and transport analysis, legal advice and staff time.

Judge Harland's 60-page decision does not encourage the council to pursue costs.

The council has 10 working days from the date of the decision to file an application.

City council chief executive Richard Briggs has asked for a legal interpretation of the judge's decision.

Council staff had yet to make a recommendation on whether costs should be pursued, Briggs said.

Elected members will debate the issue on November 30 at an open-door meeting.

Reviewing the district plan has taken six years and cost ratepayers $6.5 million.

The district plan is considered one of the city's key documents.

Its overall aim is to manage growth, creating an increasingly compact city.

Briggs said staff had carried out the plan review in a professional manner.

Councillor Geoff Taylor said King's appeal against the district plan was an issue that came from the previous council term.

He intended to read Judge Harland's decision and the council staff report before forming an opinion on whether council should pursue costs.

Councillor Rob Pascoe sat on a council working group last term which looked at all appeals against the district plan.

Pascoe described the judge's comment that she did not encourage any application for costs as "curious".

Those parties that lodged appeals against the district plan had lots of opportunities to settle via negotiation or mediation, he said.

"I have a mind that there should be at least an offer from Mayor King or at least a memorandum going back to the judge seeking cost," Pascoe said.

Councillor Leo Tooman​ said the council had to consider whether any application for costs would be successful.

​"At the end of the day the Judge will make the final decision on whether to award costs, but the council has to consider how likely it is an application will be awarded," he said.

Councillor Philip Yeung​ declined to comment on the matter.