The company wants the pool it is required to build in its proposed 1352-lot subdivision deemed the town's community pool, thereby securing ratepayer funding.
The council favours building the community pool in the Three Parks subdivision.
Northlake has been highly critical of the document the council is consulting Wanaka residents on, describing it in the High Court at Invercargill on Monday as ''fundamentally misguided and inaccurate''.
The company's attempt to obtain a court order stopping the document going out to the public failed, but Justice Rachel Dunningham said in her judgement Northlake was ''perfectly entitled to engage with the community as part of the consultation process and make its case to the public however it wishes to do so''.
It was also entitled to challenge the council's decision over the pool's location, due to be made before Christmas.
After Monday's court decision, the council released its nine pool options in a consultation document, and Northlake has begun disseminating publicly its view of the options.
On Thursday, lawyer Maree Baker-Galloway provided the Otago Daily Times with figures showing that contrary to the council information the Northlake proposal is cheaper for ratepayers than the Three Parks proposal.
Asked to comment on the differences, council chief executive Adam Feeley said disagreements on the pool options ''only really produce a difference of a dollar here and there'' in terms of rates impact.
Mr Feeley said both the council document and Northlake's information were based on assumptions, so both were ''technically right''.
He considered the first question for Wanaka people to decide was the type of facilities they wanted.
The second question was about the pool's location.
And the third question was how much they were prepared to pay.
Mr Feeley said the current pool was considered adequate but if Wanaka people wanted something of a higher level then they would have to pay for it.
He believed Northlake should be negotiating with the council rather than going to court.
''We are certainly not going to say to Northlake, 'we won't listen to you on an option that is a genuinely viable option'.
''If, in the course of the next few days or a week or two, Northlake puts in front of council a new or a materially different option, then council would certainly have to consider that.''
The document provided by Northlake says it is concerned cost estimates for the Three Parks option had been underestimated and those for Northlake overestimated in the council's consultation document.
It also says Northlake would ''gift'' land to the council for its pool while the cost of land at Three Parks had not been disclosed.
''For ratepayers to understand the impact on their rates of the Three Parks option, the cost of using that land for the Wanaka Community Pool should be included in the assessment.''
Northlake has complained to the Ombudsman about not being provided with the information it wants from the council.
