Ombudsman's Provisional View letter

Earlier this year a schedule of 44 complaints, and other associated documentation, was sent to Bristol City Council for their consideration. The complaints schedule, compiled from comments made by a large number of local residents, spanned many issues including failure to follow procedures, planning guidelines and codes of conduct when considering the Memorial Stadium Redevelopment planning application. Complaints concerning the management and conduct of the Development Control Meeting of the 17th January was also included in the schedule.

The Council responded to the 44 Complaints during April and May this year, and the only concession to the complaints was as follows:

"Whilst I can agree that there are always things that could be done better, and undoubtedly lessons to be learned from this process, I do not accept there is anything flawed in the process that would undermine the validity of the decision, or suggests that the decision taken on 17th January needs to be rescinded."

HorfieldROSE found the Councils' response to the 44 complaints to be totally unacceptable. If the Stadium Redevelopment takes place many residents lives around the stadium will be blighted due to the Council turning a blind eye to many aspects of the proposed stadium, such as the perimeter road, student accommodation, the size of the building, etc. It is not really necessary to repeat here what all residents of Bishopston and Horfield know is wrong with the proposed stadium, especially the potential for traffic chaos and increased pollution!

We therefore resolved to send more associated documentary evidence to support our case to the Ombudsman's Office.

The Ombudsman's Investigator has been in close contact with our group over the past few months and we have supplied further details as required, BUT, the investigators provisional view has concluded that we have not (as yet) convinced him Bristol City Council has failed to administer the planning application correctly in regard to planning law and planning procedures. Nor did we convince him that the planning meeting of the 17th January did not reach a decision in a quasi-judicial manner.

However, the Investigator has stressed that the letter outlines his provisional view and we can respond with further evidence in support of our complaint - and rest assured, we intend to.

HorfieldROSE understands that over 30 people sent letters of complaint to the Ombudsman's office and we would recommend, if you have any more meaningful evidence to add to your original letter, then please do so by letter, though we would stress that repeating information you have already sent is not necessary as we believe the Ombudsman's investigator is fully acquainted with all aspects of the complaint.

Please email the HorfieldROSE website if you have any further questions on this.

The campaign against the stadium redevelopment, and the associated adverse impacts on the community, is continuing.