GLD Vacancies

Council facing second legal challenge over permission for 62-dwelling development on former zoo car park

Bristol City Council has received a second judicial review threat over plans to build a 62-dwelling development on a former car par park owned by Bristol Zoo.

The Clifton & Hotwells Improvement Society (CHIS) first threatened a judicial review of the council in the summer of last year over planning approval for a 62-home development on the same plot of land.

CHIS has now issued proceedings with the courts in a new legal challenge.

The housing development was first stalled in June 2022 after the CHIS issued a pre-action protocol letter to the council threatening a judicial review over its decision to grant planning permission.

The letter claimed the local authority based its decision on a flawed planning officer's report.

In light of the legal challenge, the council sought a quashing order for the planning permission from the High Court.

The ensuing court order confirmed that the decision was taken on the basis of recommendations in an officer's report, which had failed properly to consider the level of heritage harm, failed properly to weigh up harm and public benefit, and which had not set out a clear and convincing justification for the heritage harm under the National Planning Policy Framework.

The council has since granted approval to a slightly modified scheme, which has now become the target of a second legal challenge by CHIS.

CHIS has not revealed the grounds it is pursuing but reported that it alleges the granting of approval was unlawful on at least four grounds.

It lodged papers with the courts on 31 January. The council is contesting the claim.

CHIS was founded in 1968 and aims to improve amenities, preserve the “best features”, and maintain the quality of life in Bristol’s BS8 postcode, which covers Hotwells, North Clifton, Cliftonwood, the west of Whiteladies Road and Clifton Village.

A spokesperson for Bristol City Council said: "We can confirm that the council has received a pre-action letter and it is taking legal advice on its response."

Adam Carey