WHEN it opened in 2003, the Reynolds arena spelled happiness for many supporters who dreamed of Premiership football for their third division heroes.

But the dream became a nightmare for members of the Neasham Road Action Group as Darlington Borough Council failed to enforce planning conditions to make their life bearable on match days.

However, spokeswoman Jan Mazurk is now claiming victory for the 2,000-plus locals who feel the "excellent and historic" ombudsman's report has fully vindicated them.

But she said it was a pity that the council had to be instructed to consult and involve local people.

"The leadership of Darlington Council keeps trumpeting about how quality of life for residents is one of their prime aims," she said. "For the future, they should stop bleating about hindsight and use a little foresight."

"This is a victory for the 2,000 people who were unable to get the council to consult with them in the first place. And then, when planning conditions were constantly flouted and ignored, still would not listen to us."

She said it was now time that the leadership stopped directing planning decisions. "The bigger the development the more likely our council will agree to it," she added.

"It has a reputation of ignoring massive opposition to developments. We must have the council that likes to say Yes to everyone - except residents, council tax payers and those whose quality of life is affected."

Mrs Mazurk said the stadium and highway works were still incomplete, with the council's promises to protect the environment and residents' interests indicating that their words were, and continued to be, worthless.

"The stadium will not go away. If the council can't uphold planning conditions for a stadium that has an average attendance of 4-5,000, what chance is there that they will ever be in control of planning and policing a stadium that has a 25,000 capacity, should that number ever be reached?

"Many people in this town must feel that having got the planning details of the stadium so wrong, what chance is there for the recent decisions they have made on the town's other major landmark, High Row?" she asked.

Council leader, John Williams, told the D&S Times that the authority accepted the ombudsman's findings, but argued that serving an injunction to prevent the opening of the stadium would have resulted in the closure of Darlington Football Club.

Questioned on whether he felt the residents were let down by the authority in this instance, he replied: "The council did all that it could to protect the interests of the residents, other than take action which would have resulted in the closure of the club."

He felt residents could have every confidence in the council's decision-making in future. "In the past 25 years there has only been one other occasion when an ombudsman's ruling against the council has been maladministration, and during that time more than 20,000 planning applications have been processed," he said. "That record would stand in comparison with any local authority in the country."

The D&S Times asked Coun Williams whether he planned to resign, but gained no response.

The council has agreed to pay one complainant £200 in compensation for her time and trouble in pursuing the concerns about licensing matters. The ombudsman recommended that the second complainant receive the same amount.

In addition, both ought to receive an extra £250 in recognition of the time and trouble taken in pursuing their complaints about planning consents and enforcement action.

However, Mrs Mazurk said money was never the issue. "The stress this has caused local people, not just in their fight to get the council to listen and consult with them, but the after effects such as drunks leaving the stadium at night, cannot be compensated for by money," she said