Bristol City Cabinet jeered after approving green spaces and parks sale
MORE than 40 parks and green spaces across Bristol will be sold after the city council approved plans, despite ongoing public opposition.
The Liberal Democrat cabinet was repeatedly jeered, interrupted and heckled by the public as members spoke in support of the area green space plan at a meeting last night.
The plan aims to fund improvements to up to 200 Bristol parks by selling off green spaces over a 20-year period.
More than 16,000 people have signed petitions against the sales, arguing their open spaces are the "green lungs" of the city and should not be touched.
Of the 42 public statements submitted to cabinet, only two were in support of the plan – one from a Lib Dem councillor and the other the Bristol Parks Forum – with the rest criticising either individual sales or the whole scheme.
The cabinet unanimously approved a modified version of the plan, which originally included 64 sell-offs.
Nine sites have been saved, including Wellington field, part of St Annes Park, Okebourne Road and Kings Head Park.
Decisions have been deferred on seven more, including Plummer's Hill, Lockleaze Open Space and Downend Farm.
But that leaves 48 that are earmarked for sale, many despite continued public opposition. These include Newbridge Road open space, which had a petition of more than 2,400 people trying to save it.
Calls by the cross-party scrutiny commission to defer the decision were rejected.
Executive member in charge of the scheme Gary Hopkins said: "It's been four to five years on this; people need clarity on what we're doing. We need to get on.
"Let's face it, the financial situation is not getting any easier. Pretending that something will fall down off the money tree and help our parks is just not going to happen."
Mr Hopkins said he expected around £2m to go to each of the city's neighbourhood partnerships, so local people could decide where the money would go for various improvements.
Cabinet members pointed out that despite losing around three per cent of the park land, the council was gaining an extra five per cent, an overall increase.
What they did not explain was that the gains were in just three or four locations – including Stoke Park, Grove Wood and land near Victory Park – compared to more than 40 that are being lost in a wide range of locations across the city, and that the first two gains were happening anyway, regardless of the sell-off plan.
Councillors repeatedly defended the consultation process against claims it has been confusing, poorly executed and has not taken residents' views properly into account.
Thousands of letters and e-mails went astray during the consultation, only to be found at the last minute, and Freedom of Information requests from the public have not been responded to.
Health and care executive councillor Jon Rogers said: "Officers have done a great job.
"We have listened. The consultation has been very valid.
"I'd be surprised if anyone in this city is unaware there is a green space strategy going on."
Members of the public heckled that statement.
Deputy leader Simon Cook said: "It was never going to please everyone, there's always someone who's upset. But I can't understand comments like 'this is a waste of time and money'. If we didn't do this it would condemn our parks for years to come."
Questions still remain over the finances of the scheme.
Many councillors argued that money raised from developers during the planning process, known as section 106 payments, would not be enough to fund the improvements in parks.
But they failed to point out that the drastically reduced amount of money expected to be raised by land sales is actually less than the £15m of section 106 funding the council says is available.
Originally the council said it would raise £41m from land sales, but just last week this was revised to £16m and only £11m of that will be used for investment.
Mr Hopkins has refused to provide a breakdown of how these figures were reached due to "commercial sensitivities".
But the council still has yet to explain why it will not reinvest all of the money raised from land sales in remaining parkland.
Of the eight members of the cabinet, only two represent wards where land is under threat; Dr Rogers (Ashley) and Mr Hopkins (Knowle).
The rest – Barbara Janke (Clifton), Mark Wright (Cabot), Clare Campion-Smith (Henleaze), Anthony Negus (Cotham), Bev Knott (Bishopston) and Mr Cook (Clifton East) – all represent wards that stand to lose nothing as a result of the proposals and only gain.
61 Comments
View all
by steve, bristol
Saturday, December 18 2010, 7:28AM
“come next may please all you sensible voters of bristol DONT VOTE LIB DEM lets show this political party to the dustbin”
by a successful property speculator, in my site allocation
Saturday, December 18 2010, 12:56AM
“I am a property speculator in Knowle, not far from Gary H who comes from Middlesboro. If I was shown a piece of WET ground in the west I would be saying no, sell me the DRY bit, I dont want something wet to build on, it might cause problems with the development. PLUS I need road access. Building land has to be looked at INDIVIDUALLY on its merits, profitablity weighed against cost of wildlife mitigation, materials, highways issues and planning consent has to be easily obtained. These sites, are all varied, some will fail the planning process as they are simply ridiculously difficult to access, raising highway issues, others will cost too much money to develop by the time wildlife mitigation has been taken into account and some fall into both categories. Like I said its just as well Gary Hopkins is not in the building business, half these sites will fall at the first hurdle - Planning. Others that go through will be subject to problems, probably strong opposition from the neighbours so only certain buildings will end up being built there,and then you might get one or two where no problems are found or he finds an organisation big enough to find millions of pounds to build and address all the problems that are presented with most of these sites. There is no money in the building business at the moment and land is plentiful and cheap surveys expensive and builders that are working can take their pick of decent building land without the likes of Gary Hopkins shoving hundreds of parks at us thanks.”
by Chris, Bristol, England
Friday, December 17 2010, 8:41PM
“Councillor Rogers you are Democratic Disgrace
"All Councillors are doing" their best ,so your speaking as if your one big club, your not listening to the Proper People
who care about BRISTOL,(Brycstowe)who know Bristol Born Bred and care like no others
So WHY WONT YOU LISTEN ?
Why are you all so Dictatorial
Lead by Comrades Janke and Cook ! Where's our Democracy ! we have never agreed to all this.
The Mess of Buildings you are proud of is a disgrace to Architecture and Bristol's Historic past
We have had more damage done now ,that what was done 70years ago perfectly good buildings pulled down and replace with Plastic Glass offices mainly to-let
Grim looking Communist style flats,a Mish Mash for a City with the Heritage of Bristol "Shame on you All" especially Gary Hopkins delighting in pulling down perfectly good Edwardian buildings and replacing with cheap style modern eyesores" We want to replace all old for new" he said last night
All Councillors do what they like and listen, not to the People they are suppose to represent,but by their Hierarchy
Things can change and will change
We need a BRISTOL Mayor not a Kremlin Kangaroo court”
by Anon, Posted from my iPhone
Friday, December 17 2010, 7:53PM
“Two kinds of people talk about the "silent majority".
You get the cynical politicians, who know very well that it's nonsense, but reckon people are stupid enough for them to get away with it.
Then you get the true idiots, who really believe that everybody DOES think like them, except for a few troublemakers. This is because the only people they meet are exactly like them.
An hour in any decent pub would disabuse them of their fantasies, but they'd rather sit at home watching the X Factor :(
The Hedgehog, Horfield”
by Bert, Barton Hill
Friday, December 17 2010, 7:53PM
“Just remember these barstewards names when the elections roll around.”
by Dog Walker, Bristol
Friday, December 17 2010, 7:40PM
“@Hedgehog
By all means, Red Panda is more than welcome.... :)
"Curious thing about the silent majority. Thay always agree with the speaker or the writer"
Couldn't agree more. Funny thing about the silent majority is that they care so much about something they don't speak out. Maybe the care so much they are speechless?”
by Laura, Bristol
Friday, December 17 2010, 7:30PM
“In case you don't know the tale of Packers here's a link:
http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Bristol-running-track-goes-ahead-despite-opposition/article-454142-detail/article.html”
by Laura, Bristol
Friday, December 17 2010, 7:22PM
“Bristol CC was boasting in the Estates Gazette five years ago about the millions it was looking to haul in by selling off public land. They've neglected our parks ever since to try and create a justification for all of this. The "consultation" was nothing of the sort, attendees at public meetings had it made very clear to them that the only outcome of the process would be deciding exactly which sites got sold. That is simply not a consultation on the overall policy at all.
I'm certain those people whose local sites were saved were pleased the council "listened", but turning local people against each other to save their own green spaces is no decent way to behave.
We should have learned from the enclosure of and building on Packers Field, and now it is too late.”
by I found it, Fresh from Wiki
Friday, December 17 2010, 7:19PM
“For those of you wondering....
Hopkins is an English, Irish and sometimes Welsh patronymic surname The English and Welsh derivations mean "son of Hob". It derives from the Germanic warrior name Hrod-berht, translated as "renowned-fame".”
by The Hedgehog, Horfield
Friday, December 17 2010, 7:10PM
“Curious thing about the silent majority. Thay always agree with the speaker or the writer.
Pretty well everybody who's expressed an opinion on this (other than Lib Dem councillors and council apparatchiks) has opposed it, but maybe everybody else does support it. I wonder, then, why they remain silent?”