Public inquiry will decide Castle Park 'town green' bid
A public inquiry is being planned to rule on a campaign to give town green status to Castle Park.
The ongoing dispute between Bristol City Council, developer Deeley Freed and people opposing the development of the St Mary le Port site at the High Street end of the park will come to a head in December.
-
Plans have been put on hold while the application to grant town green status city centre park is discussed.
No progress on the development will be made until at least the start of 2009, after the week-long public inquiry.
This week the interested parties will have a closed meeting to hear the legal process of the hearing.
Barrister Vivian Chapman QC has been appointed by the city council as independent inspector for the dispute.
After looking at the evidence presented to him so far, the he has recommended a non-statutory public inquiry, which are used for matters of “vital public importance” but where witnesses are not legally bound to give evidence.
Campaigners hope the inquiry will allow them to make a stand against what they call the “essentially money-minded” city council, they say is trying to get the plans through.
The development, unveiled to the public almost two years ago, would see two 1960s office blocks at the corner of High Street and Wine Street demolished to make way for new offices, shops and flats.
Developers also want to landscape some of the existing green space which is enjoyed by people eating their lunch during the summer.
Mary Bannerman, 71, from Redcliffe and spokeswoman for the campaign to save the threatened area of the park, said: “It was a lack of trust in the council's long-term vision for the city centre which prompted the application for registration as a green.
“In spite of the apparent lack of action, things are happening in a slow and legalistic sort of way.”
A spokeswoman for Bristol City Council said: “There's an agreed procedure for the town green status and we will be following that procedure.”
Andrew Maltby, director of Deeley Freed, said: “The town and village green application could fundamentally affect our proposals and we have therefore decided to wait until it is determined before we consult members of the public and stakeholders on our revised plans for St Mary-le-Port.”
18 Comments
View all
by Matt, Totterdown
Wednesday, August 20 2008, 8:36PM
“I have commented many times on Castle Park stories and will cotinue to do so.
I objected to Castle Park becoming a Town Green soley to kick start the much needed (and yes, it is much needed, despite the short sighted views of some greenies!) redevelopment of the most historic area of our city.
Before the war, there were many interesting streets and buildings on the site, and the eyesores currently there do not do it justice. Bristol needs to delvelop this historic area properly - end of.
If this means losing some of the park then so be it - maybe losing a part of the park would force the development of the rest of the park to a more open and family friendly area of properly planned green spaces (and take advantage of the remains of the castle properly).
If I can go to the public enquiry I will - perhaps the supporters of the town green have under estimated the feelings of the majority of Bristolians?”
by Rob, St George
Thursday, August 07 2008, 6:11PM
“Paul,
If what you say is right then the problem is that the current lease holders know they can get more money for their leases if the land is used for part of a larger development and have no doubt been waiting in the hope that it will happen.
The effect of getting Town Green status will be that the current lease holders will have to accept that such a development won't happen. They will then have to either accept a lower buy out price or continue to own buildings which they can't let but have to keep structurally safe.
Any developer will have to negotiate with the Council over contributions to community facilities. If some of this can be used in Castle Park all the better, but it is wrong to suggest that this is the only way that improvements can be funded. Bristol Parks have recently completed schemes at Blaise and Ashton Court with £4.3m and £4.4m of Lottery funding respectively. They are also currently consulting on proposed improvements to Eastville Park which will also be Lottery funded. If the Town Green application succeeds and the threat of development is lifted then there is no reason why the same can't be done at Castle Park.”
by Paul, Brislington
Thursday, August 07 2008, 10:52AM
“Tess. In answer to your question Is it impossible for this to be done without sacrificing a valuable bit of green donated to us by the Luftwaffe? I believe the answer is probably No and their are three reasons for this:
Firstly the majority of the derelict site is covered by two long leases. (Strand Street Properties and Morley Fund Management). These were probably for 999 years which means the license holders still have the right by law to occupy the site for about 950 years. For any development to go ahead the leases must be bought out. A major problem with this site is that they want quite alot of money.
Secondly people have spoken about council's plans to improve the park. The Council has limited resources so trys to secure improvement through new development by insisting that developers contribute to improvements. This is right but again has a big effet of viability. This is the case with Castle Park.
Thirdly, development of the site is going to be complicated to provide appropriate foundations, service access, parking without a detrimental effect on archaeological remains and interesting features such as vaulted ceiling basements below Bridge street.
I'm speculating but if the Council insisted on no improvements to the park and some deal could be done with the long lease holders then maybe the development would be financially viable without using the park.
People keeping saying its about the council making money but this is simply not the case. Its very important that what goes on this site is interesting and the current proposal for effectively an extension of the market area sounds great, but Interesting doesn't generate the greatest development value, so reasons 1,2 and 3 outlined above mean that the developer will simply walk away becasue their is no money in the site. once the costs of building the scheme is off set against what they can sell it for!
The only money the Council will get is for the improvement to Castle Park. I can imagine to actually make this development happen the Council are actually offering the land for free. Hardly the actions of a Council desperate for money. More like the action of a Council keen to make an exciting development happen on this site.
If the development really did need part of the park to make it viable then town green status will leave this dead in the water!”
by Tess, Southville
Monday, August 04 2008, 11:04AM
“As a regular user of Castle Park for over 20 years I am keen to keep the green space there but also to see the derelict buildings either renovated and reused or pulled down. Is it impossible for this to be done without sacrificing a valuable bit of green donated to us by the Luftwaffe? If not why not?The most civilised and appreciated cities seem to incorporate far more green space than Bristol City Council think we need and the developers cannot be expected to protect our long term interests but the council should!”
by Tony, Chipping Sodbury
Monday, August 04 2008, 10:16AM
“Fraser says "the Town Green application does not include the land that is currently occupied by the derelict buildings" but Mary Bannerman, the campaign spokeswoman, has said "an application has been made for Greater Castle Park, defined as the castle area plus all this land to the west of St Peter's between Wine Street and the Floating Harbour up to High Street and including St Mary-le-Port, to be registered as a Town Green." No mention of excluding the derelict buildings there.
So which one is telling the truth?”