T HERE will be seven fewer green spaces in this area as a result of the plans, with just one saved from development.

Bristol City Council cabinet listened to the 840 people who signed petitions against the loss of King's Head Lane Park and removed that from the for-sale list.

But the 1,000 people who signed petitions against the loss of any sites in Hartcliffe and the 172 people who petitioned against developing Pigeon House stream were less fortunate.

The council has always argued that selling off green spaces is necessary to help invest in scores of other parks across Bristol, after a lack of investment for decades.

During the consultation period residents were asked to fill in questionnaires saying which of their local parks were most important to invest in and which investments in each park they wanted most.

Of the 90 people who returned surveys, St Augustine's Park and Kings Head Lane Park were considered the most important to invest in.

But none of the suggestions for improvement put forward for Kings Head Lane Park received a large amount of support.

The most went to providing appropriate planting to enhance wildlife value.

Two ideas, either "building houses to overlook the southern boundary" and "building a youth shelter near to Kings Head Lane", were not considered important by the majority of respondents.

All of the public responses had names removed when the council published them last month.

One comment read: "Having studied the graphics relating to the planned enhancements I am concerned that not enough consultation has taken place with the residents living next to the park. It would appear that ideas have been cherry picked to present a view favouring these changes."

Another said: "You admit this park has a history of anti-social behaviour and then dream up putting a youth shelter at the KHL end of the park. Over my dead body."

In St Augustine's Park, the idea that received the most support was relocating a new children's play area close to Whitchurch Lane.

One resident said: "We do need a children's play area very badly, also seats and rubbish bins."

But another asked: "Why fix what ain't broke? It would be more sensible to spend the available finance simply tidying and maybe improving the existing play area."

Hawkfield Meadows came bottom of the list of areas that need improving.

Money raised from sales will be added to funding from developers', grants and the parks department budget and then divided between areas in the city.

Residents will be able to have their say on where the money should go at Neighbourhood Partnership meetings and over the next six months a "shopping list" of improvements will be drawn up for each area.

Council spokesman James Easey said: "Following cabinet's decision, those green spaces which will be made available for disposal will now go into the Site Allocations plan, and the usual planning process – this will determine when and if developments occur over the next 20 years.

"But as officers made clear these areas will of course continue to be maintained up until that point."