AN escape route has emerged to save 11 open spaces in Bristol from the bulldozer.

But a big question mark still hangs over the future of a further 38 sites in the city council's controversial open spaces strategy.

A working party set up four months ago to carry out a review of the planned sell-off is urging that 11 of the most controversial sites should be referred back to the city's Neighbourhood Partnerships for recommendations about their futures.

It is extremely unlikely that these partnership meetings would do anything other than vote overwhelmingly in support of saving their green spaces if they reflect the outcry which has swept the city over the issue.

But the working party was split over what to do about the remaining 38 less controversial sites.

Two of the members – Labour councillor Ron Stone and Tory councillor Mark Weston – wanted all of the sites to go back to the partnerships.

But Liberal Democrat councillor Gary Hopkins and Green councillor Tess Green thought there had been enough discussion about them and they should therefore be re-confirmed as surplus sites.

The split means that a meeting of the full council next Tuesday will have to make a decision.

But given the political split in the working party, it is highly likely that Labour and Tory councillors will join forces to outvote the ruling Liberal Democrats. The Green Party has only two members.

Whatever decision the full council makes, the issue will still have to be signed off by the ruling Lib Dem cabinet.

It would be foolhardy for the cabinet to go against the wishes of the council because it might trigger a vote of no confidence to oust the Lib Dems from power.

Mr Stone, who chaired the working party, said: "This is an extremely important issue for the city and our aim was to try to bring some resolution before the end of the year.

"We have always regarded the Neighbourhood Partnership element as very important in the final decision-making."

The working party is also recommending a different financial package over any sites which are regarded as surplus.

They want to give local people at Neighbourhood Partnership meetings a choice. They could vote in favour of saving a whole site but they could also agree to sell off a portion of the land, with the money from the sale being ploughed back into their own partnership budget.

Previously, 70 per cent of money from land sales would have been reinvested in open spaces and 30 per cent would go to the council's central funds. But now all of the receipts will go back to open spaces.

Originally, the open spaces strategy would have needed an estimated £107 million to fund improvements in remaining green areas but this figure is now likely to be nearer £43 million.

If the 11 sites are recommended for saving by the Neighbourhood Partnerships, then the expected income from the sale of the 38 would be about £10 million. On top of this, the council could use money from its parks' budget; income from legal deals with developers, linked to planning permission, known as Section 106 agreements; and money from government grants.

In Stockwood, a site in Sturminster Close is on the list of 11 but there are several others in the area which are on the "at risk" list.

Ken Goodwin, from the Friends of Stockwood Open Spaces, said: "We are very unhappy about the report and its recommendations.

"We think that if land sales must go ahead, then they should all be decided by the Neighbourhood Partnerships.

"They should not just send back those which have attracted the most objections."

Rosemarie Rendu Jefferies, one of the residents who successfully campaigned to save Lodge Hill open space in Hillfields, Fishponds, said: "If people don't mind if surplus land is sold off, then fair enough.

"But if they don't want to see it go, then it's crucial they turn up to the Neighbourhood Partnership meetings and make their feelings known.

"The only way to save our green open spaces is to fight for them.

"You can get things done at these Neighbourhood Partnership meetings, but you have got to turn up to make sure the right decision is made."

One of the sites on the list of 11 is Daisy Field, in Shirehampton.

Campaigner Caroline Penny said it was out of the question to build on most of the site because part of it was an old tip – and soil tests showed it was too unstable to hold foundations of buildings. Another part, near the river Avon, was a designated beauty spot.

But she said a short row of houses could be built next to the Portway, which would make the area safer for children.

She said: "The plans would have to be put before the Neighbourhood Partnership and people in Shirehampton would have to be properly consulted, because it would be important to get everything right."

Downend campaigner Tom Thomas, who has been fighting to save Bracey Drive from the bulldozer, said: "This obviously gives us cause for cautious optimism but until the site is declared officially safe, we will continue to campaign to protect it, not just for ourselves but future generations."