Land Disposal will be Cabinet Decision

Over on the Bristol Blogger web-site, in reference to the disposal of council-owned land at Ashton Gate, Cllr Gary Hopkins has stated that "Any decisions on this sort of issue will be taken in open cabinet and this has already been confirmed in writing"

I suspect he may be referring, in part, to an email sent by Cllr Barbara Janke to myself and copied to the rest of the cabinet members (including Cllr Hopkins of course) which included the following statement of mine, and agreed with by Cllr Janke;

" if, as a result of the entirely separate planning process regarding the proposal for a food store at Ashton Gate, there arises the need to consider the future of the council-owned land included in that development, that the decision on this land will be taken at Cabinet level and will not be delegated down to officer level"

The email above followed on from a discussion that Cllr Janke and myself had following an event hosted by the Bristol Civic Society on Thursday 8th October.

That conversation itself followed on from the full council meeting of 15th September, where Cllr Simon Cook, in response to a question from a member of the public, provided a written statement that;

"BCFC have been in discussion with BCC officers around the possible acquisition of the freehold of land owned by BCC. These discussions are on-going and a report will be taken to Cabinet when negotiations are complete and the planning applications determined. This is likely to be in the next few months."

In that same meeting, in response to my own question;
"Has a valuation been placed upon this land by Bristol City Council in the event of it being sold for redevelopment?"

Cllr Cook provided the following written response;
"No value has been placed on this land at present as this is dependent upon any successful planning application for a change of use"

So, to summarise, BCFC have been in negotiations with BCC about acquiring the freehold of the council-owned land, but the value of the land is dependent upon any successful planning application. In addition, the decision regarding any potential land disposal will not be delegated down to officer level, but will be taken in open cabinet, sometime in the next few months but after planning permission has been determined.

If anybody thinks that I have misrepresented the statements of Cllrs Janke, Cook and Hopkins, please feel free to let me know by adding a comment below. I am also emailing the councillors concerned so that they can correct any errors on my part.

More Questions than Answers

Questions put forward for Wednesday's (1st October) Cabinet Meeting of Bristol City Council:



Question for the Executive Member with responsibility for land disposals (Cllr Simon Cook)

In response to my question to full council on the 15th September detailed below;

"Q4 Does Bristol City Council intend to consult directly with local residents regarding the future use of this land prior to the 5th November when planning application 09/03208/P is scheduled to be determined?" You replied;

"A4 It is not intended to hold a public consultation on the future of this land. There has been considerable discussion and consultation over the development as a whole where individuals have had many opportunities to express their views."


My question for cabinet is as follows;

Does the executive member not accept that until the publication of the responses to public questions for the full council meeting of the 15th September, there had been no official announcement or acknowledgement by the City Council that it was, in fact, the owner of a significant portion of the land which planning application 09/03208/P refers to, and does he not further accept that individuals may have responded differently to consultations or offered alternative viewpoints in discussions regarding the proposed development if they were aware that a vital and necessary portion of the land was and is in public ownership as opposed to being in the private ownership of the developers themselves?

If the executive member believes that there has been an official announcement or acknowledgement by the City Council of its ownership of this land, could he detail the methods used to make this information public knowledge?





The answer I received at the cabinet meeting was;


Planning applications are frequently made for sites where the applicant for planning consent is not the owner. The ownership of the site is not a determining factor in relation to the planning process, and the fact that an applicant does not own the site would not be something that would prevent the Local Planning Authority from making a decision about the application. Equally if representations were made about the applicant's lack of ownership to the LPA, this would not be something that it would have to take into account in deciding whether or not to grant consent. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the necessary legal interests to let it implement the consent.


As a consequence of this there was no requirement or need for the Council to make any form of announcement or disclosure of its ownership of part of the existing car park - although the ownership is a matter of public record at the Land Registry where full details of the Council's ownership can be found by searching the public register.

So in effect, in response to my questions about whether the Council has adequately consulted with local residents on the future of council owned land at Ashton Gate the answer is;

1) We don't need to,

2) and anyway, the details of public ownership 'were on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard" ' and if you, as a private individual, are not prepared to take the time to perform a Land Registry search for every single planning application on the off-chance that public land might be involved, I fail to see why you should expect us, elected public representatives of the local authority responsible for protecting the interests of local residents, to make that easier for you by actually telling you when public land is involved.

3) as to whether Cllr Cook does or does not accept that people might have responded differently to the "many opportunities to express their views" if they were aware of the public ownership of the land - we still don't know because he chose not to answer that question.

Supplementary Questions: The Lord Mayor’s Cut

FAMOUS QUOTATIONS
"We believe local people know what is best for their needs and that better decisions will be taken with better services as a result."
Cllr Barbara Janke, Leader of Bristol City Council, 8th September 2009

“It is not intended to hold a public consultation on the future of this land”
Cllr Simon Cook, Deputy Leader, 15th September 2009

“You don’t know what you’re doing!”
Football fans everywhere and Bristolians especially

Below, once again, are my questions for the full council meeting of the 15th September. As the next full council meeting is not until the 10th November, AFTER the planning application is scheduled to be determined, I have now included the written answers that were provided, and the supplementary questions I would have asked of Cllr S Cook (who replaced Cllr J Rogers due to matters of individual portfolio responsibility), if I had been allowed to do so. I have emailed both Cllrs Cook and Rogers with a copy of this blog post, and they are welcome, in the spirit of openness and transparency, to respond to my supplementary questions. I am quite happy for either to respond –as the decision to proceed with any land sale will be the collective responsibility of the cabinet.



PQ4 MR T DYER TO ASK COUNCILLOR S COOK, DEPUTY LEADER AND CABINET MEMBER FOR CULTURE, SPORT, AND CAPITAL PROJECTS

PROPOSED ASHTON GATE DEVELOPMENT

In the planning application 09/03208/P for a food store at Ashton Gate, Bristol City Council are identified as holding the freehold title of part of the land proposed to be redeveloped; namely the car park between the stadium itself and Winterstoke Road - without this Council owned land the proposed retail development would appear to be unviable.


Q1 Can you confirm that this land is currently in council ownership?

A1 The council does own the car park as identified. It is let to BCFC on a 125 year lease whch commenced in 1985.

S1 Can you confirm that this lease restricts BCFC’s use of the land to car and coach parking only?



Q2 Has a valuation been placed upon this land by Bristol City Council in the event of it being sold for redevelopment?

A2 No valuation has been placed on this land at present as this is dependent upon any successful planning application for a change of use.

S2a You appear to be suggesting that Bristol City Council can only place a valuation on land when it has been the object of a successful planning application – can you clarify this, as it appears to call in to question, for example, the statement made by your colleague Cllr Hopkins to cabinet on the 30 July 2009 that the disposal of some 9.3 hectares of surplus allotment land would raise approximately £6 million despite a lack of any successful planning applications for the land concerned?

S2b If the perceived suggestion is incorrect, what is the current valuation of the land?




Q3 Will the valuation of the site be significantly greater with planning permission for a supermarket than for alternative uses, (e.g. housing and leisure)?

A3 Actual valuations will be dependent upon the particular design solutions, however, it would be anticipated that a planning approval for a supermarket would be at the higher end of any valuations.

S3 Given that the applicants have, in their planning application, described the proposals for Ashton Gate as “enabling development” whereby a development that may offer significant “disbenefits” is approved because it will provide greater “benefits” by enabling the development of another asset or piece of land, and given that this type of development is reliant upon the financial outputs from the enabling development being robust, does not the vagueness of the member’s responses regarding financial valuations, coupled with the admittance elsewhere that the value of the public land will not be calculated until AFTER any successful planning permission has been achieved, completely undermine any ability of the relevant Development Control Committee to determine whether the application will achieve this stated role as enabling development?



Q4 Does Bristol City Council intend to consult directly with local residents regarding the future use of this land prior to the 5th November when planning application 09/03208/P is scheduled to be determined?

A4 It is not intended to hold a public consultation on the future of this land. There has been considerable discussion and consultation over the development as a whole where individuals have had many opportunities to express their views.

S4 Does the executive member not accept that until the publication of the agenda for this meeting, there had been no official announcement or acknowledgement by the City Council that it was, in fact, the owner of a significant portion of the land which the planning application concerned refers to, and does he not further accept that individuals may have responded differently to consultations or offered alternative viewpoints in discussions regarding the proposed development if they were aware that a vital and necessary portion of the land was and is in public ownership as opposed to being in the private ownership of the developers themselves?

NORTH STREET: THE FILM

New film to be shown at BERATE public meeting, St.Francis Church, North Street, 7.30pm.

Bedminster based documentary film maker, Lucy Swingler, has produced a new film that documents the campaign to prevent the building of a Tesco Extra superstore at Ashton Gate Stadium. During the 10 minute film, local residents and shop keepers in North Street, South Bristol, describe the history of the street, their shops and the area, and explain why its such a great community to be part of. They also explain why they don't want the new superstore at the stadium site and what they would like to see there instead.

Lucy, who has worked on a range of historical and factual programmes* says that she was motivated to create the film after talking to shop keepers about their worries over the store. "I use the North Street shops a lot, so I wanted to show the real fear that some have that a store will put their livelihoods at risk and jeopardise the regeneration thats taken place here. I also wanted to capture the central role that North Street now plays in the community."

The film will be shown publicly for the first time at the meeting arranged for tomorrow night at St.Francis's Church on North Street (7.30pm). Local politicians, councillors and members of the city's planning committee, as well as a representative from Bristol City Football Club and local community groups have been invited to come along to discuss the proposed store and see the film.

Chris Uttley, speaking for the campaign said "We hope the film will be viewed as part of our submission to the planning application. Hopefully it demonstrates to the council and others the human face behind the damage that we believe the store will do to our community and why we value what we have now a great deal"


The film is now available to watch or download on YouTube at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyVG3hb-Dpk

The meeting is being held at St.Francis Church on North Street at 7.30pm.
BERATE
Bedminster Residents Against Tesco's Expansion into Ashton Gate
http://www.berate.co.uk/

Shock News; I Agree With The Lib Dems!

Two Press Releases from Bristol City Council caught my eye this week.

The first one, released on Tuesday, announced plans to give Bristolians a bigger say in decisions affecting their local communities. Council leader Barbara Janke is quoted saying “We believe local people know what is best for their needs and that better decisions will be taken with better services as a result."

The second, released the day after, announced that a major new scheme for building council housing in Bristol had been given the green light after receiving funding from the Homes and Community Agency. Mark Wright, Cabinet Member for Housing and Service Improvement; "Despite the property crash we are still very short of affordable housing in Bristol, and these new council houses will, I hope, be the first of many”.

I had to pinch myself, two statements by members of the Liberal Democrat executive that, taken at face value, I find myself in full agreement with – “local people know what is best for their needs” and that we are “short of affordable housing in Bristol”. I have made a note in my diary of the date and time so that I can record it for posterity.

I am sure that the above news will be welcomed by the residents of Southville and Bedminster wards which together make up a Neighbourhood Partnership Network for Greater Bedminster, one of the local community organisations through which local residents will be given the opportunity to have a bigger say in the decisions affecting their own communities.

Similarly, given the length of housing waiting lists, the news that funding is available to build housing that the majority of local residents can actually afford is equally very welcome. The average house price in Bristol is over 7 times the average earnings, approaching 8 times for first-time buyers (A New Housing Strategy for Bristol, Paper 3: Housing Demand and Supply, figs 11 and 12 on page 13). Those most in need in Bristol simply cannot afford the overpriced houses that private developers want to build on the Green Belt.

Of course, in order to build the council houses welcomed by Councillor Wright, it is vital that Bristol City Council makes efficient use of any urban or brown-field sites that it currently owns so that it avoids the pressure to build on Green Belt land – after all, this is the same Liberal Democrat party that promised during the election campaign to “Fight Labour’s Green Belt grab and preserve our green spaces”. In the same context, in order to meet the objectives set by Councillor Janke of involving local people more fully in the local decision-making process, it will be important that the council directly consult local residents on the future use of any council-owned or managed land before they offer it to private developers.

In fact, if the Lib Dems are serious about their promises to involve local people in decisions and to build more council houses whilst protecting the Green Belt and preserving green spaces, they have an opportunity to demonstrate this on Tuesday at the full council meeting.

I have put in a number of questions regarding the future use of the council owned land adjacent to the Ashton Gate stadium, of which the last one is;

d) Does Bristol City Council intend to consult directly with local residents regarding the future use of this land prior to the 5th November when planning application 09/03208/P is scheduled to be determined?

If the Lib Dems want their promises about involving local people to be taken seriously then the only answer to the above has to be Yes. And when this direct consultation takes place, one of the questions asked should be whether, if the land is to be developed, the Council should seek a further slice of the funding from the Homes and Communities Agency to build affordable housing on that land – which at housing densities similar to those for Southville as a whole could provide another 45 affordable houses.

Let’s be blunt – many commenters have been critical of the performance of previous Labour-led council administrations, accusing them of ignoring local communities, making decisions behind closed doors, and “greenwashing” environmental issues. Many of those at the forefront of the criticisms are councillors in the Liberal Democrat party which now has majority control of the City Council. It is time for those same councillors to either deliver on their promises or to be guilty of hypocritically doing the very same things they were so loudly accusing their political opponents of doing less than 12 months ago.

September 15th, 2009 may see another entry go in to my diary for posterity. It is up to the Bristol Liberal Democrats to determine whether it will be for positive reasons or negative ones.

£3.6 million public subsidy for new stadium?

The Bristol Blogger has commented on the fact that a key portion of the land that Bristol City Football Club are proposing for development as a supermarket is actually owned by the City Council.

It is in relation to this piece of land that I have submitted the following questions for the full council meeting scheduled for the 15th September;

In the planning application 09/03208/P for a food store at Ashton Gate, Bristol City Council are identified as holding the freehold title of part of the land proposed to be redeveloped; namely the car park between the stadium itself and Winterstoke Road - without this Council owned land the proposed retail development would appear to be unviable.

a) Can you confirm that this land is currently in council ownership?

b) Has a valuation been placed upon this land by Bristol City Council in the event of it being sold for redevelopment?

c) Will the valuation of the site be significantly greater with planning permission for a supermarket than for alternative uses, (eg housing and leisure)?

d) Does Bristol City Council intend to consult directly with local residents regarding the future use of this land prior to the 5th November when planning application 09/03208/P is scheduled to be determined?

To a certain extent I suspect that I already know that the answers to both a) and c) will be "yes" although I think that the differential involved in c) is not as high as people might suspect, and thus the answer might include all sorts of caveats about market conditions. Then again, it is likely that Dr Jon Rogers will be the executive member answering the questions and he does have a reputation for answering council questions with a straight Yes or No. I would also be amazed if the answer to b) is anything other than yes.

That brings us to d). I am hoping that Jon will respond with a straight Yes to this one as well. So far Bristol City Football Club have employed Trimedia to perform a "public consultation" exercise on their future plans for the Ashton Gate stadium. But many of us have serious concerns about how the response to this was interpreted. There are also concerns that other efforts to demonstrate local opinion have been undermined by the lobbying of those outside the area that will be most affected by the proposed superstore.

There is an opportunity here for the Liberal Democrats if they have the courage to grasp the nettle. An opportunity to demonstrate that, even in this age where trust in the democratic system has been undermined by the actions of so many of our elected representatives, that there still exists the ability for local communities to make their voice heard, and, more importantly, not just heard but responded to. In the face of tremendous pressure from third parties, this first-ever majority Liberal Democrat council can show that it isn't the same as those tired reactionary parties that have had control of this city for so long and that we, as law-abiding residents can, via the democratic process, make a difference to what is happening in our streets, our neighbourhoods, our community.

It is time to take the CON out of Consultation.

Banksy versus Tesco Superstore

Yesterday’s copy of the Bristol Evening Post told us how the recent Banksy vs Bristol Museum exhibition attracted over 300,000 visitors in 12 weeks. It also quotes Kate Davenport, Services Director for Economic and Cultural Development at Bristol City Council as saying that “hotels, restaurants and shops had made about £10,000,000 because of the extra people coming to Bristol for the exhibition”.

Now, I have little faith in council officers who make unsubstantiated claims about the economic effects of specific events on the local economy (e.g Stephen Wray’s £100 million World Cup “benefit”) but, apparently those in charge at the council house appear to believe the figures – which leads us to some interesting thoughts. The figures would appear to imply that the average visitor was willing to spend at least £30 in order to see the Banksy exhibition, and so this might imply a potential ticket price.

There appeared to be no let up in the demand to see the Banksy show – it is quite likely that if the exhibition had been allowed to continue it would have continued to attract large crowds. As well as the 300,000 who queued to see it, another 600,000 viewed a video of the exhibition, and there have been several public comments by people who would have been happy to see the exhibition but did not want to queue for three hours or so – and would have been willing to pay to avoid the loss of their time due to queuing.

What if a large exhibition area could be found for a further run of the exhibition, perhaps with a few new exhibits (a caricature of Brian Sewell must have a chance) in which tickets could be bought, either online or by phone with a timeslot for attendance thus avoiding the queues. If the tickets were sold at £30 each, then 500,000 visitors would generate £15,000,000.

Bristol City FC say that the reason why they need to sell the existing ground to Tesco to fund a new stadium is because there is a £15 million gap between the value of the land as housing and it’s value as retail. But the site’s value as retail is reliant on it obtaining planning permission, which is why Tesco have told City that they will only buy the land if this is achieved beforehand. Colin Sexstone insists that there is no alternative to Tesco but perhaps he needs to talk to a Bristol City fan with greater imagination – someone like Banksy.

1) Bristol City FC have the Dolman Exhibition Hall with a floorspace of 1700 sq m, plus an experienced ticketing office familiar with dealing with massive demand.

2) Banksy has made no secret of his love for Bristol City and, although he insisted on free admission for Banksy versus Bristol Museum, he also held a special "charity night" which charged a £45 entrance fee.

3) Bristol City Council has said that although they would have liked to have continued the Banksy exhibition, other events were booked in preventing an extension of the exhibition.

Combine the three and you have an opportunity to generate the £15 million funding needed for the new stadium whilst also leaving something behind for the local community that does not threaten their community and their local shops. A mixed use proposal that included housing would almost certainly get local community approval AND would place fewer obstacles in the way of planning permission being granted. Even better, Bristol City FC might even discover that the best solution for the existing football stadium is to redevelop it as a new football stadium.