Hand in glove

Hallelujah! The long-awaited consultation on the sale/lease of public land to property developers Squarepeg has finally begun. And when some poor PhD student decides to write the history of dishonest and sham 'community consultation' excercises, I am sure it will be top of their list of case studies.

A casual reader of the consultation website might think that this excercise was being carried out by Bristol City Council themselves. After all, we are talking about the fate of the Bristol-Bath Railway Path, which the website claims is 'an outstanding urban escape route' (whatever that may be). OK, so they did try to turn it into a bus lane not so long ago, but we're a Cycling City now, doncha know? So you'd be forgiven for thinking that listening to local views would be something they'd want to do themselves, having cocked it up so spectacularly less than a year ago.

Er...no. The eagle-eyed, prepared to click through to a PDF file and scan the small print, will notice that the consultation is in fact being run by PPS. Sounds pretty innocous? The investigative blogger's friend reveals that they are in fact, drumroll, 'the UK's... foremost supplier of lobbying, communications and consultation advice to the property industry'. Oh.

Satisfied clients include Barratt Homes, George Wimpey, and Persimmon Homes. And no wonder. As PPS's website astutely notes:

Pre-application consultation on major schemes is fast becoming a fact of life for all involved in development...[We] have enormous experience of how to make the provisions of the 2004 Planning Act work for you. Get it right and you can bring the community with you. Get it wrong and you will face heightened local concerns.

So, you may ask, how exactly can legislation be 'made to work' for multi-million pound developers? What exactly does 'getting a consultation right' involve? The Bristol-Bath Railway Path consultation isn't a bad place for a masterclass.

1. Create the appearance of democratic legitimacy by giving the impression that the consultation is being run by a public body.

2. Prejudge the issue by praising the development as 'much needed' and listing its many virtues.

3. Include pictures of the derelict factory site rather than the historic hedgerow that the development will destroy.

4. Base the consultation around spurious, quasi-rhetorical questions such as:

• Do you believe the area should remain as it is, or receive further investment?
• Is regeneration important for Easton?
• Do you believe development can co-exist alongside green spaces?
• What would you like to see happen to the two plots of land?

It is important that you ignore the fact that it is perfectly possible to answer yes to the first three and still be against the development in its present form. The object of the exercise is to blackmail residents of a deprived area into giving up scarce green space for private profit.

5. Pretend that green space in Frome Vale is relevant to residents of Easton and Lawrence Hill.

6. Ensure that the consultation period falls over Christmas and New Year, effectively giving interested parties only three weeks to respond.

This consultation is biased beyond belief in favour of the developers. Pinch yourself and remember that it's being run on behalf of the council. And we're paying for it.

A nod and a wink

An interesting comment by Gary Hopkins over on Charlie's blog on what we all seem to be calling "Red Trouser Gate":

"I unlike the blogger or some others am not shocked that a developer,of whatever shade of green or none, should do his best to secure the best deal for his development.
It happens all the time and I would be suprised if any developer were not trying to lobby.It is the council officers job to act in line with council policy and in the interests of Bristol residents.
Three things though are being suggested
1 That council policy has not been followed.There is genuine concern here and whilst it has been common practice for many years at Bristol CC.it is not acceptable and it does undermine political accountability.It has been confirmed that the piece of land was part of the green space strategy and I have confirmation that no exceptions were written in to the plan. (This was in answer to queeries about Filwood park)
2 That the action is not in the interests of residents.The point of loss of accountability is that it becomes almost impossible to test this.
3 Something illegal has occured. I have seen no evidence of this but would support openness as a matter of principle.Getting basic information out of this administration is a real problem ,even for a determined questioner like myself, and a secretive administration will inevitably become a bad one even if it does not start that way."

So it seems Hopkins, former Cabinet member for sustainable environment and neighbourhoods, sees nothing wrong with developers energetically lobbying council officers.

But what is abundantly clear from the FoI emails is the power imbalance between middle-ranking council officers, feverishly pinging emails around the Council House as they try to negotiate the procedural labyrinth, and exuberant local bigwigs who are able to breeze in between trips abroad and charm the (hopefully metaphorical) pants off off-the-pay-scale council executives over cafe ristretto at Goldbrick House.

(Please note: the preceding scenario is a mere figment of Greengage's fevered imagination and any resemblance to actual events or personages is entirely accidental.)

Council policy is never going to be followed under these conditions, and the idea of any kind of genuine accountability to the people of Bristol is a complete joke.

No but no but yes but....

Great story over at the Bristol Blogger about the council's secret sell-off of bits of the railway path to property developers Squarepeg. The Freedom of Information documents are an object lesson for would-be property moguls. Want to get your mitts on some public land? If at first you don't succeed, try, try, and try again.

Knocked back once? Put in another request. Still foiled by pesky council officers wanting to protect an important wildlife site/keep their options open for BRT (delete as applicable)? Nil desperandum! Get a self-important red-trousered architect to go right to the top, then get your laywers to inform said hapless bureaucrats that the sale is in fact going ahead.

Sorted.

Hedge fund

There is a nice explanation of the threatened piece of railway path and why it matters here:

http://thestoryofahedge.blogspot.com/

Squarepeg in a round hole

According to the 'Transportation Assessment' submitted with Squarepeg's Chocolate Factory application, the site is 'a unique opportunity to [sic] a development that is highly sustainable in transport terms'.

In fact, Greenbank is something far from 'unique' in Bristol: a transport black hole.

Yes, the cycle path runs past the site, but many people won't use it after dark, ruling it out for winter commutes.

Local buses are poor, and Stapleton Road train station is a bracing 10-15 minutes away. To describe the Severn Beach Line trains as 'frequent' (as the 'Transportation Assessment' does) is being somewhat frugal with the truth.

Faced with these options, most people are going to drive, making a bad local traffic situation worse. Royate Hill is prone to horrible snarl ups and the M32 clogged with commuters and Ikea shoppers.

Is it too much to ask for an honest assessment, rather than the usual meaningless hype about 'unique opportunities' and 'sustainability'?

There are good arguments for developing the chocolate factory site, but Squarepeg's 'greener than thou' bullshit makes me long to hand it over to crazed Easton hippies for intensive lentil farming.

For what it's worth, I'd like to see a development which leaves the railway path well alone, is as close to carbon neutral as possible, rewards car-free living, and provides larger properties for families and flat-sharers, not sterile one-bed bolt holes.

But given this is Bristol, not Freiburg or Rotterdam, that probably ain't going to happen.

Ain't nothing going on but the rent

[Shuffles back in, looking embarrassed.]

Luckily for the state of the nation, some bloggers have actually got the hang of this regular posting lark. Chris Hutt on the Green Bristol Blog in particular has turned up some very interesting information on the Squarepeg plans for the Elizabeth Shaw Factory, including the fact that what planners designated a wildlife reserve in 2000 is now likely to be built on without so much as even an Environmental Impact Assessment.

But hark! Here's local MP Kerry McCarthy, to defend the plans: apparently Squarepeg are the thinking woman's solution to the housing crisis:

"how else would you suggest we find space for homes for the 19,000 people on the council waiting list? Obviously brownfield sites must be the priority, but it's not the entire solution. I'm also concerned about the number of houses being turned into flats, with associated problems re parking, and often anti-social behaviour from the people who rent them. We need family homes - but they've got to be built somewhere."

Kerry, Kerry, Kerry. Where to start? Have you discussed your plans to fill the development with council tenants with George Ferguson? And why the assumption that the development is going to provide 'family homes'? (An assumption which I suspect is shared by many of the development's supporters in Greenbank.) For all the prominence of the 'cycle homes' in Squarepeg's charm offensive, of the 252 planned dwellings, only 52 will have three or more bedrooms - as against 122 one-bed and 78 two-bed flats.

Let's be absolutely clear - almost 80% of the housing in this development will be nasty investment properties of the kind that have "created a buy-to-let desert and a huge waiting list for family housing in the city" (the Bristol Blogger on the same thread).

More rib-tickling creativity with the truth is to be found in the planning application's Transportation Assessment, of which more anon.

Gary Hopkins, England Manager

Things are hotting up on the Bristol-Bath railway path.

The petition is now heading for 7000 signatures.

The Evening Post, until now an enthusiastic supporter of the crackpot BRT plans, is apparently preparing a"major feature" about wildlife on the path. You can email j.hunter@bepp.co.uk with your tales of newts, bats and frogs. Could this be a start of a u-turn?

There are also signs of growing cross-party opposition.

Paul "Mr Bean" Smith has come good on his promise to oppose the plans, although Bristol East MP Kerry McCarthy seems to be mainting her silence on the issue.

Meanwhile, we are promised that a LibDem statement on the issue is imminent. While we await this, I'd like to invite readers to reflect on another uncanny similarity.

Could Bristol's former waste supremo and the hapless England manager have been separated at birth? I think we should be told.

Railway path meeting - change of venue

Bristol Cycling Campaign's public meeting about the Railway Path will now take place in Easton Community Centre, not the Cornubia as previously advertised. Same day, same time: February 5, 7.30pm.

BRT: Bus Rapid Transit? Or Bristol's Rubbish Transport?

My fellow footsoldiers in Bristol East Green Party have been wading through the plans to transform the Bristol-Bath railway path into a bus superhighway and have come up with some searching questions for Mark Bradshaw and his merry band of unelected fools.

It seems extraordinary that in months of under-the-boardroom-table scheming, the question of where and how pedestrians might cross the bus route has not even been considered.

Interestingly enough, it seems Bristol Labour Party may not be lining up behind Mark Bradshaw to support this one. Paul Smith, Labour candidate for Bristol West, has come out against it over at the Bristol Blogger. (I am working on the assumption that no-one is sad enough to go round the Internet impersonating Paul Smith.)

The Mr. Bean lookalike is the only mainstream politician to stick his head about the parapet so far. Local residents won't be expecting a statement any time soon from absentee Labour councillor for Easton, Hotwells resident Faruk Choudhury, who might struggle to find the railway path (or his own ward) on a map. And so far, there's been a resounding silence from the Lib Dem councillors for Easton, Lawrence Hill, and Eastville.

Luckily, thanks to the efforts of the Bristol Cycling Campaign, popular resistance to this idiotic scheme is snowballing. (See the Green Party's statement here.) Over 3200 signatures in less than a week is quite something. At this rate, they won't even need a consultation.