‘The council should not use its privileged position to get around its own obligations’

With the recent disastrous fire at Underfall Yard fresh in the minds of all of Bristol, it seems unfortunate that a planning decision will be taken on Wednesday to reduce the council’s obligation to plant 55 trees on a site nearby. It now wants to plant only 24.

The title of this planning application by the council completely conceals its intention, but its impact will be keenly felt by the little community living in and around Avon Crescent for years to come.

Originally intended to be a delegated decision taken by a single planning officer, it has now been called in by Hotwells & Harbourside councillor, Patrick McAllister, so it can now be dealt with publicly.

The view in 2012, before dozens of trees were removed to make way for the new metrobus link road – photo: Google

The metrobus route runs between Cumberland Road and Ashton Avenue bridge – photo: Google

The council proposes to:

• abandon the plan to make Avon Crescent a one-way, shared space permanently, to improve pedestrian safety
• reduce the council’s obligation to plant 55 trees, which was supposed to have happened in 2018, following the introduction of the Ashton Vale to Temple Meads metrobus service

Not only is this application emblematic of the serious and repeated tree-planting failures of the whole metrobus project, but it also illustrates problems inherent in the planning process by allowing incremental development years after an original application has been granted.

Since it has been closed to through-traffic, Avon Crescent has become a popular and safe walking and cycling route – photo: Martin Booth

We don’t know whether the original granting of planning permission in 2013 would have been given had the developers said at the outset that they had no intention of planting the trees promised or of making the street safer.

However, it’s clear that the approval, and its later variations, went through a thorough planning process.

In the nearly ten years since then, it seems that nothing has been done to realise the conditions imposed at the time.

Surely, the council should be providing a role model to other developers in Bristol, not using its privileged position to get around its own obligations.

This 2013 Google Earth image shows the area just to the south of Cumberland Road, where it adjoins Avon Crescent.

An aerial view above Avon Crescent in 2013 – photo: Google Earth

There is an extensive area of green open space, including at least six trees growing there:

This green space no longer exists. It was removed sometime between 2015 and early 2017, as this Google Earth image shows:

Building of a new metrobus link road meant the removal of dozens of trees – photo: Google Earth

What we have now is a request by the council to remove conditions designed as reparations for local damage and intended to protect the local community.

In particular, the trees that once grew on the site are long gone and now the developer, our very own council, is saying that these cannot be replaced, whereas their original proposal said that they would be.

This represents a dangerous precedent. Not only does it undermine the whole planning process, but it leaves the local community feeling betrayed because, having thought that their original concerns about the scheme had been addressed, they now find them cast aside.

This sense of betrayal must seem even greater, given the assurances made by the mayor barely two months before this application was issued.

It cannot be a coincidence that the administration plans to develop this area – the so-called Western Harbour.

Perhaps these obligations are no longer convenient to what is being planned.

In light of this, it is hard to understand how the council can possibly say that “it is considered that the proposed removal of condition 4 would not result in any unacceptable impacts upon green infrastructure and would accord with Policy BCS9 by retaining more trees than the extant consent”.

The fact that the applicant is the council only adds insult to injury, given its purported commitment to doubling tree canopy across the city and its recent declarations of climate and ecological emergencies.

Bristol City Council should be exemplary in implementing its own planning policies, as well as applying its own ecological emergency and climate emergency action plans, and pursuing the goals of the One City Plan.

It is only when these “promises” are realised on the ground that they will have any impact. Promises mean nothing unless they are acted on.

This is an opinion piece by Mark Ashdown, chair of Bristol Tree Forum

Read next:

• Road to reopen to cars despite mayor’s promise
• Man arrested following Underfall Yard fire
• Hotwells pub named best in Bristol by CAMRA

Listen to the latest Bristol24/7 Behind the Headlines podcast: