Skip to content

Ashton Vale Greenbelt is TVG, fact

March 17, 2012

Whatever way you look at it the greenbelt at Ashton Vale has been established as TVG. The £30k Crail enquiry, the Councils hashed-up negotiation, the PROW committee fudge, the landowners grudging agreement of partition. All this blustering over the last year shares one thing in common- there’s an implicit acceptance that TVG is embedded in Ashton Vale meadows.
The question has been not is it TVG? it’s…Yes it is but how much?
But that question has already been addressed.
The green belt at Ashton Vale is either TVG or it’s not, there’s no legal equivalent of ‘sort of TVG kind of’ as far as I know.
And it’s already satisfied the legal requirements of TVG, as the PROW has acknowledged by the fudged attempts to partition it.
So let’s just register it and move on with life eh?
It would be win win all round. The local residents can emerge from their bunkers after years of siege by monster hypermarket and greenbelt destruction and share a nice pint with their neighbours on the other side. Passionate footy fans can get on with supporting their team from relegation and be welcomed as important visitors to the neighbourhood as they have been for generations.
And the directors of the club? I don’t see why a couple of training pitches can’t be put in at Ashton Vale. Then the real task of knuckling down and developing The historic Ashton Gate stadium, the true and only home of BCFC can go ahead with the full support of all around the region.
With Bristol rugby sharing the ground the future is bright, beer swilling rugby fans mingling with the more delicate cider supporters, in a rebuilt stadium in the heart of the community.
Why not? Why wouldn’t you? It makes sense.
And if money is the only issue, I’ll help out with the fundraising.

  1. Paul Bemmy Down permalink
    March 17, 2012 7:46 pm

    Ashton Gate. All those memories I was sharing with a long time season ticket holder last evening, who, I’m amazed to say, is falling out of love with our once great game. Watching John Atyeo, and the other players training in Ashton Park, and queuing afterwards for their autographs, and the Sunday morning kick about with the likes of “Shadow”, Louie Peters, Chris Garland, and Geoff Merrick. His point was, can you see any of todays players doing that, or are they now so detached from the fans that they would’nt even if they were allowed. Even Alan Dick’s first div team were often seen about North Street and even though they were all not, they all acted like they were Bristolians. We sadly agreed those days are gone forever, but football had better watch out because if my friend is getting fed up, you can bet there are many others, and without the fans, as a spectacle it will be nothing. Fortunately, it will always be a great game to play.

  2. March 17, 2012 8:11 pm

    That’s quite true Paul.
    I still enjoy football though despair at how the administrators of the game have let it fester in a sea of silly money.
    The USA surprisingly are the ones to set the lead with caps on wages and teams etc in their national sports, we’re far behind.
    They do still appear in North St though – in the era of health regimes for top sports stars it’s nice to see city players nipping into Denny’s Bakery still for wholesome lunchtime snacks. Can’t say I’ve noticed any of them kicking a ball around in the park though.

  3. Richard Lane permalink
    March 18, 2012 2:11 am

    Sorry to piss on your bonfire but, you are talking shyte. You have the nerve to claim that I am in denial.
    The decision by the council and they are the ones that make the decision. Was to register, only a part of the site as a TVG.
    They did that as a compromise decision, in an attempt to appease both parties.
    As the application was for a 42 acre TVG and part of that application did not meet the criteria, as proven in additional evidence. It is concievable that the whole site should not be registered as a TVG as it does not meet the criteria.
    If the application for a TVG was made on the southern fields that do meet the criteria the fair enough, that should be registered, but it wasn’t, end of.

  4. Bobh permalink
    March 18, 2012 9:50 am

    More Dickless Lane tripe.
    It was not proven in “additional evidence” it was suggested,there was no legal scrutiny of the evidence it was just accepted.
    The registering authority can and do not register parts of sites,but those parts have to be recognised as not being used in the 20 year test.
    The aerial photograph of the site in early 1988 shows a tip area south of the Silbury rd entrance 20 mtrs away from Colliters brook and being 100mtrs by 150mtrs rectangular in shape it fits into the “L” shape in the present field structure..
    The field area north of the tip is now normal,this is a year before the 20year test starts.
    As this is a legal and factual process,the only area that could possibly be removed from the TVG is the 100mtr by 150mtr site,and this was grassed by 1989,so then useable.
    There is no requirement to compromise you register the land that passes the test and remove any land that does not,and as the evidence of the residents is more “proven”than the evidence from BCC then that should be used and any other unscrutinised rubbish discarded.
    The photograph is “fact” it is not drempt up rubbish,there was no tip evidence north of the Silbury rd. entrance accross to Longmoor brook,this area was available for recreation in 1988.

  5. Richard Lane permalink
    March 20, 2012 12:10 am

    To all people concerned, it was proven. The fact you don’t agree is immaterial.
    A photograph can only show what was the condition of anything,
    at any one time.
    The licence to tip did not expire at that time. The use of that field cannot be determined by a still photograph for subsequent years, unless there is further photographic evidence showing the same state of the field.
    I note there are no cows in the field, that must obviously mean that they did not graze in the field, using to your theory.
    There are also no people in that photograph, proving categorically that there was no public use of that field.
    I’m pretty sure that if you’d have taken a picture of that field before there was a licence to tip, there would have been a similar picture.
    So it stands to reason that there might well be a picture of that field, after the one you refer to, with more tipping shown. Except of course, you wouldn’t show that picture.

  6. harryT permalink
    March 20, 2012 8:36 am

    People and cows move. Landfill does not.

    The photo shows the land covered and the drainage dithces filled and covered. All the landfill plant and equipment has gone. The depot manager (brought to the hearing as the landowner’s witness) agreed that the photo showed the landfill was over.

    It was only a very small area of land being landfilled anyway but it had certainly finished by more than 20 years before the application.

  7. March 20, 2012 7:53 pm

    Here’s the main fact from the TVG enquiry:

    Inspectors report 26th Oct 2010…..The totality of the application land qualifies for registration as town green under section 15(2) of the Commons act 2006………..

    This is a fact and anything else is conjecture.
    Time to face the facts and move on.

Comments are closed.