Why HLF demands a bridge to be built for articulated lorries into a listed BUTE PARK?

Dear Sir or Madam,

Re the building of a new vehicular and pedestrian bridge and road
for articulated lorries into Bute Park, Cardiff which is listed on
the Cadw/ICOMOS Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic
Interest in Wales as grade I.

Q1.....Can you explain why the HLF told Cardiff council it needed
to 'demonstrate a commitment to construct a new vehicular access'
into a grade 1 listed Bute park as this access is primarily for
articulated lorries which is not environmentally friendly and will
concrete over and destroy a quiet undisturbed area of park.

This is based on a quote from this document - the link below
"In June 2006 the HLF approved a Stage 1 grant of £3.1m towards the
overall cost of the project which amounts to £5.6m. The Stage 1
grant specified that the Council needed to demonstrate a commitment
to construct the new vehicular access into Bute Park and the offer
excluded a contribution from HLF to the Bridge." link-
HLF & cardiff Council Execut_E_07_09_11_A_rep_R-2.pdf

Q2...Why does the Heritage Lottery Fund view the position of a new
bridge over the docks feeder to provide access into the park from
North Road as an essential element of the Bute Park Restoration
Project?

Based on quote from this document ...
On the 20 August 2007 the National Heritage Lottery wrote to the
Council confirming that:-

“the Heritage Lottery Fund view the position of a new bridge over
the docks feeder to provide access into the park from North Road as
an essential element of the Bute Park Restoration Project.

“Accordingly Cardiff County Council will be required to demonstrate
a firm commitment to the bridge and provide a construction start
date as part of its Phase 2 application to The Heritage Lottery
Fund. Without this HLF will not

be in a position to commit its funding to the Bute Park Restoration
works”.

7. Following the Stage 1 approval, a Stage 2 bid will be submitted
in October 007 and subject to satisfactorily meeting the
commitments and requirements of the HLF then confirmation of
approval of the Stage 2 bid is
expected in spring 2008. Without this commitment and construction
start date from the Council by October 2007 there can be no Stage 2
bid to HLF.

Q3...Why is this bridge seen as essential to the HLF?

Q4. Why does the HLF ignore and continue to ignore public
opposition and Q5.Why refuse to attend a public meeting that Prof
Kevin Morgan invited them to more than once?

The present position is that opposition is still growing from 1,600
on a facebook group - 1,000 plus emails opposing this bridge went
to planning.
5,000 signed a petition opposing this.

We have already made a major impact on the Council and councillors
throughout Cardiff. At the June Council meeting Independent, Labour
and Conservative councillors united to propose a halt to
development work in the four parks to allow proper public
consultation. This proposal was defeated by the Liberal Democrat
and Plaid Cymru Executive by a procedural manoeuvre. Those of you
who see the South Wales Echo may have seen the extraordinary
outburst by the Council leader Rodney Berman accusing us of being a
Labour Party front organisation. In fact our proposal to halt
development and allow a proper consultation about the future of the
central parks has been adopted by the Council’s own Scrutiny
Committee which spent several months taking evidence rather than
indulging in knee-jerk face saving diatribes.

Q6....
Did Lindsey Cuddy who is on the Heritage Lottery committee-
ever report all the objections/concerns/public opposition received
by Cardiff council who employ her to the HLF as requested by HLF
committee for Wales sept 2008
HLF Members were asked to let Martin Buckridge know of they
received objections to The Bridge or lodge at Bute Park.

Q7 Did Lindsey Cuddy report to HLF the points below that as a
council employee she would have been aware of.
Q8 did the HLF committee discuss the points below that were
in the public domain and widely reported in the media and on the
internet.
Q9 Did Jennifer Stewart raise the concerns any time to the
committee - that were raised with her or/and the opposition to the
bridge and HLF role?
Q10..Why did L Cuddy or any other member of HLF not raise the issue
that there was NO EIA on this urban development of a sensitive
area, Or that there was and still isn't a full sustain ability
assessment as in the Parks Strategy.

1. Work was started before planning permission, knocking down many
trees and digging out undergrowth. Work then stopped after protest.

2. Head of Parks Cllr Nigel Howellls with his conflicting interest
was permitted to intervene at the planning Cttee meeting contrary
to Cardiff Councils code of conduct

3. The MAP of the road published alongside Coun Nigel Howells’
piece in the Capital Times had been DOCTORED to show the council’s
proposed developments in a more favourable light.

4. Council officer admitted that the artists image was “ephemeral”,
and that in reality the bridge would be larger, higher and more
visible.

5.. Cardiff Council ‘information’ material does NOT clarify that
the proposed access bridge is more than 28 feet wide, and will be
raised on pillars
, and that sections of the current eight-foot path would be more
than doubled in width and turned into a lorry roadway raised on an
embankment. Nor does it say it would be still wider on curves to
accommodate the largest lorries and that still more of the meadow
would be converted to a lorry waiting bay.

6. Trying to ignore planning conditions - Public pressure forced
them Cllr Berman and Cllr Howells Fin Dems and Neil McEvoy of Plaid
Lies to pull back from their plans to start on the bridge. After
bringing in heavy equipment and saying the start was imminent, the
council contractors have been sent back to wait for nesting birds
according to the planning conditions.

7. I and others are still calling for an EIA on this urban
development of a sensitive area,

8. and a full sustainability assessment as in the Parks Strategy.

9. I did ask why there had been no Equality Impact assessment. Now
they produce a phoney one which they composed this month, which can
not be considered valid as this document purporting to be an EqIA
is a travesty as the idea is to engage with the community before
the policy is developed. Only a handful of organisations have been
approached and many issues not addressed. Cllr Howells writes "The
new access bridge will provide an alternative vehicular access for
the park and will therefore there are no disability access
implications which specif
ically relate to it" Doesn’t mention the raised road that
pedestrians will share with articulated lorries and the risks that
that poses.

The equality impact assessment does look at the huge articulated
Lorries which will give rise to complaints made about noise and
exhaust emissions. Pedestrians will feel their safety is
compromised, especially on this unsuitable raised path/road. Also
the noise and vibration will cause alarm and distress plus concerns
about fumes.

* In a survey*:33% hearing lorries were bothered by them
* Heavy Lorries are 13 times more noisy than cars in congestion
* Vibration correlated best with lorry flows
* 37% consider lorries produce worse fumes

Other options were not consulted on, some of these should have been

- no articulated lorries in the park

- moving the nursery

- park and ride for articulated lorries

Q11 Why where the other more sustainable options above not
considered by HLF?

Yours faithfully,

Anne Greagsby

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am disappointed I haven't heard from you so far.
Under the Freedom of Information Act you should have replied by
now, and are breaking the law.

Please send your reply to my request asap.

Yours faithfully,

Anne Greagsby

Dear Heritage Lottery Fund,

I wrote to you on the 11 DEC 2009 and I am requesting the
information yet again through this site to try to get the document
requested and answers to my questions detailed below.

Following my FOI request you replied to me in Sept and told me
"the overall proposal for the Park which includes the elements
which HLF is funding, was supported by a detailed conservation
based study and analysis."

It does not seem unreasonable to request that report. I have been
waiting since Sept for a copy! I can assure you that I have not
received a copy from Cardiff Council and as HLF has the report,
please send me a copy. I am intitled to request this under the
freedom of information act and therefore you are obliged to provide
a copy.

Re your Point 3- "The HLF is funding the upgrading of the paths,
and 'turning bays', in Bute Park : this needs to be seen in the
context of the agreed work plan for the conservation of the
historic park."
Please can you explain this to me?

Please also provide the dimensions and plans for the 'path' for
artic lorries that HLF (you) are funding through listed Bute Park
from the Bridge?

Which trees in listed Bute Park will be 'topped' or pruned back or
lopped in any way along the route of the 'path' to make space/way
for articulated lorries?

The new bridge you insisted must be built is a huge
industrial-type, motorway- style bridge. It towers over the
existing footpath and is totally out of character with the park as
will your massive 'paths' and articulated lorry turning circle.

How can you justify this road building in the park to the people of
Cardiff in the name of conservation of our heritage? Please, at
least let us see the detailed conservation based study and analysis
you based your decision on as requested above.

Yours faithfully,

Anne Greagsby