Baltic Wharf (Bristol)
Does anybody know what is going to happen to Baltic Wharf. We have just spent 6 glorious days there and from all accounts it appears that the site will shut so that the council will be able to build FLATS. Doesn't the council understand that an awful lot of people visit this site over the year and obviously spend money in shops, on the water taxis, in the pubs and the various visitor attractions that abound in the area. The council have a great attraction in this site as it is nearly always full. I know as we have regularly tried to get in. Does anyone know who in the city council, I could write to? This site needs to stay in the caravan and motorhome family.
Comments
-
The Baltic Wharf scenario has been ongoing for a few years, with a brief closure respite given a while ago. See here for latest progress in finding an alternative site http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-37940715
0 -
I think it has all been done, GH.
Our member, Tigerfish, stayed on site and had councillors visit him to see for themselves. He was likely instrumental in achieving the stay of execution which has kept the site open until now.
At the end of the day, if the landlord wants it back, there's little we can do I'm afraid.
3 -
Won't those people who live in the flats spend money in Bristol? They will also pay council tax and bring a permanent community to the area.
I am sure that there are many people who are on waiting lists for housing who look at caravan sites and think 'what a waste of good building land using it for tourists who just come and go'.
I am sure that Bristol council have considered all the options and come up with the best result for their residents.
0 -
Lets get real. Any council will see property development as a right opportunity.and the needs of campers wont even enter their thinking. They are the landlords and the club will have no say in the decision. An alternative site in the area is a separate issue and its the only thinking the club will have any say on and that will be a commercial decision.
0 -
Sites out of towns is the way forward, less council pressure,increase in revenue from car parks from all the visitors out of town.
0 -
I think the people who buy the flats will be in Bristol anyway so there will be no extra income for the city as the flats could be built elsewhere. Tourists are additional spending and if the site is not there as demonstrated here many will go elsewhere and that spend will be lost to the city. The decision looks very shortsighted but that's how councils work.
0 -
A site out of town is NOT the way forwards. A major part of the attraction of Baltic Wharf is that you can walk into the City Centre, with no need to drive. I do hope that any replacement will keep a city centre ease of access, even if its by a not too long bus journey.
1 -
Without doubt Baltic Wharf is in an unrivalled position as a city centre campsite and it will be a shame to see it eventually close. I think I would take more comfort if I knew the local council were actively helping the Club to find an alternative rather than seeming to be blocking attempts at building a new site. At a conservative estimate around 35000 people must stay at Baltic Wharf each year and I just wonder how many would bother if the site was no longer available. It would be interesting to know if the Club has been offered the freehold of the site although I would imagine this would run into many million pounds and even if they could buy it would it be financially viable?
David
0 -
Might I suggest that someone writes a letter to the editor of the Bristol Post, the local paper. They do have a "letters" page and a suitable carefully worded letter pointing out the uniqueness of the site and the considerable loss of revenue to the city and business's might be very impactive!
TF
1 -
In the previous petition to Bristol City Council the financial losses were stated, as we don't know the present situation we are dependent on the club for information. Every time I drive past the potential Police Horse Stables site I can't think why these were turned down. What else are they going to be used for if there is a possible flooding risk, much like Baltic Wharf itself!?
0 -
When the club site closes the pub next door closes too, so its a nice big plot of premium building land. I and others believe the council has always known exactly what they're doing on this. The original reason for not renewing the lease was that they needed to build a school. Various conversations about the unsuitability of the site for a school brought that proposal to an end and finally the truth came out. There will be a waterside apartment development, similar to others there. This is a highly lucrative business for the council and their cronies. I don't think the caravan site and pub is considered by a lot of non caravanners to be worthy of such a location.
1 -
I've never stayed at Baltic Wharf, but I'm going to try and get there before its projected demise. It's really such a pity that this site is being considered for another use, and I know the Club want to keep it for as long as they are allowed.
Because of its close proximity to the town, it must be particularly appealing to motorhomers who can get to the shopping area without having to drive.
I would imagine it is always the preference for the Club always to go for freehold where it is on offer - it gives greater security for investing in facilities on site. I don't know if the Club has been offered the freehold on Baltic Wharf, but I would imagine it hasn't - I'm sure this information would have come to light had it have been.
David
0
