BASINGSTOKE and Deane Borough Council look set to get legal advice on whether it can press ahead with plans to create a policy that will protect some of the borough’s most treasured green spaces.

As previously reported by The Gazette, councillors at Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council voted in favour of creating a list of the most treasured green open spaces which should be protected from future development, in April 2013.

Officers at the borough council have been working on criteria that will see determine if sites are afforded protection with questions such as is the green space of borough-wide significance? Is the green space used for sport and recreational activities? Do the sites have heritage and conservation value?

However, under the proposals, green spaces would not be afforded protection if a previous council decision has been made to either develop a site or investigate the potential of a site as part of an exemptions criteria.

But members of the borough council’s Cabinet have decided that they should seek professional advice to see if they can legally press ahead with the plans after councillors expressed concern that developers could challenge the document.

Angry Eastrop residents opposed to plans to build a new £10million football stadium in Old Common Road spoke against the plans at a meeting of the borough council’s Cabinet last Tuesday.

Crossborough Hill resident Helen Richards told the meeting that green spaces in urban areas of Basingstoke were vital for the growing population, adding: “To leave the exceptions criteria unchanged would be a cynical manipulation of a well-intentioned policy.”

Gavin James, Liberal Democrat councillor for Eastrop, urged the Cabinet to change the word “not” to “even” in the exceptions criteria which currently says “Green spaces would not be afforded protection where an earlier council decision has already been made to either develop a site or investigate the potential of a site, or where a previous decision has been taken that access across a site may be required in the future”.

Cllr Mark Ruffell, Cabinet member for planning and infrastructure, expressed concern at the proposals, telling the meeting: “I have to say the alarm bells are ringing in my head about this.

“I am beginning to think we should get legal advice on this. I just don’t think this has been thought through and if it has been thought through, they are leading us into a car crash.”

The borough council will now seek legal advice to confirm if it can press ahead with the plans.

If the proposals go ahead, 52 of the borough council’s 60 parks would be afforded protection.