The Bristol Arena belongs in the heart of the city where it stands to benefit the wider community, according to an overwhelming sway of public opinion.

While alternative proposals to relocate the project to the Brabazon Hangar in Filton have been branded “utter madness” and slammed as a short-term gain that would only exacerbate existing congestion problems by opponents at City Hall on Tuesday.

A petition calling on mayor Marvin Rees to build the long-awaited 12,000 capacity arena on derelict land earmarked at Temple Meads, rather than the north Bristol site, has gained the support of more than 5,200 people.

Support

independent journalism Bristol24/7 relies on your support to remain independent. If you like what we do and you want us to keep reporting, become a member for just £45 for the year Join now

It was a hot topic at the full council meeting, where – despite heightened security following the events of the last meeting – crowds packed into the public gallery to make their voices heard.

“An arena in Bristol will encourage people to spend money in the city,” said Heather Mack, presenting the petition.

“The Filton airfield site is not an option that benefits the whole city. It’s south Bristol that desperately needs employment opportunities – here we have the opportunity to create jobs where they are needed.”

She spoke on behalf of thousands who backed the petition and scores who wrote statements urging the mayor to choose Temple Meads.

One letter stated: “Given the pollution levels in Bristol already encouraging thousands of people to drive through the city to an ‘out of town’ site would be criminally dangerous.”

Jake Applebee, director of Crack Magazine, said in a statement that “it really would be utter madness if the arena was to be relocated to Filton”.

But Labour and Tory councillors both spoke in defence of the mayor’s value for money study which will determine the final decision on the arena’s location.

“This is primarily a business decision that must be made armed with all the relevant information,” said Don Alexander, Labour councillor for Avonmouth and Lawrence Weston.

“The price for any poor decisions in our capital programme will have to be paid for in the services we provide.”

Agreeing with Alexander, Geoff Gollop, a Conservative councillor for Westbury-on-Trym and Henleaze, said: “I can look at all the comments in the petition and I agree with them.

“But, this is a massive decision and we have gone down a route of a value for money study – how can we make a decision without access to that study?”

On the other side of the fence, Charlie Bolton, Green councillor for Southville met with loud applause when he said: “You have the opportunity to build something which complements our city centre economy. Or you could build something which detracts from our city centre economy.”

The Greens tabled a motion calling for the arena to be built at Temple Meads and not Filton. This was passed with some 34 votes in favour, including support from a number of Labour councillors, who were given a free vote on the issue.

Bolton called on councillors to vote for the motion and for the mayor to “build an arena which is best for Bristol”.

Forwarding the motion, Steve Clarke, Green councillor for Southville, urged Rees not to build “another white elephant” on the site of the Brabazon hangar – a structure branded a financial disaster.

The Conservatives tried and failed to pass an amendment to the motion calling for any vote on location to be postponed until there has been sufficient time to scrutinise the value for money report.

Gollop, chair of the overview and scrutiny committee, said it would be negligent to make a decision without knowing what the cost implications and financial risks are.

Kye Dudd, Labour councillor for the central ward, argued the Greens’ motion was premature and warned a “build it at any cost” approach would indeed be negligent.

He admitted he would prefer for it to be built at Temple Meads, but “not at any cost”.

But Mark Wright, Lib Dem councillor for Hotwells and Harbourside, said he has little faith in the value for money study and raised concerns about the long term impact an arena on the outskirts of the city might have.

The debate took place against a backdrop of calls to “just finish the project”, with accusations that the failure to deliver an arena for Bristol has become “boring to watch over the years” and an “embarrassment to the city”.

Rees stressed that no decision on the arena’s location has been made yet and confirmed that the value for money study will be available for scrutiny by mid-April – although concerns remain that this will not give adequate time for proper scrutiny.

“We are in the process of providing an evidence base to ensure we make the right decision,” he said. “We now have two meaningful options.

“The first question is ‘can we afford to build the arena?’ Our first priority remains to deliver an arena for the city, but this debate is taking place without the full facts. We have a responsibility to ensure the project is sustainable and supports this city for the next 50 years.

“We will bring together the evidence and you will have time to scrutinise it, but it will be based on fact. If we end up over-spending because of a rushed decision, we will have to decide what services we do not want to fund because of that decision.”

Support for the motion shows the way the wind is blowing in terms of a preferred location, but does not actually impact the final decision which is promised in May.

Main image: A visual of what an arena at Temple Meads could look like

Read more: Overwhelming support for Bristol Arena to be built at Temple Meads