Plans to develop a new hotel on the Southlands property in Warwick seem to have sparked a similar uproar to that which greeted plans to build the new hospital on the Botanical Gardens, although for opposite reasons.

In the case of the hospital, there was no argument about the need for a new, or massively renovated, hospital, but there was heavy opposition to the use of the jewel in the crown of the parks system for construction purposes.

The Southlands property, although enormous by Bermuda standards, is not well known to most people as it has been in private hands for generations. Instead, the concern centres on whether the addition of what would be a third new hotel would help most Bermudians.

There seems to be a consensus that it would not, and would in fact require the importation of yet more non-Bermudians to make the hotel work.

The sacrifice of the mainly virgin land at Southlands just does not seem to be worth it.

It also contradicts a primary recommendation of the Sustainable Development Roundtable, which admittedly seems to have been ignored the since the end of Alex Scott?s tenure as Premier.

But that does not mean that its proposals were without merit, not least its recommendation that new developments be built on brownfield sites rather than green land.

The Southlands proposal is the only one of the three hotel developments now proposed that would develop a large segment of open space.

The proposal at the adjacent property, on the site of the former Golden Hind and Banana Beach, largely redevelops previously built-on property, while the Hamilton proposal would be built on Par-la-Ville car park.

The broader issue concerns Bermuda?s rapidly diminishing supply of open space. Once built on, open space is lost forever, and Warwick has very little substantial open space left, outside of the land around Astwood Park and Warwick Long Bay, saved by an earlier farsighted government, and the Warwick Pond area, which was preserved by the National Trust and the Audubon Society.

It is difficult to put a value on open space, with its value often only becoming clear once it is gone, at which point it is irrecoverable. It can be argued, correctly, that Bermuda needs new hotel facilities to replace the somewhat outmoded existing properties and to present new attractions to visitors.

But there are other proposals on the drawing board which do not require the destruction of open land. Further, just how many new properties does Bermuda need? Job creation is a non-starter of an argument in an economy that already has full employment, and additional employees would have to be brought in, thus exacerbating strains on the infrastructure ? even with the provision of staff housing.

Finally, this newspaper is increasingly concerned about the use of special development orders to override existing zonings or to short-circuit the planning process. Apparently, there are those like Bank of Bermuda chief executive officer Philip Butterfield who think that money should be the only measure of a building application?s merits.

This newspaper believes that an open and transparent process in which proposals are available for public scrutiny and objection, while cumbersome, is preferable to a system in which money and power can override existing and well established rules.

Unfortunately, the Government is the worst offender in this, because it first rendered land preservation agreements meaningless when it allowed the agreement concerning the Chaplin Estate to be altered, and secondly, tore up existing zonings and past practices when it sneaked the Loughlands SDO through.

Those steps, along with the later reversed hospital decision, made it clear that this Government cannot be trusted with the stewardship of the Island?s open spaces and environment. As such, it is up to the public to look after that which its Government cannot, and to oppose the Southlands proposal