Member's Working Party Document, 16th March 2006

MEMBER’S WORKING PARTY DOCUMENT, 16th MARCH 2006

Page 4 of 8

In response to the “holistic plan” the responses can be analysed as follows:-

1	Don't want golf, will restrict access	39
2	Don't want floodlit driving range (near houses)	9
3	No to hotel and will benefit from restored gardens and terms not known - will be exclusive	34
4	Against boating and fishing	2
5	Maintain memorial benches and trees	2
6	Traffic concerns and against use of Golden Gate	19
7	Retain caravan park	19
8	Don’t want private development. Park and Castle must be in public domain	117
9	Wildlife concerns	38
10	Why not other uses (Museum – Registrar’s)	1
11	How can Nottingham support Wollaton Hall	7
12	More space for cricket – coaching partially sighted	90
13	Why not leave as it is. Retain quite peaceful grounds	74
14	Horse owners/users concern re restricted access and flying golf balls	4
15	No to scale of hotel development	5
16	Access restricted, keep open to public	42
17	Concern re lease terms and if venture fails	2
18	Believe Government should fund or other ways to maintain	9
19	Against sell off and closure	3
20	Trust only answer to restore the Castle	2
21	Loss of Parterre	2
22	Believe access will be lost	30
23	Support Trust/Friends, voluntary group	12
24	Council should apply for lottery to restore Castle	10

Again, by disseminating the information in this way DCC is failing to address the fact that there is wide-spread and continued opposition to its plans to dispose of Elvaston Castle Country Park.

In addition English Heritage have responded to the consultation proposals and their comments are summarised as follows:-

26) Government guidance urges local authorities not to hold assets unless they meet its objectives including financial ones. Otherwise assets should be disposed of to encourage alternative use.

27) The aim of any ‘disposal’ should be to obtain optimum value for the taxpayer that is consistent with local and national policies for the protection of heritage assets – rather than highest price.

28) Concern is registered re the scale of the new build development.

29) An “enabling development justification” is essential for the proposals to the Castle and other related buildings. The same principle applies to the golf course where affecting the registered park, and garden.

It is apparent that English Heritage has problems with the size of the hotel project (which will double the size of the Castle in our estimation and contains plans for extra floors within). An “enabling development justification” will be essential.

<<< Prev	Next >>>

� friendsofelvaston.co.uk. The content on this site is published without prejudice.





Home------------------News Update -----------------Support / Join Us-----------------Contact Us