Flog Off vs Community Use

I have already given mine, and other's, suggestion for the uses to which Watling Gate can be put. However, I recognise that they are just first thoughts and need to be tested against the Council's proposals and the Leader's assertion that their's is in the best interest of everybody.

So, how do the two options stack up in terms of addressing the issues raised in the letters of objection?

Issue	Flog Off	Community Use
Uncertainty over the future	Once the land and building is sold off, there will always be the threat of the building being demolished and flats, for example, built on the site	No uncertainty. The house and land remains in public ownership.
Sale of public park land	Sets the precedent for further sales	No precedent set
Colonel Newton's will	In direct contravention of the wishes of Colonel Newton	In accordance with Colonel Newton's will. Terms of tenancy could ensure that the tenant is paid a small honorarium to report disturbances within the park, thereby becoming an employee of Trafford.
Loss of Green Space	Development is intended to allow car parking for 10-12 cars	No loss of green space, as minimum parking, on the existing drive at the front of the house, to be used by the flat occupier and disabled only.
Deterioration of the Environment	Physically reduces park area, but also has an impact on those area left by making them more inaccessible and allowing cars into the park.	Improved environment, as the land around the building would come back into park use. Also, by removing the undergrowth around the house, lowering the hedges on the formal garden and improving the path structure, it would still be possible to open up the area, possibly by siting play area for older children (such as a spider's web climbing frame) on the west side of the park, encouraging greater use on that side. Finally, the House could act as a valuable resource in building up funds for park improvements, by donating a percentage of all income and/or surpluses. Such funds might then be used to attract matched funding. Improvements in the house's environment would make it more attractive to users, thereby developing a symbiotic relationship between the two.
Unsuitability for a business	No recognition of needs of community, proposed clientele is from Bowden	Would need to recognise that the building is in a residential area and attempt to address issues arising from this: Traffic: Have an environmental brief and actively discourage traffic. This could be done by: Asking all user groups to sign up to the policy of minimum traffic use, car sharing etc; only having two parking spaces at the the front of the house, one for the flat occupier, and one for the disabled; Bike racks next to the building; Promoting alternative, none car-routes to the house Improved lighting (solar powered) within the park so that people feel safe to walk on darker evenings. Increased foot fall: Have a good neighbour brief Keep meeting venues small, a maximum number in the house at any one time Only accept booking from local groups Ensure that locals are kept informed of calendar of events and review users acceptability every three-six months so that legitimate complaints can be resolved satisfactorily Policy of only opening to say 8 or 9 p.m. and only accepting evening bookings which are unlikely to disturb anybody. Advertise all proposed user groups, to give locals a chance to object before agreement is reached Discourage car use in Leys Road by: Making if difficult for cars to turn by blocking off this entrance, using a barrier to allow entrance by the flat occupier, the disabled and ambulances in case of an emergency Creating double yellow lines and/or requiring residents permits for parking; Improve the path from the Frieston road entrance so that it goes directly to the nursery and the house. No liquor licence
Other Issues
Security of the building	Proposes to increase security by taking parkland	Could improve security by a combination of the options below without taking land from the park: A tenant would mean that the flat is occupied at night, thereby increasing security; Could have internal screens to be place on lower floor windows at night ( might be problem with it being a listed building, but, hey, look what's there now)! Alarm linked to the police Security lights Security camera Most importantly, community use and involvement would help to ensure that local people take ownership of the building and seek to protect it.
Setting of the building	Gives building its own setting by taking parkland	Accepts that setting of the house is the parkland, and removes all barriers between the house and the park.
Privacy of tenant	Proposes to increase privacy by taking parkland	Proposes to improve privacy of tenant by allowing sole use of the sun roof.
Drain on Trafford MBC	Proposes to remove a drain on resources by offloading the problem onto the people of Timperley	Attempts to remove a drain on resources by creating an opportunity for the people of Timperley. After the initial investment to make the house secure, and then to renovate it, the House could be self-funding.
Loss of capital Receipt	Trafford MBC would lose the capital receipt from the sale of Watling Gate, but would retain the asset	The park would not benefit from a very uncertain capital receipt. It will, however, benefit on an ongoing basis, so that Trafford MBC could actually find itself having to spend less on the park, freeing up funds for other parks in the area. It could also benefit from being included in any bid for funding.