Questions to Cllr Poole Executive member for Strategic planning, prosperity and development are as follows
1.
Were the Executive members, aware of the contents of the will , when they made the decision to support the recommendation to dispose of Watling gate to Mr. Marsden together with the adjoin land.
Have they all had an opportunity to read the will --------------------------quote from will
“I give to the Urban District Council of Altrincham in the County of Chester (hereinafter called the Council) all of my dwelling house and residence known as Watling Gate, Timperley together with the land forming the site.
I declare that the Council shall hold the said plots of land hereinbefore given to the Council upon trust for the perpetual use thereof by the public for the purposes of a park or pleasure grounds and for the purpose of exercise and recreation.
I further declare that the Council shall hold the said dwelling house upon trust to use the same or permit the same to be used for any civic purpose such as a branch library and a welfare centre and that part of my house may, if the Council so desires, be used as an official residence for one or more of the Council’s employees and the said dwelling house shall not be sold, let or occupied, by a private individuals or private individuals.”
In our opinion the proposals are in direct contradiction of Charles Newton's will
2.Were the Executive aware that the Friends having accepted the need to sell the building the Friends did not agree that additional park land would be offered for sale
3, Were the executive aware that a request was made for continued public access between Leys rd and Rochester drive I accept there is reference to this however is no map attached to indicate the footpath linkage.
In relation to the Police advice re-the closure of the footpath link between Rochester and Leys? Was the advice to block off this area based on a risk assessment and did the Executive Committee have access to the a copy of the Police report -
The concern of the Friends and residents is that if this footpath is closed then this would isolate the park leading it more vulnerable for development. Under 4.3 the reference in the report about speculation arose at a public meeting in Feb when a ward member informed the meeting that if Park land were developed it would have to be for affordable housing
4. the report states that monies will be allocated from the sale to the improvement of Newton park .No mention of what percentage of sale would be allocated. Monies ,I understand are already likely to allocated from planning agreement 106 from flat developments in the area .Is this the monies referred to?
5.In relation to 3.7 the friends consider that as Watling Gate is situated in the park this is already an appropriate setting. On a personal note my children attended the nursery there, which opened in the fifties, and it was not deemed necessary to secure parkland for the use of the nursery, so why for this private business
Its interesting also to note in the committee minutes of Altrincham Town council written in 1956 that the tenants at the time requested that the parks committee look at ways of preventing trespass of unauthorised persons round the house when the nursery was closed in the holidays. The committee resolved that the park gardens at watling gate are open to the public and the use of the grounds by the general public does not constitute trespass
6. I refer to 3.8 re parties submitting highest bid. There is no information in the report in relation to the number of bids or any information on the bids. Was this information available to the Executive committee when they made the decision at the meeting on the 10th of October.
The report states the Executive member was given details of the bids on Jan 6th so was it the Executive member who made the decision to enter into an exclusivity agreement for a period of 3 months with Messrs Ellison and Marsden
3.9 states that the bid has now been reduced by £150,000. Therefore the council has a duty to go out to tender again to re advertise this property and can not accept this bid in light of this new information
If I was selling my house and I had agreed the sale and then the buyer came back and said well I am going to give you £150,00 less I would put the house on the market again!
Were the committee given the information in relation to the original bid and obviously now also is there some concern over the uncertainty of the business proposal s put forward by messrs ellison and Marsden? Several off his intended occupiers have now found alternative accommodation Do we know how many occupiers were intended
7. Which brings me to another point raised by The friends and residents in the area there is no mention in the report or on any of the maps of any parking and parking on green space /park lands is definitely not acceptable to any of us.
*8. As opposition spokesperson for parks and countryside I sent my views on these proposal s and requested that the labour groups views were included in the consultation. There is no mention of our views in this report. Our views as Councillors have been totally ignored.
9. One of our main concerns is that despite a consultation exercise there has been little notice taken of the views expressed by the friends group and local people.
I know that your Executive members have made a point of signing up to the leadership for central government which states clearly in its advice that local government instead of doing things to people now have to recognise that sustainable communities require us to work with people. A question this scrutiny committee must ask is where is the evidence in this report that the member and officers are working with people in this community or are they foisting on the public the best solution for the Council and not taking account the best solution for the community
10 Another concern I have as opposition spokes person for parks and countryside is the sale of park land sets a precedent for future sales of park land and we believe park land to be sacrosanct
Finally this is a sale to a private developer who may choose to sell this house and park land at some time in the next few years
From the lack of any information to the contrary in this report I can only assume that the council, once this park land is sold, would have no future say or hold over any future development