ELVASTON CASTLE

Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15
 

Campaigners have criticised Derbyshire County Council for celebrating 40 years of owning Elvaston Castle country park despite looking to dispose of the building itself. The authority will celebrate the landmark with a free family fun day in the park on June 20, featuring attractions such as birds of prey and chainsaw sculpting. But the Friends of Elvaston Castle, which is battling to keep the castle in public hands, claim the move shows the authority's policy on the attraction is inconsistent.

A group spokesman said, "There doesn't seem to be any balance in the county council's approach when it continues to pursue the disposal of the park while at the same time celebrating its existence. This is especially in view of the fact that the castle, the jewel in the park's crown, will no longer be accessible to the public should the Highgate Sanctuary deal go through. We would find it easier to encourage the celebrations if it was clear what the motives were behind them. Does the council have another agenda?"

A county council spokeswoman said the Highgate plans would not stop any access to the country park. In reply to the Friends' points, she said, "The event has been planned to celebrate 40 years of free public access to a fantastic country park and to give local families a fun day out." The day of celebration from noon to 5pm will feature willow weaving, pole lathe turning, story-telling workshops, tree climbing demonstrations, Viking re-enactments, dancing, chainsaw sculpting, birds of prey, a pet's corner and the chance to learn how to make herbal potions and grow vegetables. (Source: Derby Evening Telegraph, Jun/10)

How can a council which finds itself unable to fund repair costs to an estate that attracts 700,000 visitors a year, announce as its preferred bidder a company registered as developers of real estate which, so far as I am aware, has never traded, and with the terms shrouded in secrecy, under the euphemism of "commercial confidentiality"?

Councillor Bob Janes statement about "free public access throughout the park" presumably does not include the curtilage to the castle, any possible use for the public of which will be permanently lost. The 18-hole golf course is glossed over by saying that it will be on land not currently open to the public. So, here we have an area of the park owned by the public but not open to them, which can be converted and opened to golfers!

A bridleway runs at the side of this section of the park, which is used by horse riders, walkers and cyclists. Should everyone have to start wearing protective headgear in order to walk across it, whilst dodging golf balls? This makes a mockery of the so-called "free" public access. Presumably, converting the stables to a craft centre and café will have a two-fold advantage for the developers.

One will be to maximise their profits, and secondly it will allow them to build the extension to the castle that Tanya Spilsbury spoke of on Radio Derby, where the present cafeteria is located. The lottery funding for the gardens has been on offer for some time. £8m is the amount talked about. Firstly, this is not available to any commercial developer and has apparently been held up due to the uncertainty of the situation.

It does seem a shame, however, that such extensive restoration work seems destined to surround a "posh hotel", rather than a building at present owned by the public but unable to be fully enjoyed by them. As far as the purchase of the estate is concerned, the then Derby Borough Council, together with Derbyshire County Council, purchased the estate, not the county council on its own.

Also, whilst Councillor Janes emphasises the fact that it is Derbyshire (and not Derby's) taxpayers who have to foot the bill for the estate, he goes on to suggest that there may be ways for Derby City Council to become involved in the proceedings. The taxpayers of Derby paid their contribution towards the estate for nearly three decades, until it was handed over to the county council in 1997.

Several Derby city councillors have told me that although they sympathise with protesters who do not want the castle "handed over", there is nothing they can do about it as the county council is now the sole administrator of the estate, something of which Councillor Janes is well aware.

The massive banners that the county council have erected on the main entrance to Elvaston Park stating that "Elvaston Castle and Country Park Is Not For Sale", couldn't be more misleading. Perhaps he can explain the real difference between a sale and a 99-year lease? Graham Mansey, Secretary, Friends of Elvaston

Now that the preferred bidder for the Elvaston Castle Country Park has been named, I have a few questions no-one seems able, or willing, to answer.

1) I have a letter from Mark Todd MP, dated August 8, in which he states "none of the proposals produced to date by either the private sector (within the constraints the council imposed) or the Friends, are financially credible". Since then, what compromises have been made?

2) It has been stated that the public will have access to 90% of the 60% they already have. How much will we have to pay to gain access to all, or part of this 90%? What will the parking charges be?

3) There are no guarantees that the council will not sell the lease at a future date! Why then did the council spend public money on erecting banners and producing leaflets, stating that the castle was not for sale?

4) Who was responsible for letting the listed house and grounds fall into such disrepair? These are just a few of the questions that spring to mind. (See also: Gallery of Shame)

I fear that in future the public will be prevented from visiting the grounds by prohibitive restraints and charges, and they will only be able to peer through the Golden Gates at the privileged few, wheeling their golf trolleys over the beloved, but lost, Country Park. Mrs Susan Giles

So we're going to have a wonderful golf course at Elvaston Castle, great news indeed! It's great news for the flora and fauna uprooted to make way for the flattened fairways of a golf complex. It's great news for the thousands of residents whose heritage will be further eroded by the council selling out to corporate enterprise (yet again).

It's great news for historians who will, undoubtedly, lose yet more of the sites of historical interest around the periphery of the castle. Oh, and it's great news for the county council, ridding itself of a financial millstone around its neck, and, at the same time, collecting a great deal of money from the purchasers as a "reward" for their years of hard work on site, looking after the public's property. It's a total con, stop the sale now. Sam Vimes